Quote: I'd say this is a pretty accurate breakdown. People who look at sound as a magic black box tend to think that EQ is like if you pulled a snake out of a hat instead of a rabbit. People who think that sound is just one more part of the physical world that can be quantified are less resistant to the idea, though I've seen my share of the "charts and graphs" crowd getting hung up on miniscule artifacts that show up in the readouts. There's a lot of argument about how EQ should be used, and of course the whole philosophical argument about the cleanest signal path being the best. There's also a "scientific" way of using EQ and a more subjective way. I fall in the former camp in my use. I've evangelized for precision EQ outside the dedicated thread in my signature a few times, but for the most part it doesn't bother me what people think or do with their own equipment. As long as we're all enjoying the music. You know you're an audiophile when you start critically evaluating the sound quality of the music that plays in your own head. "Bass is a little light, but presentation is where it really suffers. It's entirely within the head without a semblance of a sound stage...."