From: waiting@the.exit.invalid   
      
   "Bill Graham"  wrote in   
   news:_dqdnVesdfXDZBfRnZ2dnUVZ_gOdnZ2d@giganews.com:   
      
      
      
   >> I never disputed your /individual/ inability to tell the   
   >> difference, just your cloudy views on the matter.   
   >   
   > Why are these views, "cloudy"? One can either hear the   
   > highs, or not. If one can't hear them, then why would one   
   > spend money to reproduce them faithfully?   
      
      
      
   OK, just to play this for a little longer... HOW MUCH did your   
   system cost?   
      
   I used to be a musician and there is nothing I love more than   
   music. But I think people who spend more than $1,500 on a sound   
   system are nuts.   
      
   The logic of "If you can't hear it, you can't hear its effects."   
   (A.K.) appears undeniable, and I do not believe my stereo would   
   sound better - to MY ears, and 99.9% of humans - if it *just*   
   cost $30,000 more.   
      
   I *have heard* $30,000 systems with 2 mono block valve amps and   
   speakers 3 times the size of my body, and I am /perfectly/ happy   
   with my 20+ yr old 2x30W Sony MHC-3500, and my ProAc Tablette II   
   speakers (the original Sonys, better than you would think, are   
   used with my computer).   
      
   Even on MY system, I /can/ hear the difference between something   
   I recorded with a 15KHz high pass filter on Vs. off.   
      
   Anyway, this is silly to argue about.   
      
   Now, for something a LOT more important:   
      
   Has anyone heard if "they" have developed a tinnitus reversal   
   operation procedure, OR some wonder drug? Mine is not THAT bad -   
   when I am talking (etc.) I am barely aware of it, but when I   
   listen to MUSIC, it is in full force. A nightmare.   
      
      
      
   --   
   Any mental activity is easy if it need not be subjected to   
   reality.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)