opaqueice wrote: > Robin Bowes;275248 Wrote: >> The point is that not all cables/amps *do* meet those basic performance >> >> requirements, so the conditional clause in your statement is highly >> significant. It is therefore meaningless, and verging on ridiculous to >> make such statements making out that all cables (or amps) are the same. > > If you can buy cables for $s/foot which meet those minimum requirements > (and you can, easily), my statement is quite meaningful and quite > important (since all audiophile cables sell for far, far more than > that).
If, if, if ... > The real problem is that the debate has become politicized, I suppose > because cable manufacturers are for-profit, and because of the pride > and status-consciousness of their customers. That makes it hard to > have a calm and reasoned discussion, but regardless the facts are the > facts. No, the real problem is that you consistently post highly polarised opinion as fact. Yes, there are some v. expensive cables out there that will not perform any better than good quality cables costing much less. No, not all cables are "good quality", therefore cable *can* make a difference. As I said before I generally support your opinion of the cable market but you undermine your plausibility by taking it to extremes. R. _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
