[o0OBillO0o]

Originally Posted by House de Kris

It seems to me that you are now changing the intent of the thread from discussing merits of the carrier (an objective discussion) to what sounds best to the listener (a subjective discussion). I believe these to be two independent and unrelated topics. I'm not sure anyone has suggested that what sounds best to someone can be determined by the number of bits or the number of samples per second.

I believe the industry will continue to offer new options as time goes on. Just as I believe the buying public has the right to ignore such options, or to embrace them. No one's got a gun to their head here.

@Kris.. there is always a "So What?" What does this mean to us?-Which is subjective, but worth discussion because both objective and subject are important. The other statement is "Who cares?" -it's not sarcasm it's something to ask every time there is some concept of polarization.

Case in point. Your subjective answer here (below). Side note:So if you're not poking the bear here, then please help this discussion by going back to "objective."

Originally Posted by House de Kris

Contrary to your beliefs, I don't feel that noise is part of the art of music. I can listen to live music, and noise of the venue is part of the package, that's a given. But, noise of the venue is not necessarily part of the art. When listening to a symphony and a large truck drives by the hall, I don't consider that part of the art. I consider that an unfortunate accident. Likewise, when that performance is recorded, any additional noise added to the performance is not part of the art. It, again, is an unfortunate accident. Noisey mic preamps, noisey random particles on tape, surface noise in grooves, quantization noise in digitization, noise in amplifiers driving speakers, noise from my neighbor's lawn mower when listening all come after the fact of creating the art and not part of the the art of music at all - in my opinion.

Oh, and all of these noises after the fact reduce the resolution.

That's a great opinion. I am sure if we could control everything there would be no need for discussion anywhere here on the forum.

See Beck's Morning Phase for a album where the artist purposely puts noise in the recording.

Originally Posted by House de Kris

Yes, another article that sports the same jist as the one in the OP. But, it did have this interesting paragraph included:

It appears that this is another link you've provided that contradicts the link in the OP. Specifically, this thread is based on learnings from The Matrix, and that there is no resolution. This latest link states plainly that resolution is indeed technically correct (and thus implies it exists).

I get that because the concept of resolution is "so endlessly misleading for so many people" that such articles must be written. The first article goes so far as to spread misinformation to make its point. Is this the sort of article we should parade about as being 'good clean thinking'?

This is getting ridiculous. ^^ I am done here.