You ain't nothing but a hound cat.
tl;dr.
Cliff's pls.
Of course, *logically* speaking, the double negative means he's not calling her a hound dog at all.
Thanks for patronising me Max, but it still dosen't make the thread any less ridiculous.
If you felt the need to once again state your beliefs about digital data, why dress it up in all the nonsense?
I don't need anything clearing up. We all get that you are absolutely committed to the notion of digital being unaffected by cable choice and transport. Doesn't mean we all have to agree wtih you though.
For the record I've never felt the need to worry too much about digital cables but I have heard differences between different transports and I believe there a differences between DACs too, although some of that is likely to be down to implementation (PSU, analogue output stages etc.). Either way it is the end sound that really matters. How people choose to get there is up to them.
Surely 'ain't nothing but' is a triple negative, and therefore an affirmative?
Surely 'ain't nothing but' is a triple negative, and therefore an affirmative?
Similar to the Small Faces 'Lazy Sunday' where "laaayzee Sundee afternoon ah!" always has the "ah!" on the end of 'afternoon'.
Watched some of their live stuff on YouTube the other day. The sound fantastic. Pure energy. Marriott and Lane are very underrated as songwriters.
Surely 'ain't nothing but' is a triple negative, and therefore an affirmative?
In any event, what does hound dog mean in this context? Does one want to be a hound dog or not?
Barking mad me thinks ! 
Oh dear. Oh dear oh dear. 
Of course a cable can't change the words. That is ridiculous. The ability of a cable to affect the tonal balance of sound has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not it can change words. I completely fail to see what this thread can achieve given that the whole premise is ridiculous.
I must still be asleep. I must have slept all the way here on the train, walked to the shop in my sleep and I must be sat here at my desk asleep, because the only way to explain this is that it is some kind of surreal dream. 
I think your first mistake was going to work on a Saturday. I think your second was reading a thread with a lunatic title.
Apparently there is no room for interpretation here – one is either a hound dog, or one is not: you can't be 90% hound dog, or 80% or whatever, depending on what kind of lead you use.
What you want to be doesn't come into it, as to allow it to do so would give rise to expectation bias, and could lead to you thinking you were a dog when in fact you were a goldfish.
The dog is either there or it isn't – that's how dogs work, and anyone who can't see that is simple. 
Apparently there is no room for interpretation here – one is either a hound dog, or one is not: you can't be 90% hound dog, or 80% or whatever, depending on what kind of lead you use.
What you want to be doesn't come into it, as to allow it to do so would give rise to expectation bias, and could lead to you thinking you were a dog when in fact you were a goldfish.
The dog is either there or it isn't – that's how dogs work, and anyone who can't see that is simple.
If that's what you want to be, that's fine by me. 
The dog is either there or it isn't – that's how dogs work, and anyone who can't see that is simple.
Surley the point of the thread is/was that yes the dog is there and is indeed a dog but some dog's can be better dog's example being that pedigree dog's are or can be healthier dog's compared to other dog's 
- Login to post comments
Why didn't you just post that then? Instead of all the doggy dog dog stuff?
Marantz M-CR603 + AirPlay • Rega R3 loudspeakers • iPhone 5 32GB • iMac • Apple Airport Extreme 802.11n • Panasonic TX-L32D25B • Sony BDP-S390 • Ruark Audio R1 Deluxe • Humax HDR-Fox T2