Musicality" in a system? What IS that ?


I thought I would venture to bring a question in, the interest in which unites us all. What has happened, when we describe a system as "musical"? Is it just a subjective and passing state of mind, which fills us with joy as we listen and if so, what does it need for us to get there? System tweaking perhaps or rahter "ego tweaking" like good company, a good wine, a good cigar etc? Both perhaps? Or could there be objective criteria, which have to met for a system to attain this often elusive and volatile quality? I am convinced that there are...but to your mind, what are they?
detlof

Showing 2 responses by ozfly

Detlof, this has been an inspiring thread. IMHO, and borrowing liberally from Katharina, Frogman and others, musicality cannot exist without, first, the highest level of artistry. Whether the art is in physics (Djjd) or the creation and performance of music, the artist must have a natural emotional and intuitive understanding of the craft. We've all heard it -- it's what keeps us going and stirs our souls: The performances that are so seamless that is seems the artist is transparent and only something greater, the music, exists. Buddy Guy and Stevie Ray Vaughn come to mind in the blues genre. Once that happens, our amps and speakers are called on to deliver it in our homes. I don’t know whether the delivery of musicality occurs because of accurate nth harmonic reproductions, the accurate capture of natural echoes, a totally black background or just the right soundstaging. But it does require enough subtlety to capture the nuances that differentiate the great performances. Presumably, the audio reviewers use the music that stirs their souls when they test systems. So, since the musicality was already there in the performance being evaluated, the system can be tested for the faithful reproduction of the subtleties that define great musicality. As many suggest, it is simply a matter of whether you feel you are there -- you are sharing in the mastery of music. Maybe I'm rambling, but a system can get in the way of musicality but it cannot reproduce it if it isn't in the performance first. Great performances are differentiated from average ones by great differences in emotion and talent that are funneled to us in many small ways. The accurate capture of those small things is what counts. Since we are dealing in nuances and each system has tiny imperfections, we are guaranteed a life of tweaking and searching as audiophiles. But, it’s a happy search and there are a lot of gems found along the way. Again Detlof, thanks (I’ve pretty much left “musicality” linked to my emotional response – now, I’m wondering whether there aren’t some things that can be grasped more analytically so I can improve my system more intelligently. Not to worry, I can’t give up the emotional response :-))
Frogman and Gregm, your questions might be redefined as "do feelings (or aura...) add to the music in a palpable way"? In other words, would you hear something different from two musicians even if they played the exact notes? That could be a great experiment! Same notes, same instrument, same location, same tempo -- subjective vs. objective tests and defining the gaps. I tend to think that the musicians who are great add more layers and change the timing just enough to capture the greatness of the music, so I would initially discount the aura approach. But ... who knows? A live test would be an interesting first step. Follow up with whether reproduction equipment captures any live differences that exist. Very interesting questions -- once I started thinking about it, I again realized how little we actually know. (For all that matters, it would be interesting to objectively test "great" vs. average artists to discern the differences -- that could translate into better equipment design or configurations.)
Katherina and Detlof, thanks for the kind words. Cheers.