About users with hidden agendas

You can be a toxic fellow at times. I know as can I.

Yup! The #2. A couple more….

Anybody pretending to know how is the sound of a system exactly by contemplating image of the gear without listening to the room acoustic is deluded....

or he sell gear and upgrade...

An acoustician dont look the gear to bash it or praise it, he listen to the room....

I am only a regular guy able to experiment in my dedicated room and this is the only essential fact i learned....

Nobody can prove me wrong about that....

I already look at one million dollars bling system that seems awful because of the ROOM....mIne is 500 bucks.... I dont pretend it is better , i do pretend that price tag means way less than acoustic....

Then pretending to know what is the real s.q. of a system without listening the acoustic seetings is meaningless...

Saying that a Sansui or a McIntosh amplifier are bad or low S.Q. or the reverse without listening them in a very good acoustically controlled room is also meaningless.. Some audiophiles called this ignorance a "taste"....

But nobody could ever know what will be the s.q difference . of the gear before and after a rightfull acoustic embeddings treatment and control...

Then taste are only that : taste, and they may change....

Acoustic dont change...Why?

Because it is the way to bent the room in relation to the specific needs of the gear and speakers using your specific ears to tune the relation...

Acoustic is a process ......Not a taste...

I use a combo of these:

there are many people who view music as as a tool for evaluating their systems.

which are very much a statement of their being related to the validation process..

And  …

Then pretending to know what is the real s.q. of a system without listening the acoustic seetings is meaningless...

Basically if I can get the little lady to play pretend or dress-up, and start prancing around the living room with a horned viking helmet acting out the shield-maiden role while playing Wagner, or dress-up in a Kimono when i play Madame Butterfly (but replacing the sepaku for the final scene), then THAT is also a good measure of listening success.

There is nothing in common between the room acoustic where we listen Puccini

and wearing a kimono to increase our perception of the music...

Then assimilating the two is only that : a joke...

By the way my audio journey is completed i listen music not my system...

I never bought anything nor any upgrade save the basic gear i own...

I am here for some friends and advising and learning about the key problem in audio :acoustic.... And also speaking about my low cost solutions..

i can also use a COMBO of your post and any other people post, mixing them and make a cheap joke at your expanse... .

Easy...

but i dont do that ....I dont need to .... Guess why?

It is because mocking others is not the best way to keep the appearence of being wise especially if we are not so much wise to begin with....

I use a combo of these:

there are many people who view music as as a tool for evaluating their systems.

which are very much a statement of their being related to the validation process..

And …

Then pretending to know what is the real s.q. of a system without listening the acoustic seetings is meaningless...

Basically if I can get the little lady to play pretend or dress-up, and start prancing around the living room with a horned viking helmet acting out the shield-maiden role while playing Wagner, or dress-up in a Kimono when i play Madame Butterfly (but replacing the sepaku for the final scene), then THAT is also a good measure of listening success.