It was a rather weak "paper" not based in any verified reality. There is nothing at all scientific about the paper nor really mathematical for that matter. She is not at all a subject matter expert.Bad faith exist when someone misrepresent the intention of someone else to attack him after this distortion...
First -You cannot accuse her, like you blame me of ignorance about the Nyquist Theorem, which is small game mathematically speaking for a mathematician...
Second- This CANNOT be a "weak paper" this a general public article... Then faulting her for a piece of vulgarization and anecdotal subjective experience demonstrate your vindicative dogmatism and volontary distortion of objective fact...
Third I myself use this article for the general public here, and for his opinion that float none of the 2 boats in war, nor yours (digital) nor the other boat (turntable fanatics). She trust his ears and have some doubt without faulting no one, nor the digital camp nor the turntable one...( She is modest and intelligent)
I am in the third boat with her and real science, the human Brain/ ears evaluation of timbre experience cannot be reduced to a theorem of signal theory... She said it but with caution like an interrogation: why if mathematically speaking digital and analog are on par , and why if mathematically digital CAN DO anything that analog can do, why then, so much humans are judging it inferior?
My own point which is alluded to in this article, is that from the only accuracy that count, the human ears judgement of accuracy, there remain a debate and this debate pose the question of what is a phenomenon...It is not a measured number, if we said so we destruct science...
My other point, which is not alluded to in this article, is about the powerful difference that embeddings controls can have on turntable or dac and then on our judsgment about the experience...
I myself use digital, i will repeat myself, but unlike dogmatics of one boat or the other, i refuse to solve this Gordian knot by idiosyncrasic arbitrary decision or by some theorem... I am with those who with reason, like this mathematician, interrogate herself: why if mathematically there is no possible difference, why so many human perceive one?
My experience is it is impossible to cut simply that problem assuming only ONE experience, mine or some other experience, nor decide because a theorem of the theory of signals said so...
Accuracy is a human experience first, not a microphone experience translated in digital sequences first ... If you dont understand that, you will understand nothing to the universe or about yourself... Sorry for you...
I repeat , i am not on the turntable boat, and especially not on your boat especially for the reason(Nyquist theorem) you are there, even if i consider digital on par with analog in my experience for reasons i will not repeat here and anyway reason you will be unable or not interested to understand...
By the way last time you depart for a beer with myjostyn leaving ignorant dude like me alone, then why coming back with no new arguments to answer a post that was not directed toward you?
You cannot accuse her to not understand Nyquist theorem do you? You can play this game with ordinary people but not with me and certainly not with her....
« Autocritic hability and good faith are the ONLY gist of Intelligence, nothing else is»-Anonymus Smith
«But if some Nobel prize have not and never had autocritic capacity or good faith then what about his intelligence?»- Anonymus friend
«Guess what?»-Myself