3 ms·
I read him differently. He only criticized objective claims which were scientifically implausible or found to be untrue, e.g., that vinyl had higher fidelity th
by ozy23378 13y ago
I read him differently. He only criticized objective claims which were scientifically implausible or found to be untrue, e.g., that vinyl had higher fidelity than CD as a medium, that humans could hear a difference between cheap and expensive cables, or when his measurements differed remarkably from manufacturers' specs, i.e., false advertising.
He did not criticize subjective preferences such as vinyl over CD, fancy cables over cheap ones or tube amps over op-amps. Only when false/implausible objective claims came into play did he refute them.
- calinet6 13y agoThis is true, he never argued against simple preference. His bedside manner in most discussions left a lot to be desired, is all.