Why isn’t more detail always better?

Natural detail is always something to strive for.  Unnatural highlighting of a certain group of frequencies that are pushed in your face is not detail - it's highlighting.  If you're listening to a live unamplified performance, you hear all the detail meant to be heard (from a relatively nominal distance).  If you suddenly rush the stage and wrap yourself with one of the performers in a shroud, sure you'll hear primarily that person and their breathing, etc.  But if you step back to hear the whole group, what you will hear is the natural presentation as it was meant to be heard.  Natural detail and transparency is not brightness, nor any other annoying artifact of reproduced sound.  To hear a system that does this correctly is a wonderful experience.  I've had a number of these experiences this past year.

Accurate detail means as close to live or the recording studio, in the bass, midrange and treble.  If you cannot separate the bass guitar from the kick drum, it lacks detail. If it is fatiguing, it lacks accurate detail. Accurate details are always better. You, however, may not enjoy a completely flat frequency response. 

Detail is never the "last word" in accurate retrieval but one of many criteria in the overall reproduction of sound.Its always about synergy; the balance of all factors that creates an illusion of a live performance.

I found having "quiet" incoming AC first, allows me to tune these balances much more easily.