Musicality: chasing the undefined?

Wharfedale EVO 4.4 Floorstanding Speakers
Analogous

Analogous

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2017
Messages
3,477
Points
113
Location
Bangalore
I recognise a great sounding set up when I hear it.
When I try to understand why I like it so much the term “musical” invariably comes to mind along with the other usual terms used to describe good quality audio reproduction. I have seen/heard this used widely in audio reviews and have used it myself on occasion without being to explain what this is.

I am guessing since it’s not well defined it is not measurable or quantifiable.

Hoping to get some interesting/good insights from FM. Here are a couple of articles with different perspectives to get us going…

www.frontiersin.org

Music and Noise: Same or Different? What Our Body Tells Us

In this article, we consider music and noise in terms of vibrational and transferable energy as well as from the evolutionary significance of the hearing system of Homo sapiens. Music and sound impinge upon our body and our mind and we can react to both either positively or negatively. Much...
www.frontiersin.org www.frontiersin.org
darko.audio

Musicality: talks loud, says nothing | Darko.Audio

As sound quality descriptors go, musicality is perhaps the most toothless of them all.
darko.audio darko.audio
 
Oh …. Almost all the terms thrown around in rapturous praise are most of the time used wrongly by audiophiles having no training in music or zero exposure to live concerts in proper halls.

Terms like tone , timbre , timing , attack , decay are used in whatever way one pleases without having the least idea what one is talking about , especially in so called revered stereo magazines and worse in online reviews and most YouTube videos.
 
My take is this. There is a feeling that is evoked in you when you listen to live music. If your system is able to evoke that same feeling when you listen to it, it is a musical system. People try to use words to describe it. When you talk or write, that is the only way to do that. So I pretty much forgive it and indulge in it myself. Many of my audio nut friends and me have a shared collection of such words and we know what we mean when we use it. It works perfectly well.

The treble sounds ever so slightly rolled off but also glassy!... If you know what I mean :)
 
square_wave said:
There is a feeling that is evoked in you when you listen to live music.
Click to expand...
this is the catchword. IF you listen to live music and are familiar with the (preferably ) unamplified sound of instruments, only then you can qualify in using those words to describe the merits (or lack thereof) of a stereo system. If you have training in music , even better.

Without having either of those two , it is plain farcical to use those words in reviewing a setup.
 
Bloom@83 said:
this is the catchword. IF you listen to live music and are familiar with the (preferably ) unamplified sound of instruments,
Click to expand...
This again depends on your proximity to acoustic instruments during a live performance. If it's in an intimate setting then you could pick up the timbre of every unamplified acoustic instrument.

Even if the musical instruments are acoustic, they will be amplified in a large-scale environment such as a concert.

This is yet another generalisation. An acoustic guitar string made of Bronze, Phosphor bronze, Aluminium bronze, Silk and steel, Polymer-coated, Brass, Steel and Nickel, Nylon, for example, would not only sound different from each other, but will also depend on the gauge of the strings in the various aforementioned materials.

Furthermore, the width and depth of the guitar box will also have an impact. As an example, consider the following.


Acoustic-Guitar-Sizes-ALL-1990781837.png

In terms of timbre, my understanding is that a musician will listen to music differently than a non-musician. Audiophiles may be interested in the technical qualities of audio, but musicians are more interested in the construction, skill, composition, and other aspects of a musical work than in the mastering quality of a song, which audiophiles are more keen in. There is no right or wrong here; all that matters is how one chooses to appreciate music.
 
So, it’s not even Jargon?

www.merriam-webster.com

Definition of JARGON

the technical terminology or characteristic idiom of a special activity or group; obscure and often pretentious language marked by circumlocutions and long words; confused unintelligible language… See the full definition
www.merriam-webster.com www.merriam-webster.com

Definition of jargon​

1: the technical terminology or characteristic idiom of a special activity or group
2: obscure and often pretentious language marked by circumlocutions and long wordsan academic essay filled with jargon
3a: confused unintelligible language
b: a strange, outlandish, or barbarous language or dialect
c: a hybrid language or dialect simplified in vocabulary and grammar and used for communication between peoples of different speech
 
Bloom@83 said:
this is the catchword. IF you listen to live music and are familiar with the (preferably ) unamplified sound of instruments, only then you can qualify in using those words to describe the merits (or lack thereof) of a stereo system. If you have training in music , even better.

Without having either of those two , it is plain farcical to use those words in reviewing a setup.
Click to expand...
I agree. I frequent live shows and at times you go into a zone while at the show. A system has to take me there.
 
square_wave said:
The treble sounds ever so slightly rolled off but also glassy!... If you know what I mean :)
Click to expand...
I agree, when one "describes" sound I'll know exactly what one wishes to express or define. Issue is when "such definitions" are erroneously used. It always helps to find an author or reviewer one can relate to in terms of describing sound.
 

