Chung wrote:
wrote:
Chung wrote:
Excuse me, but you have been engaging others in this torturous
discussion for way too long ...
This is one of the differences between the "camps"-- this sort of
discussion may be torture for you, but to me it is interesting and very
relevant. I'm enjoying Mark's posts. I get the feeling that rahe is for
you, a turf you would like to protect from claims of things you
disagree with.
I don't share your feeling at all. I like a lively debate of opposing
ideas as much as anyone else, but in this case, we are going over the
same points, since, oh, the middle of June, or so. And Mark still wants
to "debate" what it means when two things sound the same, or if there
are no differences between them. It takes someone with a lot more
scientific curiosity than I have to find this particular point worth
further elaboration after almost three months.
You just don't like the way the conversation has gone. Much of the
initial effort on this thread was concerned with differentiating the
implications of "identification" tests from those of "discrimination"
tests (it was eventually agreed that the latter are the standard tests,
and the results of the former are questionable).
What was the origin of this? In large part, it was your suggestion, in
the "will sound improve with a sacd player?" thread, to "let someone
else change the player so that you don't know whether it is playing the
CD or the SACD layer. Then you try to guess which layer is being
played" (May 25, 7:57 pm), which is to recommend an identification
test.
If you don't have the patience to follow through on the implications of
your ideas, and the considerable advice you give in this group, no one
says you have to, but don't complain if others examine those ideas and,
sometimes, criticize them.
Mark