DanSmedra wrote: > BASED ON MY RECENT LISTENING EXPERIENCE [/B]*VIA TIDAL STREAMING**, I > PREFER THE AESTHETIC QUALITY OF MQA'D ALBUMS/MUSIC OVER THE > **NON*[B]-MQA'D VERSIONS OF THE SIMILAR ALBUM. > > My statement is both rational and fact-based.
Thank you - that statement is indeed both rational and fact-based. Unfortunately it doesn't say anything about the possible functioning and benefits of the MQA technology. > Why do you wish to argue with this statement? i don't. > Do you believe in some empirically "objective" form of sound/music that > doesn't pass through YOUR ears and nervous system on its way to human > consciousness? This discussion definitely belongs in the "audiophile" section. I am not going to address the mostly philosophical issue of "objective forms of music". What I do believe in is some empirically objective form of signal reproduction - that is what we are talking about here. Taking a recording, as it exists in the mastering system, and transferring the recorded waveform to your DAC. > At every level of human experience, would-be scientists come forward to > endorse the -myth of objective consciousness-, thus certifying > themselves as experts. And because they know and we do not, we yield to > their guidance. p. 208-209 Heh, yes. No, you don't have to yield to the guidance of experts and science, but if you don't, it would be nice if you also had the intellectual honesty not to leach on the results of the work of experts and scientists. :) "To try to judge the real from the false will always be hard. In this fast-growing art of 'high fidelity' the quackery will bear a solid gilt edge that will fool many people" - Paul W Klipsch, 1953 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Julf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=42050 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=106754 _______________________________________________ Touch mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/touch
