HOME | DD

Description
I think vinyl offers it's advantages and there certainly is a demand for it but without being bias (because I grew up listening to vinyl), I don't know which is really better. I know which I prefer and which sounds real to me. But on what basis can I really compare them?

George Reisch suggested in an article called Digital Idealism vs Analog Realism [link] that the basic principles of the discussion might go something like this:

For those historically inclined, much of this debate comes from the 18th-century philosopher George Berkeley (1685–1753). In Berkeley's day, Isaac Newton's star was rising, and his physics was recognized as a premier intellectual achievement. But Berkeley had doubts. He was uneasy with the realist view that matter existed all by itself, for that would mean that the material world had a life of its own, apart from our ideas about it. No idealist will go there.

Berkeley rolled up his sleeves and set out to convince us that Newton and others were wrong about matter—that it didn't really exist independently of us. Had he argued with Newton, it might have gone something like this:

Berkeley: Sir Isaac, have you ever seen a piece of matter?
Newton: Of course I have.
Berkeley: Are you also sure that matter exists all by itself, and that its existence has nothing to do with your perceiving it?
Newton: Um...excuse me. I fear I do not understand.
Berkeley: I mean, Sir, can you be sure that the existence of a chunk of matter that you happen to perceive does not gain its existence from your very act of perceiving it?
Newton: Are you asking if I have perceived matter without, at the same time, perceiving it, so that I can be sure that I myself am not the source of its existence?
Berkeley: Yes, that is exactly what I ask.
Newton: Well then, the answer must be no. I cannot both perceive something and also not perceive it, can I?
__________________________________

I'm not sure where this was getting... Enter "CLOSED"

Enter "CLOSED" [link]

Description
I think vinyl offers it's advantages and there certainly is a demand for it but without being bias (because I grew up listening to vinyl), I don't know which is really better. I know which I prefer and which sounds real to me. But on what basis can I really compare them?

George Reisch suggested in an article called Digital Idealism vs Analog Realism [link] that the basic principles of the discussion might go something like this:

For those historically inclined, much of this debate comes from the 18th-century philosopher George Berkeley (1685–1753). In Berkeley's day, Isaac Newton's star was rising, and his physics was recognized as a premier intellectual achievement. But Berkeley had doubts. He was uneasy with the realist view that matter existed all by itself, for that would mean that the material world had a life of its own, apart from our ideas about it. No idealist will go there.

Berkeley rolled up his sleeves and set out to convince us that Newton and others were wrong about matter—that it didn't really exist independently of us. Had he argued with Newton, it might have gone something like this:

Berkeley: Sir Isaac, have you ever seen a piece of matter?
Newton: Of course I have.
Berkeley: Are you also sure that matter exists all by itself, and that its existence has nothing to do with your perceiving it?
Newton: Um...excuse me. I fear I do not understand.
Berkeley: I mean, Sir, can you be sure that the existence of a chunk of matter that you happen to perceive does not gain its existence from your very act of perceiving it?
Newton: Are you asking if I have perceived matter without, at the same time, perceiving it, so that I can be sure that I myself am not the source of its existence?
Berkeley: Yes, that is exactly what I ask.
Newton: Well then, the answer must be no. I cannot both perceive something and also not perceive it, can I?
__________________________________

I'm not sure where this was getting... Enter "CLOSED"

Enter "CLOSED" [link]