I don't want to beat a dead horse but I'm bugged.

What surprize me is that you act like children and propose me "thorazine" or something else not "amazing" at all...

You confuse the message and the messenger in a bout of rejection without even thinking about what is proposed by 3 geniuses who think about sound and music in a new way...

What is the relation between Ansermet and Furtwangler notion of musical time and Time in general for example ? Is anyone of those who insult me has an idea to give about that because i have ?

Why not thinking about what is hearing sound in a new way, what is music etc instead of circling like children writing some dissertation about subjectity and objectivity which is kindgarten level and never goes anywhere because you dont know what you speak about : the fetchism of the gear for some and the zealot measuring hobbyist attitude for others....

These 2 groups propose nothing interesting to me and too anyone save trivialities...

I will repeat, no evaluation of gear made sense at the end out of acoustic and psycho-acoustic control settings where the subjectivity impressions taken seriously are related to objective dispositions and conditions and measures , blind test is not enough and only one useful but insufficient tool by itself anyway because the goal of psycho-acoustic is not a debunking circus..... Period....

Tuning a small room was a learning experience for me taking 2 years....Then i know what i spoke about a little even if i am not an acoustician at all...

Now why not to think about what is sound and music meaning in the universe and in the brain?

Did one of those who insult me can wrote only one sentence describing this relation?

😁😊

By the way i am an enthousiastic mind, i am not bi-polar, and dont need medication...I propose ideas instead of insults and if someone read my posts he will be amazed by the number of ideas or small discoveries i made here in my interest with sound and music...i am a free spirit not a sheep...It is the reason why dividing groups blinded by ignorance repel me...I like each one  of you separetely out of any group mentality...

..

«Beating a dead horse is an idiomatic expression with a figurative rather than literal meaning. If you’re beating a dead horse, you’re engaged in a futile or pointless action. In other words, you’re pursuing a lost cause and wasting time and effort.»

Then who beat a dead horse ? Me proposing multiple aspects of reflections about the brain, information theory, number, music, the cosmos with reference to recognized great minds, or those who insult me here some zealots insisting  going on without end "to beat the dead horse" out of any subjectivist described as "deluded" , or those fetichists insisting  going on without end  "to beat the dead horse" out of any objectivist and even banishing them ?

It does not take a I.Q. test to answer me here....Or pehaps it takes one ?

😁😊😊 Sorry i could not resist to present my defense and my point...

But it is solely about measurements versus subjective.

So maybe it is because we cannot describe feelings and impressions and emotions as easily as we can express things with numbers… maybe that is why we use objective analysis?

At this point we have moved to beating a dead horse using AI and machine learning.
We should be at the glue stage soon.

Now two remarks here....

My feeling and impressions correspond and CORRELATE to ACOUSTIC experience and very well defined concept to describe sound experience: Imaging, soundstage, timbre, bass, LEV/ASW ratio, dynamic, etc all had a precise psycho-acoustic and acoustical definition and can be understood ONLY when we learn how to control them at will in a room if we are an audiophile or in a laboratory if we are an acoustician ...

Buying like a fetichist a piece of favorite brand name gear is not enough, and measuring like a zealot a second times this piece of gear to correct the designer and verify it, is not enough either... And arguing if we must measure OR listen is ridiculous...A dead horse alternatives...

Objective measures of any kind, electrical one or acoustical one, are there to serve our leaning hearing subjective experience and process and serve to improve our impressions by our own will to experiment with objective material dispositions ...

And you read me WRONG, i did not propose, nor any of the scientists i used in my posts,  to replace human mind by a machine to improve room acoustic... It is the opposite, i explicitly say that even if an A. I. will be better for many aspect of the job but not all, it will rob us of our own learning process.... Do you read posts or do you answer them without reading them?

Then interpretating me wrong, it is you who circle "beating your dead horse" alternatives : O or S....

I am not an O or a S... I am in the learning process...

I used to be surprised by such antics but that was long ago. It's silly to argue with those who employ ad hominem attacks, circular reasoning and other mental gymnastics, imo, unless you simply enjoy ill logic. For me that's just a waste of time.

For sure you are more wise than i am...

I am only a too much enthusiastic person....

my deepest respect to you....