Swampwalker --
It seems you take things a bit out of context here, and misunderstand what I mean.
My "gripe" in a sense with poster Grannyring was that I found he tended to label the DAC-direct defenders to adhere to a "non-real" sound:
To some it sounds cleaner or more resolving, but I feel this is either mistaken for "transparency" or some folks like that lighter than real sound. Ha! I know that sounds negative, but we do all have preferences.
To each their own would then be like saying: the ones who prefer the "real" sound, and those (the DAC-direct people) who embrace a "faux" imprinting. On the surface it's a benign statement saying "to each their own," but in the context of what he wrote I found it got a slight knowing-it-better tone.
My comment ""To each their own [fortune]" may also apply to those who've struck upon a winning DAC-direct combination instead of being simply in the camp of preferring a faux sonic imprinting" was trying to communicate that those in favor of a DAC-direct solution wasn't necessarily defenders of a "faux" sound, but could as well achieve a winning combination with "real" sonics.
