@gregorio I think this response to you is better placed in @castleofargh 's thread here, but I didn't want to bring down the level there. Should this continue, perhaps a new thread is better, since it also doesn't belong here. I have neither the time nor desire to engage in one of your standard bullying, long-winded, pedantic, point-by-point, repetitive battles. Perhaps later, when I have more time, although my previous exchanges with you prove unsatisfying. You never, or at best rarely, acknowledge your mistakes or give credit to valid counterpoints to your points. I respect your expertise in the methods and standard practices of music recording and production. I can and have referred to your knowledge of that space. I also support your, or anyone's, calls for evidence to back up claims. I'm an evidence-based person and do evidence-based work. There are limits about when and how to call for evidence, but it is a valid and useful endeavor. But using your own words as evidence ("The facts and science back me up.... so disagreeing with me is anti-fact/anti-science") is such a blatant appeal to self-authority that DK problems are an obvious area to explore. You place people in 2 groups: those who show you proper obeisance or the audiophiles (using the negative definition, not one from a dictionary). Although you may know more than many lay people in the areas of digital and analog audio, electronics/physics, and perception, you are by no means expert in these. But you act as though you are and appeal to your own authority: classic DK. I can dig up your posts and PMs for evidence, but off the top of my head, among other things, you: misapply Shannon-Nyquist to sampling theory, interchange voltage and current incorrectly, confuse frequency and time, confuse measurement and recording, and don't understand the limits of perception. There are valid relationships among these things you use to justify your mistakes, but they do show your lack of understanding, let alone expertise. 71dB has useful knowledge about auditory spatial perception and acoustics. Better than a lay person, but not an expert. He also likes crossfeed and wants to point out that there is a perceptual basis for some people liking it. Sometimes he leaves out the "some" from "some people", but he has gotten better. You want to dismiss the preference as a "vanilla ice cream tastes better than chocolate"-type preference. He repeats his justification for there being a true perceptual reason that the illusion is pleasing to some. You engage in pedantic, bullying, condescending harassment, which just provokes continued, flustered responses. In your exchanges, there is not a correct vs. incorrect side. You both make valid points, often talking past each other, but he struggles with communication (for language and social-interaction reasons) and that is your favorite exploit. The only winners in your exchanges are the popcorn-munching, rubber-necking voyeurs who used to shout "fight, fight, fight" on the playground, and you, because this achieves your goal. You provoke 71dB's worst behavior, and the only way to stop the train-wreck is to just stop. Most posters on audio forums are not experts in the related fields. So any exchange here must be taken with a grain of salt. The reason most exchanges are posted, rather than PM-ed is that the exchange may benefit others. 71dB's and ironmine's exchange, if they mutually benefit from it, should continue. Not because they write flawless posts, but because it helps both, they have fun, and it could help others. You were not elected hall monitor, and your classic "this is not the *** forum, this is sound science" really shows you seek validation here. We all know it's socially unacceptable to admit that... all except 71dB, he just admits it. And I'm willing to cut him some slack for his language and social awkwardness. You, as a bully, haven't earned that slack.