What is Musicality?


Hello fellow music lovers,

I am upgrading my system like a lot of us who follow Audiogon. I read a lot about musicality on Audiogon as though the search for musicality can ultimately end by acquiring the perfect music system -- or the best system that one can afford. I really appreciate the sonic improvements that new components, cables, plugs and tweaks are bringing to my own system. But ultimately a lot of musicality comes from within and not from without. I probably appreciated my Rocket Radio and my first transistor radio in the 1950s as much I do my high-end system in 2010. Appreciating good music is not only a matter of how good your equipment is. It is a measure of how musical a person you are. Most people appreciate good music but some people are born more musical than others and appreciate singing in the shower as much as they do listening to a high-end system or playing a musical instrument or attending a concert. Music begins in the soul. It is not only a function of how good a system you have.

Sabai
sabai

Showing 30 responses by sabai

Rawinsonde,
Musicality has different meanings in different contexts. It may have one meaning for a musician and a different meaning for an audiophile. One meaning does not exclude the other. The music world is big enough to handle both. Being musical applies very well to components and audio systems.
Tiggerfc, you're as close to what I am saying as I am. Musicality, the music, is inside us. Getting lost in it and really enjoying the musical experience does not depend on the gear. But good gear sure can enhance the experience.

Sabai
I was happily surprised to wake up this morning to read all of the responses to the question that I posed to everyone yesterday. My question was leading in the direction of the importance of the inner person -- whose inner ear is undeniably "influenced" by the quality of the sound that his system is producing. Ultimately, where is the music located that we are appreciating? Is it coming from the system and the speakers? Is it in the air between the speaker and our ears? Or is it in our ears and our brains that receive the sounds? Or is it in all of these locations? My question was leading in the direction of the importance of the listener and how each of us hears what our systems produce. Ultimately, the music is inside each of us. Our ability to appreciate our music is a function of how musical WE are as well as the quality of our systems. I have a very old friend, Alex, who is now 85 years old. He was a jazz pianist and drummer and either knew or saw most of the greats of yesteryear. He saw Art Tatum in a small basement club in New York City. He introduced Stan Kenton on stage. Stan's kids used to play with his own kids. Alex's hearing is now quite impaired. He said to me recently that it would be a waste of money for him to upgrade his vintage Marantz/JBL system because he just can't hear the high frequencies anymore. But Alex and I spend afternoons listening to the old standards and watching the videos of the greats of years gone by and Alex still appreciates music as much as just about anyone I know, including my audiophile friends with modern systems. Musicality resides with the listener. The equipment resides on the shelf. We are all striving to create the best system we can. I certainly am with equipment from EMM and Marantz and Merlin Music and Audio Magic and Oyaide. But my own sense of musicality -- how I hear what my equipment produces and how much I appreciate what I hear -- is the ultimate determinant of how much I am able to appreciate what my equipment produces. We all like to A/B and do the best we can to upgrade and tweak our systems. But in the end we have to just lay back and enjoy the best sound that we are able to afford. We may not be able to afford the "perfect" system but we can enjoy what we have with a sense of musicality that is actually the most important component in our system. Are you "missing" something in your system? Most of us are "missing" something but if we have a strong sense of musicality then we are not "missing" anything at all because the music resides within our hearts.

Sabai
Kijanki - I am not suggesting that at all. In fact, I agree with you completely. I have a good friend who is an excellent musician - a guitarist and singer. He has been performing professionally since the 1960s and has backed up many very well-known groups. I was surprised one day to discover that he is really not a very good listener at all when we got together to appreciate all the upgrades I had made to my system which I thought were quite impressive. He payed slight interest to the improved quality of sound that my system was producing and it seemed like the whole thing just passed him over. In fact my own musicianship was so mediocre that, after struggling with classical piano for 12 years, I threw in the towel - about 12 years before I should have. My piano teacher always used to tell me I should be a singer and I did in fact become a singer - accompanying the music that has emanated from the various systems I have owned over the years.

