A question for those folks who eschew the concept ‘bits are bits’ but deny the existence of a “bits are not bits” philosophy: How do software programs modify the 0’s and 1’s so they sound different? Presumably the software program that you believe sounds the best makes the 0’s and 1’s more analogue-ic, melodic; defined, refined; spatial, palatial; emotive, evocative, empathetic, and euphonic. It makes the ‘0’s’ more oval, the ‘1’s’ more erect. The program enhances the ‘1’s’ sharp edges, and make the’0 s’ smoooooother. Staccato vs. legato. Both digits are cleaner and leaner. No electron hitchhikers. How is it that yes/no, true/false can be so different? Maybe bits equivocate...maybe yes, maybe false.
Or maybe bits are modified by our bias. I love the sound of my Atma-Sphere M60’s. And their looks are magical. Especially at night when the lights are off. They sound much better than my previous Bob Carver solid state amp. Did I A/B these amps? No. How is my acoustical memory? Poor at best, and no better than my built in EQ, presbycusis. But Yes, Yes, they DO sound better. Don’t they? How can you deny that they aren’t better sounding? The Atma-Spheres were more expensive. They are more attractive to me. The ‘Wow’ factor is convincing. And the fact that they are manufactured in my home State must mean they sound better. I’ll call the latter ‘parochial bias’.
It is interesting that the most vociferous anti ‘bits are bits’ contributors to these threads are from Europe the home of JPlay. Could this represent ‘parochial bias’ at (J)play?