Should Sound Quality of Computer Audio be improved

Yeah - was getting bored - need me another dose of Petty. Really, though...I've just been noticing the huge amount of high res releases over the past few months and it made me think back to this thread...

Chadeffect, I think we have both taken Pettyofficer's bait. The guy is either off his rocker, trolling or simply frustrated because even though he's an engineer he ain't intelligent enough to "clean up their O.S. mess".

After all, any normal person who really felt this way about computer audio would just not bother coming to this forum at all - kinda like I don't go to home theatre forums.

I'm sure he's having a chuckle - and actually I am too!

Pettyofficer - those of us who frequent this forum - and I mean frequent it with true interest and not general bitterness in no particular direction - actually do feel like we're getting our money's worth with computer audio. I doubt any of us downloads many MP3s for use in our home stereos. Most of us either rip CDs or download CD-quality or high res audio from sites like HDTracks. We'd all love to see more high quality downloads available - the only way this happens is if more and more adopt this "new format" which isn't really a new format as I explained to you in another thread.

I'm sorry but you're just not living in the real world. You can dream and dream about some magical "new format" which is released in a state of perfection with every recording ever made in history immediately available. Dream your dreams and wait around for such a magical format. You'll be waiting a long time...and we don't really care. We'll be too busy enjoying our music.

Pettyofficer - your complaints are directed at "computer audio" but are completely misdirected. What you are arguing is true of all formats. Some recordings sound great and others...not so much. But none of it sounds as good as the master tape or live music. This is no more the fault of "computer audio" than it is of the CD player or turntable.

It's also hard to tell at whom you are specifically ranting and railing. Microsoft? Apple? HDtracks? Other audio manufacturers? Audiogon members? Hard to tell because you're all over the place.

Give it a rest already!

Pettyofficer, enough already! You want computer audio to be improved, YOU do something about it!! You're complaining to the wrong people! Most of us here are actually quite pleased with the sound we're getting and don't need your "help".

Besides, you say you're an engineer. Then quit complaining already - design a "built for audio computer" yourself if it means that much to you. Enlist some help from your engineering colleagues if you have to.

But please, enough words already - we want ACTION!!

Wow - sounds like Armageddon is coming! The end of music! And it looks as if it is our fault for adopting this New Format!

Pettyofficer, I probably should have realized this sooner but your last few posts have convinced me you haven't a clue what you are talking about. I'm done wasting my time with you...

I think I finally get it - this guy is just slightly confused, he thinks that Computer Audio is a person...

YOU're tired of exchanging endless barbs accomplishing nothing? YOU are?

How about this? Next time you start a thread and people answer and leave suggestions, how about you actually make an effort to absorb and understand what they're saying? Then perhaps something will be accomplished!!

Otherwise it just looks like you're coming onto this forum to be antagonistic.

What "impending doom" high pressure salesmanship? Why are you accusing us of trying to annihilate all other formats, Petty? Presumptuous and aggravating!

As I have repeatedly said (repeatedly because you are obviously not listening), my alpha source remains my turntable. My Mac - DAC source has essentially replaced my CDP because it sounds better to my ears. I have absolutely no vested interest or ulterior motive - just want the best sound for the buck.

I have no emotional or commercial interest in or aversion to any format.

After all this, I actually couldn't care less what you think about computer audio or any other format - but please stop putting words in my mouth. It's extremely annoying!

Petty, once again, failure to actually listen to and process what is being said. "The other guy understands me perfectly and is extremely annoyed as a result" - which is referring to me. But if you took the time to actually read and more importantly UNDERSTAND what is being written then you would realize that what I ACTUALLY said is that I am annoyed because you are not listening - which makes your response all the more ironic.

As I said, I could not care less what you think about computer audio. What I find ANNOYING is you putting words in our mouths.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything and you certainly are failing to convince me of anything. Personally, I think computer audio done right can easily beat an optical player in the same price range, based on my experience and what I have heard (which is a ton). I also believe that computer audio done wrong can sound horrible.

As I said (and I'm getting tired of repeating myself), I don't actually care what you think on the subject. If you can't even listen to and understand what we're saying, I don't really trust your hearing anyways. You obviously have your agenda - which appears to be to discredit computer audio and to somehow characterize all those who have adopted it as attempting to kill music and all other formats. It's ludicrous, really. Believe it or not, we're just music lovers who have adopted the format, pure and simple!