Sabai
I think you have hit on a very important point, Learsfool, and so has Byroncunningham. Music is a whole, not a collection of parts or the sum of those parts. But musicians may be listening in a very different way. They may be able to appreciate a bad recording of a good performance in a way that others cannot. For many of us, if the recording is bad or the quality of the sound that our equipment produces is unimpressive or "problematic" (meaning harsh or veiled or another of the many problems that may detract from our ability to enjoy the music) then we will have a hard time calling that piece of music "musical". It does not speak to us. Which goes back to my original point that so much of what each of us perceives as being "musical" depends on the inner person and how he or she perceives musicality. For many of us here, purchasing equipment that we hope will improve the quality of sound makes a big difference to our enjoyment of the music. I know this makes a big difference for me for most of the music that I play. There is some music that I play that speaks to me no matter how bad the recording and no matter what equipment it is played on. But good quality recordings played on good equipment are such a pleasure to listen to that I cannot deny the importance of the improvements I have made to my system. I should preface my remarks by stating that I am not associated with any manufacturer or any dealer and have no friends in the trade. So my comments are my personal opinions only. I recently added Oyaide plugs to my system and they have made a world of difference. I used the "revealing" P-037 for the CDP and I found the sound resolved yet lacking -- it was "thin" and "lean". Then I added the "warm" P-079 to the amplifier and I now have a revealing AND warm sound emanating from my speakers with a much larger sound stage and a much "fuller" and more "musical" sound. So yes, for me the equipment I use makes a big contribution to the "musicality" of my system and my ability to enjoy the music. But without the inner sense of musicality I doubt all this would make any difference to me. I have friends over who enjoy music but not in the same way I do. Their response is "it sounds very nice" no matter what changes have been made to my system since their last visit. Musicality means different things to different people.

Sabai
Byroncunningham, you make some very astute observations here. IMHO it is very important to differentiate between expertise and appreciation. It cannot be an a priori assumption that expertise necessarily means a greater sense of appreciation. The appreciation of an "expert" may be different from a "non-expert" but the former is not necessarily deeper or felt with greater intensity or sensitivity than by the latter. The appreciation of the "expert" may have a different perspective superimposed upon it because that is what happens when one becomes an "expert". There are meanings that emerge for "experts" that may not emerge for "non-experts". But not appreciating those "special meanings" that influence the "expert" does not mean that the experience of the "expert" is on higher level than that of the "non-expert". It simply means that they may be experiencing the music differently.

Sabai
Onhwy61, "understand/comprehend" connote an intellectual or cerebral attitude toward music appreciation. I am not using the word appreciation in this way at all. I use the word appreciate to mean the ability to enjoy. Different people enjoy music in different ways. Men are naturally more cogitators than women. This is a psychologically observable fact that has been noted by many famous people in the field of psychology and psychiatry including Carl Jung. Have you noticed how your sister, mother, girlfriend, female friends or wife often appreciate music differently? Because women function primarily on the "feeling level" and not on the "thinking level" they tend to appreciate music on the feeling level, not on the cerebral level -- in most cases, unless they are musicians or unless there is a specific aspect of the music's reproduction that stands out and cannot go unnoticed, such as harshness in the high frequencies or a boom in the bass frequencies that may grate on the ears and "interfere" with one's ability to appreciate the music as a whole. Dissecting a musical piece and focusing on one or more of its constituent parts is not the same kind of listening that I am referring to when I use the word appreciate. For me, understanding or comprehending a piece of music technically is not at all the same thing as appreciating it or feeling it in its wholeness.
Jax2, I was not trying to elevate women or audiophiles in my comments. I was just trying to point out the different ways different people experience music. For me experiencing music in its wholeness is what musicality is all about. I believe that more men than women are doing the buying and selling on Audiogon as well as participating in its forums. Does this have any meaning? I believe it does. I believe it means men think more about audio systems than women do. Both may be able to appreciate the music deeply but I believe more men than women have a tendency to become concerned about specific aspects of the music and the equipment it produces unless the latter are musicians or are in the music industry. Women have a more innate and natural ability to just sit down and enjoy the music without letting their brain interfere with their appreciation of it. Not that women may not notice a particular shortcoming in the sound reproduction. On the contrary, they may pick up on it faster than their partner. But because their partner may be more involved in the technical side of things he may be more worried about how to upgrade or tweak to get things just right and may spend a lot more time on Audiogon trying to figure things out.

