bob wrote:
wrote:
chung wrote:
bob wrote:
wrote:
snip all
Shorter Scott:
1. To me, the euphonic distortions of digital are beautiful.
2. Lots of recordings are badly made.
3. It's all digital's fault.
bob
Add (4):
4. Any attempt to summarize my (Scott's) position by objectivists will
fail.
So far they have failed.
What makes you think we were trying?
I find it odd that such a smart group of
people would feel compelled to summarize a *summary* of my views. Why
can't you guys just take *my* summary for what it is?
Because it was too long to read?
Why do you guys
continue misrepresent my views? Do you not understand them or are you
misrepresenting them on purpose? Like I said before, in any debate or
disagreement, if one side can accurately represent the opposing view
(like I did with the objectivist POV)
Yeah, right. Try again, some time.
When even the 'mainstream' audiophile press asserts that 'objectivists'
believe 'all amps sound the same' and the 'digital is perfect', there's not
much hope for rapproachment on accurate representation of views.
My point was not to summarize you. It was simply to note that you
offered nothing new, and that once again you appear to be someone who
likes the *sound* of vinyl and needs somehow to rationalize or justify
that preference. I'm surprised that I have to spell this out for you.
I wonder why Scott thinks people *should* care that much
about what his views are?
--
-S
"If men were angels, no government would be necessary." - James Madison (1788)