I reprint this with permission and wanted to say that Paul’s been doing a post every day for the last several years and I’m not sure if he’s even missed one day. Kudos to him.
The polite way of saying that we are fundamentally opposed is to refer to each worldview as a separate school of thought.
In so doing, we honor the other’s viewpoint without squashing it.
Take for example the live-end/dead-end argument. Two completely opposite schools of thought.
The live-end crowd (of which I am a party to) prefers the front wall (the wall behind the loudspeakers) to be more live than acoustically dead and preferably with diffusion. This to my ear sounds more natural and creates a beautiful holographic soundstage. Rich.
The dead-end crowd would prefer to make acoustically dead the front wall in an effort to reduce as much as possible any reflections from the speakers. Their aim is to have a clean and uncluttered sound. Sterile.
Both schools of thought are valid.
Each offers a very different sonic result.
They are means to an end.
It is not the schools of thought we disagree with, only the desired outcome.