Sabai
Well, you're all making very good points today, IMHO. Jax2 no apology needed. I think we're talking about the same thing in different ways, like a diamond with different facets. I think that the "studies" over a period of quite a few decades confirm that there are very real differences between men and women in a generalized sense. Of course this does not apply to everyone. It is just a broad stroke with the psychological paintbrush. I like what Tonywinsc observed. My wife is the same way. She has her little battery-powered mini radio in the kitchen and carries it all over the house with her to listen to her favorite music. I gave her my back-up system that now occupies center stage in the living room but she rarely ever turns it on even though it is a darn good system and she has a lot of CDs she enjoys when she does turn it on. When she comes into my small listening/computer room upstairs and I ask her what she "thinks" of the latest tweak or component she simply says "good" and then gets on with whatever she happens to be involved with at the moment. But sometimes a special song does elicit her request for a dance together. She appreciates the improvements in my system -- that I know -- but she is not obsessed with audio matters like I am -- and like I have been for many decades. My wife is very musical. I sleep in in the mornings and I am very often awakened by her lovely voice singing A Cappella or accompanying a song on her little radio. Our musicality is different but we both appreciate music in very much the same way -- as non-cogitators. Her appreciation of music does not depend on a "system". To reflect on one of your comments, I am not upgrading because I am bored. I am upgrading because this is the first time in my life that I have been able to afford a quality music system. I have a budget for it now, I have made most of my purchases and I am enjoying music in a way that I never thought I would be able to. The improved equipment makes a big difference to me. Music appreciation and audiophile live happily under the same roof in my modest listening room. I am very happy about each upgrade and tweak. I have my list and once it's all in place later this year then that will be about it -- except for maybe a plug here or an IC there -- but I'm not even sure if that will be necessary. Nothing major remains to be done. IMHO, The trick is to be happy with the best you can afford -- and I certainly am. I am very happy with my system and I am neither bored with it nor motivated to tweak it to death. On the video side, I am not a TV watcher although I do enjoy watching the occasional movie. So video upgrading and tweaking are not concerns for me. My wife enjoys watching TV a lot but since she is very happy with our TV set video upgrading or tweaking is not an issue for either of us.

Sabai
Kijanki, I agree. Without a passion for music then what's there to talk about here? But I have never given a thought to passion for music that is not accompanied by musicality. People who are musical but not into music? I guess it's possible. But for me the two go hand in hand. Like Frank Sinatra used to sing in "Love and Marriage". They go together like a horse and carriage.
Tonywinsc, I agree. I am the same way -- running lines and looking for small ways to improve the sound -- a silk pillow under the CDP helped a lot. I made a couple of plug changes a few days ago and the enjoyment factor went into the stratosphere. This morning my wife surprised me. I put on some of her favorite music -- Neil Sedaka remastered -- when she brought my favorite brew up to the listening room. She was so taken with the beauty of the music that she couldn't leave. She kept saying "I can't leave the room the music is so beautiful now. What you did makes such a big difference." We are now appreciating the music in the very same way. That's what I call really special. I can't wait till the new components arrive.
Chazro, I will take a line from Steely Dan. "I'm learning how to meditate. So far so good." I'm learning how to improve my system. So far so good. Once I add the Merlin speakers and the EMM I think my new system will be far more "involving" than my current system. We'll have to wait till September when everything is in place to hear how it all fits together.
Nilthepill, your comment is not off topic. It is exactly what the topic is all about. I also feel that musicality is IN you. The quality and/or synergy of your system creates the technical side of musicality. Most people find they enjoy their music more if they can afford better equipment. Each of us has to define what it means to have a musical system and I think that a short look around Audiogon will show that there are almost as many opinions about what makes a system musical as there are Audiogon visitors. Much depends on what you can afford. Some people are in the position of wishing they had a "more musical" system but they just cannot afford it -- yet. Others make poor choices when they purchase equipment -- I have done this myself in the past -- or are unaware of the value of certain choices that might make for a more "musical" system. One example of this is a friend of mine who "doesn't believe" in cords, cables, plugs and receptacles. He has a modest budget and "doesn't believe" that one choice over another could make a dramatic difference to the sound his system produces. He is a very musical person but has not yet discovered the value of this side of the audio world. But he wants to test one of my cords in his system to see if it will improve the sound. So at least he is open to the possibility that this kind of change could have a positive effect on the musicality of his system. I have found that even small changes can have a dramatic effect on the quality of sound. Change a plug and it can sound like you changed a component. This is very much a process of trial and error. The goal is to minimize error along the way -- not always an easy task.
Hello everyone, In my last posting I forgot to add a comment made by my friend -- the one who doesn't believe in cords, cables, plugs and receptacles -- about my speakers. I have the Totem Rainmakers but they will be soon replaced by the latest Merlin TSMs. When he heard the Rainmakers in my system he felt they were a very poor speaker because of the mid-bass "boom/bloom". Well, the "boom/bloom" was there alright but it was not the fault of the speakers. After he headed home I did a bit or research. I top-loaded each of the Rainmakers with about 30 lbs. of sand and replaced the stock plugs on the end of the Master Couplers with Oyaide plugs. My system was transformed with the "boom bloom" completely gone. The Rainmakers are actually an excellent speaker in their class if they are paired with the "right" equipment and tweaked appropriately. This goes to show how much we have to experiment to find that elusive synergy that will allow our systems to produce the most musicality they are capable of producing.
2chnlben, This is exactly it, IMHO. Musicality refers to the human characteristic. Musicality is often used erroneously to describe equipment but as long as we understand this then we know that people mean musical when they are talking about the musicality of their system. And, of course, this does not mean that a person who is less musical will enjoy music any less than a person who is more musical.
Rawinsonde and Vsollozzo,
Musicality is a human quality but a good system can enhance ones appreciation of music. I have done a lot of work on my system since 2010. I do a lot more toe-tapping now than I did back then.
Detlof and Frogman,

