Does it have to sound good for you to like it?

Yup has to sound good or it will grate on me enough to the point where I will get rid of it. 

I have plenty of Classical recordings that I listen to that sound less than immaculate.  I subscribe to Pristine Audio streaming service and most of their catalog is the pre stereo era

A good composition well performed is far more important than the recording quality, IMO. 

This thread gives me some insight as to why some people are always "upgrading" and why they have such strong sonic preferences.  I wish them luck.

Being music driven, could listen to my favorite tunes on a transitor radio (almost). 

This post provokes answers to one of the perennial questions on this forum, implied by a snide remark attributed to Alan Parsons: "Audiophiles don't use their equipment to listen to your music. Audiophiles use your music to listen to their equipment."

Sometimes, I listen to the equipment. Then the recording quality takes precedence, since it is the most important determinant of the listening pleasure.

Other times, I listen to the music. I still love the Furtwängler performance of Brahms's first symphony best, for instance (monaural and not much above AM radio sound quality). 

But then, there's this (from rok2kid above): "Classical is unique in that it's the same music played over and over by different ensembles.  You should not have to put up with bad recordings because there is always a better one available.  Fortunately, the recording technology seems to have peaked at the same time as the great conductors and orchestras." This is just ignorant. All three of those sentences show a failure to understand anything about so-called "classical" music.