atmasphere, ricevs:
I don't try to hide that I think a lot of "tweaks" are highly questionable, and as opposed to what many believe, I have had a large group of audiophile friends who over the years have tried them, so I have been exposed first hand to them, and see difference in blind/sighted listening. Some, based purely on the claims, are physically impossible. I know stating that irks someone. Almost never has anyone ever come back with truly empirical evidence to support their position, even if they resort to "I can trust my ears". I do find leaping from "I trust me ears" to "it must be true" distasteful, almost as much as "I like it", therefore "it must be accurate", however, those argument and conversations play out much differently from this.
We are not "arguing" over likes, or personal impressions. We are discussing hard, factual engineering topics and concepts. These really are effectively black and white topics, and there is an absolute right or wrong. People who obviously have a deep and accurate understanding of this topic post detailed explanations and why things are the way they are, work the way they are, etc. We don't sugar coat, of exaggerate.
In the face of that, someone else, with clearly an incomplete and inaccurate understanding of many of the related topics to Class-D repeatedly posts technically erroneous information. This is not even debatable. It really is black or white, right or wrong. They are wrong. Absolutely provably wrong, and they have been. They don't recant, or consider they may be wrong, they double down and repeatedly post false information labelling it as factually correct, even though they cannot describe it in their own words or justify their position.
Last, I find the repeated personal attacks on atmasphere totally uncalled for. It is like he has a personal grudge.
I don't try to hide that I think a lot of "tweaks" are highly questionable, and as opposed to what many believe, I have had a large group of audiophile friends who over the years have tried them, so I have been exposed first hand to them, and see difference in blind/sighted listening. Some, based purely on the claims, are physically impossible. I know stating that irks someone. Almost never has anyone ever come back with truly empirical evidence to support their position, even if they resort to "I can trust my ears". I do find leaping from "I trust me ears" to "it must be true" distasteful, almost as much as "I like it", therefore "it must be accurate", however, those argument and conversations play out much differently from this.
We are not "arguing" over likes, or personal impressions. We are discussing hard, factual engineering topics and concepts. These really are effectively black and white topics, and there is an absolute right or wrong. People who obviously have a deep and accurate understanding of this topic post detailed explanations and why things are the way they are, work the way they are, etc. We don't sugar coat, of exaggerate.
In the face of that, someone else, with clearly an incomplete and inaccurate understanding of many of the related topics to Class-D repeatedly posts technically erroneous information. This is not even debatable. It really is black or white, right or wrong. They are wrong. Absolutely provably wrong, and they have been. They don't recant, or consider they may be wrong, they double down and repeatedly post false information labelling it as factually correct, even though they cannot describe it in their own words or justify their position.
Last, I find the repeated personal attacks on atmasphere totally uncalled for. It is like he has a personal grudge.