Once again, please stop putting words in my mouth - THAT is what I find annoying!

Petty, therein lies one of the big advantages of computer audio - it can be a direct replacement for CDs as well as a high resolution medium. No need to replace your CD collection if computer audio does take hold - just rip your CDs to your hard drive while simultaneously enjoying the option of higher-than-CD resolution. You can have your cake and eat it too.

Again, nobody is "pulling the plug" on any other format. No matter what you or I say, the only way that happens is through market forces. I don't want any format to be wiped out any more than you do - but if computer audio renders CD redundant in the eyes of consumers it will become obsolete.

Petty, I have left many suggestions and details of my set-up in the other thread - I refer you there. And unlike you I have actually POSTED my set-up on this site so you can refer to my system to see how I have things set up. There's also tons of info out there on the internet which any reasonably intelligent person should be able to sift through. It's all way easier to set up than a turntable, let me assure you.

I have never, EVER said that computer audio has NO WEAKNESSES - again you are completely misquoting me. I have said REPEATEDLY that computer audio is most definitely NOT plug and play and much effort is required. And I think there is general agreement on this. I would think that anyone with enough interest in audio to frequent a forum like this is used to putting in some effort in getting great sound - in fact I'd think most find this fun.

And again, I am not shoving "perfect sound forever" down your or anyone's throat. I have merely said that I have put considerable effort into my computer audio set-up and as a result its fidelity has exceeded the performance of any optical player I've had in my system.

Again, perhaps I need to shout but hopefully you'll listen this time: I am not trying to get anyone to adopt this format. I have no agenda. I could not care less if you adopt computer audio. Like you, I hope that computer audio does not eliminate all other formats - and if you truly believe that its adopters like me are responsible for something like this then you need your head checked.

I have adopted it because in my experience it has given me better fidelity than optical players. Pure and simple.

Only like pulling teeth because you sometimes don't listen to what is actually being said - your own opinions powerfully drowning out any other voices.

I don't remember anyone saying "computer audio SHOULD replace all other formats". Personally, I do believe it WILL likely replace other digital formats but analogue is likely to continue being a niche market. This is not my wish, just market forces. It's just much cheaper for recording companies to offer these digital music files without physical media - and the majority of people are happy with MP3 quality (i.e. the 99% of the population not having these discussions on audio websites). For the rest of us there will be CD or greater quality downloads - as long as it is profitable for the record companies.

Again, this is not my WISH, just what I believe is likely to happen in the next decade or so. And I don't believe it is necessarily anything to fear. CDs don't really offer anything that a downloaded computer file doesn't - other than guaranteed 16/44 storage and something to hold in your hands while the music plays. As long as there is demand for CD or greater quality downloads and the recording industry can profit off of it, it will continue to grow as CD shrinks. Again, all in my opinion.

Please don't turn around and say I want to wipe out all other formats, adopters of high res computer audio want to wipe out other formats, Bill Gates wants to kill our first-born, etc, etc. If anyone is to "blame" here I believe it is the recording companies and the non-audiophile general public - they're the ones happy with MP3s.

Me - I'm more excited at the sound I get from my Mac -> Wavelength front end and at the possibilities of resolution far exceeding redbook CD.

Petty, it is proof that I asked for - proof that we are trying to wipe out all other formats. This is what you are accusing us of and you have presented no proof at all, just more of your tired diatribe.

Accusing me of double talk? Really?? I call that the pot calling the kettle black.

"Four things that I believe are worth fighting for: CD, Vinyl, Computer
Audio, and the free use of "ALL" of these Formats. "

This is exactly what we have - free use of all these formats. I think your arguments are running out of steam - at least until you show the proof that should be forthcoming with all of your accusations.

Regarding your quip about ignoring and ridiculing - your continued inability to comprehend what is being said has unintentionally made you the master of irony!

And again, your last post leaves me wondering whether you really believe what you are saying or are just baiting us for chits and giggles.

I mean c'mon:
"The wheels of Computer Audio are falling off way too many times, the word is already out on the street!...I was trying to save Computer Audio, but if you want to make me the bad guy trying to end it- guess my job here is done!...With the assistance of Microsoft, Apple, Macintosh, and you guys- failure is guaranteed!"

Never mind the grammar and punctuation - the tale you tell is gripping! The fallen hero - trying to save Computer Audio but thwarted by us simpletons bowing at the altar of the big computer corporations, all conspiring to destroy music. You, standing as the lone warrior, single-handedly trying to save music as we know it!

