audiomuze;534079 Wrote: > If it's backed by science I'm all for it, otherwise the differences are > between the ears...
this is a broad statement and in a way you are supporting my own position. this is the very reason i use mit cables and am hesitant to use most of the other cable manufacturers. mit has a pretty lengthy history and i would put their r&d up against any other cable manufacturer. i however do not feel a need to digest every detail of that science in order to support a product. that is quite a grandiose thought as it seems impossible to consume the information necessary to accomplish it. i'd drive myself crazy just trying to decide what to eat through the day. in reading through many of the forum threads there is a ton of effort put into understanding jitter, ringing, and all the things that prevent better listening experiences. many try to address these issues within the dac or the transport source but is it not possible to accomplish some of this in the cable? isn't this why some think spdif is flawed while others think usb is or aes or firewire etc...if you read computeraudiophile's forum, which i would argue is several levels more tech than this one, you would be convinced that spdif should be put to rest and it all sounds as convincing as what you may believe about spdif..."backed by science"...as is the design of my "magic cable"... -- richardw ------------------------------------------------------------------------ richardw's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=32135 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=76895 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