Monk created a unique style -- according to his wife, due to his small fingers (especially his baby finger which was nearly half the length of his middle finger). His compositions became classics. Peterson composed very little. He had a huge reach. His command of the keyboard, his virtuosity and his beautiful arrangements and renditions of the "classics" were breathtaking. Monk and Peterson are two of my favorite jazz pianists.
Hfisher3380,
I agree with you completely about the use of the word "musical" when used to describe components. Reviewers will say just about anything to disguise the fact they are sales people in sheep's clothing. They have to be taken with a grain of salt. IMO.
Mapman,

Foot tapping and other involuntary body reactions are a good indication of musicality. Of course, you can tap your foot or sway to the music consciously. I am referring to when you catch yourself with your body moving without having directed it to do so.
Detlof,

Thanks for your thoughtful and sensitive posts.

For me musicality is a combination of a high level of artistry on the part of the performers, a deep appreciation for music and great sensitivity on the part of the listener, and a system that is good enough to reproduce performances well. This leaves a lot of leeway for interpretation. I believe that we are looking at a continuum here, not a single standard that can be written in stone and defined by absolutes. Nevertheless, there is a point at which one may say the performance was not moving, or the system was not up to reproducing the performance with sufficient nuance. As for the listener? How do you begin to talk about sensitivity and music appreciation without opening a Pandora's Box?
Detlof,

I am not very inclined to make this into an intellectual thing. Music is perceived by the brain in a special way, thankfully. We can try to dissect the whole matter but it does not change the perceptions.
Learsfool,

As you rightly point out, musicality and music appreciation are not just about emotion. There are feelings and thoughts and other psychological events that happen when we look at what it means to be musical. But it does mean being moved in one or more ways.
In my original OP from 2010 I was not so concerned about the quality of reproduction. Since then, my system has evolved to a much higher level. It provides much more listener satisfaction than it did back then. As a result, I have come to appreciate how much the quality of a good audio system adds to enjoyment of the music.

Learsfool,

But, of course, music is far more than a language. It is processed by the brain in a unique way. For instance, lyrics are not processed by the brain as words. They are processed as part of a musical whole.

And, of course, there is an intellectual side to music. But that is not what most of us are concerned about when we listen.

Frogman,

As you rightly point out, much of what we perceive musically is dictated by our own personality. To that we can add our mood at the moment and our personal memories. What is felt and evoked in one person may not be the same as what is felt and evoked in another. Just as we cannot know how each person feels when he tastes vanilla we cannot know how each person reacts under the skin to any given musical piece.

Detlof,

When all is said and done, music does indeed remain a mystery. As it should.
Trying to dissect musicality is like trying to dissect love. We enjoy talking about it but, in the end, the talk does not encompass or define the real thing. The description is not the described. The real thing is elusive and mysterious.
Schubert,

If you look up Monk's Youtubes you can have a look.The explanation about how he developed his unique style came from his wife -- related to his short fingers. On the other hand, some people who witnessed Monk playing say he was capable of playing with lightning speed.
Detlof and Frogman,

I don't think that Thelonious Monk was at a level of "technical perfection" -- which is what Oscar Peterson alludes to in his comments about Monk. Nevertheless, I feel Monk was a very great artist. He was technically good whereas Peterson was technically great. Which did not make Peterson a greater artist than Monk, in my books. They were both great in their own individual ways. IMHO.
Detlof,

Monk was most interested in composition and the spontaneous interplay of musicians afforded by live performances. He allowed the creative process to take care of things.
I never get tired of listening to Monk. He was so creative, he always keeps me interested.
Wes was great, especially his small group recordings.

Here is another "high-musicality" selection:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N48-K9z-HA4

Beautiful!