“Terms I Don’t Use Because I’m Tired of Them or Never Liked in the First Place​

Natural​

W.T.F. does that mean? I know it’s generally used to describe something that is pleasing to listen to or fundamentally good, but I hear it used in the wrong context so often, I’m weary of my friend Natural. I heard some audiophiles describe a version of some music I worked on that I knew for a fact contained more distortion, non-linearity, and coloration compared to a LESS processed and cleaner version of the same recording, as more natural. Okay. I get it. For many of us, color is king. Until it’s not.

Musical​

I don’t know. I have used it, but never loved it. It’s kind of what you say when something sounds good but you don’t feel like digging deeper. I do like musicality for some unknown reason.

Bloom​

Okay, I kinda liked it back in the day, but it just seems dated to me now. You might love it. Maybe I’ll start using it again? I can be such a fickle SOB.

Phasey​

Sorry, but no. Just don’t.

Transparent​

I don’t hate on this one (like natural) but I think it’s sometimes a lazy way to talk about something that might be better described in discrete terms as having wide dynamic bandwidth and low coloration and noise, flatter than most in the FR dept., and probably on the more damped side of the scale. I’ll give ‘transparent’ a full pass when it’s used to describe a complete hi-fi system that truly calls so little attention to itself that it’s uh, transparent.

Pace, Rhythm, and Timing (PRaT)​

If these terms really speak to you, then great. You have my blessing, seriously. For me, I can’t quite go there. Something to me just feels a little off about these terms. I love the idea of using these terms, cause it would seem useful to ascribe these qualities (or lack of) to a speaker or a turntable so why do I slightly cringe when someone uses these terms? Maybe because these terms all describe what musicians call groove.

But components don’t groove, they just reproduce the groove. If a system has good dynamic contrasts and is well damped with a solid low end, it might seem to groove more than an under-damped, compressed sounding hi-fi system. But if you play James Brown on your phone speakers it will still groove. Mightily.”

Excerpted from: http://parttimeaudiophile.com/2020/07/11/hi-fi-what-does-it-sound-like/
 
aeroash said:
This one's a real kicker! These could be the "inventions" of the industry to lure the poor to empty their pockets!
Click to expand...
When you listen to a time and phase coherent loudspeaker design, there is a sense of timing you get with all the sounds in the mix that gets your foot tapping to the music. Your brain starts doing less work to decipher what is going on. That is a very PRATy system! I heard this for the first time with a green mountain audio loudspeaker. Almost all single driver full range and coaxial speakers do this well. An old philips hiQ speaker will do this better than many big audiophile soundstage king speaker these days.
 
Analogous said:
So, it’s not even Jargon?

www.merriam-webster.com

Definition of JARGON

the technical terminology or characteristic idiom of a special activity or group; obscure and often pretentious language marked by circumlocutions and long words; confused unintelligible language… See the full definition
www.merriam-webster.com www.merriam-webster.com

Definition of jargon​

1: the technical terminology or characteristic idiom of a special activity or group
2: obscure and often pretentious language marked by circumlocutions and long wordsan academic essay filled with jargon
3a: confused unintelligible language
b: a strange, outlandish, or barbarous language or dialect
c: a hybrid language or dialect simplified in vocabulary and grammar and used for communication between peoples of different speech
Click to expand...
"argot" is the appropriate term in our case:)

Jargons and terminologies are shorthands born out of necessity in any specialty field.
 
So, coming back to the term “musical” sounding…any additional insights or thoughts on what this experience is?
 
square_wave said:
You can get all this with an improper speaker design. The sound will be all over the place though.
Click to expand...
Not IME. Mids yes. But Highs and real low, very difficult. Lows require good speakers that have very low tension in moving the cone and an amp with power on demand (and yes the room). Lot of the high is lost in long or high capacitance cables or cheap amps.
 
mbhangui said:
Not IME. Mids yes. But Highs and real low, very difficult. Lows require good speakers that have very low tension in moving the cone and an amp with power on demand (and yes the room). Lot of the high is lost in long or high capacitance cables or cheap amps.
Click to expand...
Lows, Mids and Highs are possible if the frequency response curve good. I was referring to loudspeaker design only.

To play music, you need so much more.
 
Audio Technica AT-LP60X Fully Automatic Belt-Drive Turntable
Buy from India's official online dealer!

Similar threads

Analogous
Can you ‘feel’ the music? You’re probably an empathetic person
Replies
4
Views
943
Analogous
Analogous
Back
Top