pablolie;184112 Wrote: 
> Not sure why you would get flamed. Because I am touching on the great 
> subjectivist vs objectivist divide
in audiophile land.

pablolie;184112 Wrote: 
> 
> I am always very scpetical when people claim something's based on
> physics. There was a time when they could prove the sun circled the
> earth with physics. :-) On the other hand, I don't think *everything*
> needs to be measurable and quantifiable to be valid in an art as
> esoteric as "high end audio", which is somewhat irrational to start
> with.

Well, we differ here. This isn't quantum mechanics. It isn't cosmology,
string theory or general relativity. This is not X ray wave guides. We
understand electronics at 20-50 KHz. We know alot about audio
perception. There are still black art areas, like speaker design and a
bit of room acoustics. But it is way less black art than people seem to
believe. This topic is measurable.

Anyway, I have said my piece on this and I will go back into my hole
now. I really do know better...


-- 
Eric Carroll

Transporter-Bryston 3B SST-Paradigm Reference Studio 60 v.4
SB3-Rotel RB890-B&W Matrix 805
SB3-Pioneer VSX-49TXi-Mirage OM7+C2+R2
ReadyNAS NV+
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Carroll's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=9293
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=33146

_______________________________________________
audiophiles mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles

Reply via email to