OK final reply. We got really different view on this for sure, you got the typical audiophile point of view where there's like written in stone "rules" what defines this and that and you have to do x to achieve y. I then again disregards the "rules" and go usually by ear and I search the sound that attracts me and it doesn't matter how and what I do to get there, it's the end result what I hear that counts if it's good or not to me. For example when I EQ, I don't EQ for a perfectly flat response in mind but what my ears enjoy hearing. I couldn't care less what's concidered "hi-fi" or not as long as it sounds the way I enjoy it. I follow my senses and you follow science/facts etc. When my senses are pleased with the sound is when I'm satisfied, not when "knowing I followed the book that this has supposed to be the optimal way to find the holy grail" which is how many audiophiles work like (doesn't have to be the case but for some it is). That's why we got such a different view on this. :P
I wonder what you would call me as I would never call me an audiophile, I mean the only real same goal we have is to find as much satisfaction with the sound as possible but how we go search for it is from like opposite directions.
Edited by RPGWiZaRD - 11/6/11 at 4:30pm