LOL!!!

Hmmmmm...that's strange...most of us don't find it THAT difficult to back up our music collections for safety's sake. It's not THAT difficult! And most of us can somehow do the research and implement a computer audio system that at least equals if not exceeds competitively priced CDPs

But...after all this I guess you're right Pettyofficer, computer audio is just too challenging FOR YOU. Nobody is stopping you from NOT adopting it and using your CDP. We just want you to stop complaining about YOUR problems as if they're OURS - we've actually figured it all out - and we'd be happy to share it with you if you would just listen for once.

No need for you to worry about those of us who have had success with what you find so confusing. By and large we're quite happy with what we're hearing, thank you very much!

Petty, neither I nor anyone else is denying you anything and I'm not quite sure why you continually state this. Show me the proof that anyone who has adopted computer audio is trying to deny you anything.

These are market forces, pure and simple. You seem to feel we're all out to get you but I promise we're not trying to harm you or your family.

"Support you seizing the Audio Market, and turning it into a North Korean Concentration Camp?" LOL! Come to think of it not much is funny about a concentration camp, but I assume your intent here was humor.

Petty, these are not threats or ultimatums. They are predictions. They may or may not come true. Nobody is putting a gun to your head other than you in your wild imagination - unless you're just messing with us.

"Soon all new music will only be available as downloads". A threat?

"If you don't believe that Computer Audio has
arrived yet as a viable replacement for CD, or even Vinyl..."
Aggressive?
Huh?

You can't be serious. The only one using aggressive, even over-the-top language around here is you. Many of us on this forum actually do think that our server systems give us better sound quality than CD. Many of us are somehow able to get them to work for us. But nobody has uttered a word of aggression towards anyone who doesn't share their opinions or beliefs.

Nobody is "holding a gun to your head" and forcing you to comply with anything. Nobody is putting you in a North Korean concentration camp. These are merely beliefs - if you don't agree that CD's days are numbered then that is your prerogative. In the end it doesn't matter what you or I think - market forces will decide. If there is enough interest in CDs they will remain a viable alternative - if there isn't they won't. Simple as that. No guns, mobs or concentration camps necessary!

Petty, the only one behaving with militant aggression is you. I'm guessing it's because you came onto a computer audio forum with your own anti-computer audio bias and agenda, posed a question and (surprise, surprise) were disagreed with. At first it wasn't just disagreement but also some attempts at helpful suggestions - which you basically ignored and/or ridiculed. You then completely misinterpreted this for aggression, ultimatums, threats etc. It's actually becoming quite comical - that's the only reason why I'm still discussing this with you. It's kinda fun and entertaining to see what outrageous comment you'll utter next as your argument completely self-destructs. As a result, you have completely side-tracked YOUR original thread, which was dealing with SOUND QUALITY. Now your talk is of aggression, militancy, concentration camps, a gun to your head, mobs. It is completely ludicrous.

I'll say it one last time - we are simply a group of people who have adopted and enjoy computer and server-based audio. Just like vinyl lovers may feel their format is superior, so may computer audio enthusiasts. That does NOT mean we are out to get you or are trying to humiliate you.

Seriously, you need to get a grip on yourself. Or perhaps try medicating yourself. Or perhaps just stop pulling our legs - because honestly your posts are becoming more and more unbelievable.

Petty, this is the last thing I'm going to say to you because I think this has been done to death:

STOP TELLING ME WHAT I WANT!

Believe it or not, I know what I want - and it's not what you seem to think I want- so stop thinking it!

Sorry Petty, only so much of this twisted logic, revisionist history and paranoia I can take. I see most gave up on you a long time ago - now I am doing the same. I'm outta here.

I agree Gsself - and interestingly the one who started it ultimately hijacked it! Could be an Audiogon first!

Wow! Thread resurrected? Tbeebout of course everything you say makes perfect sense - but this thread died because we got tired of trying to reason with pettyofficer - he has his agenda and cannot be reasoned with.

However, he has bravely chosen to fight the corruption of the computer audio industry and save music from certain death so we need not fear!

Good points yet again Chadeffect - which will come to no avail. When in doubt, refer to the original question in the thread - "should sound quality of computer audio be improved"? The answer is actually quite simple - YES!! Sound quality of every format should be improved. All the other crap Petty has carried on in this thread is merely smoke and mirrors distracting from this focus.

