Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

hifitodd wrote:

I am interested in how you personally discovered dpols for your own personal reference.  You Say:  If this is the case, then how did you first come about dpols?  Given that DPoLS cannot be "stumbled upon".

The DPoLS not be "stumbled upon" but it should be cognitively recognized. The point is that a listener consciousness should be DpoLS-ready (I know it sound ironic but it’s what it is). Without have own awareness to be DpoLS-ready the fact of stumbling upon the DpoLS might be completely acknowledged. You do not fine anything if you do not search for it.

hifitodd wrote:

Do you feel that way about everything audio related?  You obviously have very firm-rooted opinions of rights/wrongs in audio, and you must feel as though there are physics-related reasons why you feel the way you do.

There as differences in perception of Music but there are no differences in perception of sound. I do not have any opinions about rights/wrongs in audio but I do know what relates to sound and what relates to nothing. DpoLS is very directly and very dominatingly affects Sound. However, the conversations about the “DpoLS exaggeration” without having any familiarity with the DpoLS benefits relates to nothing…

hifitodd wrote:

Actually, I may be starting to see your point now that I am starting at your thoughts in isolation.  You mean that physics clearly coincides with reality, but that's not the point.  The point is what is real/not real, regardless of data, and a person's ability and motivation to work with reality using live music as a frame of reference is all that matters.

In a simple trims yes, but there is more to it. Physics and sciences are the wrappers that support out perception of raw Reality. If a person could operate by the native languages of Reality then the “languages of the wrappers” because much less expressive, or at least have totally different inflection..

Rgs,
The cat

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site