Cable vs. Electronics: biggest bang for the buck

Asa, I am with you as regards psychology and those "treating" in the name of it, not so in the case of Jung. It is not a question of coexistence, that is far too comfortable, it is a paradoxon, which has to be born and lived through until it becomes unimportant. Come one, you know that......

Yes, paradox. Did he see it, merely touch it and tell others, or live within it, comfortably, stably? At the end of the power of the thinking mind is paradox of mind; as paradox is lived within, reality reveals, in the case of Jung most famously, infinite succesive temporalities (temporality being a foundation of hypothetico-deductive cognition; cognition operates upon reality through a comparative temporal construction). Linearity releases its grip and temporality becomes flux, revealing deeper symmetries of change. Jung's "synchronicity" (read paradox: coincidence not coincidence) is a perception that is temporally-based as much as "normal" thinking. In other words, temporal perception has not faded into paradox - it only looks that way to the temporal-linear mind - but has evolved: it sees "synchronous-ly" and the same way it always did at the same time. One level transcends the last, meaning that it moves beyond AND at once includes. I was wondering whether Jung co-existed in this way or merely had peak experiences of that level of perception that he then told people about, erecting an analytic structure to (partially?) describe it and (his innovative extention) apply it therapeutically. Was his perception trans-temporal, so to speak, moment to moment, or now and then with reportage thereafter?

On bliss/not-bliss paradox and transcending of its oscillation (not just seeing it from afar and reporting it to others), given your description of Jung's recoil and ego distortion vis-a-vis others, I would find it - and I say this with utmost respect - highly doubtful that he had transcended that oscillation in a stable sense (that matrix being much, much deeper than even the archetypes, much less transitory destabilzation of linearity producing "paradox"....detlof, see my personal message on that already sent).

What does this have to do with audio? (jeez, tee'd up on a teeball stand and everything).

I can hear the knives sharpening, the bushes rustling...Oh come on guys, its wide open, take a shot!! Muralman, Subaru et al what am I possibly going to do without you, my foils? (Script reads: high pitched moan, flying monkeys looking on [how about that for an image, detlof!]): I'm melting...I'm melting...oh, my world...

You only have to click your heels three times. You always could go home (ignore the thinking machinating man behind the curtain...). Stop thinking about equipment, that mine is a "component" and yours is not, that experience is secondary to my experiment upon it, etc. and click your heels... chop wood, carry water.

6ch what do you think?

Asa, I'm disappointed. I thought if any one could see whats around my neck, it would be you. Hint, it's the thread.

I know, Unsound. I was just joshin' ya. But its still there, you're still here! Run for your lives, its the thread that ate Detroit!! My condolences...

Hey, SO, cable IS a component, even with Muralman's Apogees, even though he's not sure, and yes, scientific measurements are important, but to believe they are primary to the experiement of listening is itself heresy to the Cartesian God, and saying that Dominus is mis-spent money when you yourself spend $7K on a system and there are still (the last time I checked) Bangledeshis is somewhat hipocritical and revealingly self-serving, and, hopefully, enough scientific-attached guys with puny ________ have seen this and will think twice about beating people over the heads with their rulers (is there an archetype for that, detlof?) - until, of course, they get re-juiced by WWF (or is it WWE now?) and their, er, other needs (the puny part) - so, you know, it was a good thing, no?

Oui.

I know a pretzel factory in Pennsylvania that's looking for help.