But once again he has let me down! He PROMISED - oops, I mean THREATENED - to end this thread - yet there he is posting the same old thing.

Please, Petty...I implore you...PLEASE finally follow through with your threat. You made your point 2 pages ago, are not listening to a word we say, and are completely obfuscating your own tired arguments. Please give it a rest - please follow through on your own THREAT once and for all!

I expect that we have heard the last of you. Thanks for dropping by - it was fun while it lasted!

Psssst....hey guys, I think Pettyofficer may be on to us. Y'know...our
conniving plan to wipe out all other Audio Formats and
shove Computer Audio down His Throat yesterday? He may be on to
the fact that we are in cahoots with Bill Gates and the ghost of
Steve Job to turn the Audio Market into a Monopoly. Heck, I'm even
beginning to Suspect that he is aware of Our Plan to get him into a
North Korean Concentration Camp where he has to listen to MP3's of
Nickelback on a Bose Wave system for 2 years straight. OK everyone...in the interest of not getting caught I suggest you all
Disband and go your Separate Ways...as you were!!

Petty Officer "threatening" to back out of the dialogue! LOL! What ever are we going to do!?!?

"Can we end this Thread now? It no longer serves any purpose". Another threat? Impending doom? LOL!!!

So what Petty - what of all the studios that record in 24/192 and downsample to the 16/44 on your CDs? Somewhere in your latest wandering diatribe there must be a point.

Petty, Petty, Petty...your latest diatribe is just more twisted logic. We are no more be blamed for the failures of SACD/DVDa than we are for the failure of 8-track or Beta. If enough people don't buy into a format, the format fails, pure and simple. That, my friend, is how a "Market" works.

Just like you, we are free to choose whatever format we want - and many of us are choosing computer audio. Why you have chosen to make this personal I haven't the faintest clue.

Why did vinyl outlive cassette - and why might it eventually outlive redbook CD? Why did laser disc never really make it? Why is there no reel-to-reel at HMV? How come I can never find any digital audio cassettes? What about 3D Blu-Ray - who's to blame for that slow market introduction?

There is no conspiracy here - the market decides these things. This is how the world works. You're wasting an awful lot of energy on this. No need to work yourself up into a tizzy!

Wow Petty - looks like the light bulb finally came on. No reasonable person is trying to wipe out any format. Whether or not I listen to SACD I derive absolutely no benefit from it being wiped off the face of the earth. I do believe that eventually optical discs may be a thing of the past but this doesn't mean I wish it to be so. I still buy the odd CD from time to time - and tons of vinyl.

Anyways, looks like cooler heads have prevailed. Surely the love-fest can't be far behind!

Enjoy the music - on whatever format you choose!

Even if a recording is mastered in 32 bit, once you hear it on a redbook CD player you are hearing it in 16/44. That's just the way it is, Petty - that's the technology.

On the other hand, it is possible to hear such a recording in its native resolution on a computer, of course, since the original file is on a computer.

I agree with you that competition is a good thing - but the market and consumers will ultimately decide which formats succeed and which fail.

Ivan, "audio-only" computers already exist. See Linn Akurate and Bryston BDP-1, amongst others. However, it is not that difficult to gather info on the net about optimizing your own off-the-shelf computer system for server use. Most of us who frequent forums like this have done it. It's actually kind of hands-on and fun! The beauty of it is that for less than $1K you can get an optimized Mac Mini, for example. Then add a suitable DAC and you can have a state of the art digital front end for way less than a top-flight optical player.

Rare to be able to do something like that in the crazy world of high fidelity audio!

Ivan - computer audio ain't for everyone - it most definitely is not plug and play if you want to do it right - at least in my opinion. In this area I would admit that Pettyofficer does have a point - there is some effort required to reap the benefits and there can be some frustration along the way. However, don't let his disorganized and paranoid meanderings make you think that any of this is insurmountable, futile or bound to go the way of SACD/DVDa.

In life, sometimes the best things require effort. This would include my two current favourite music formats - vinyl and computer audio. The effort just makes it all that much sweeter when you're sitting in your listening chair reaping the benefits of your work.

Petty, I don't think any reasonable person wants to deny you anything. Who here has any interest in killing off any format? Most of us pick our format(s) and get on with it. Personally, I've given up on SACD. I currently use vinyl, CD (ripped to my hard drive) and high resolution downloads. I am of the opinion that optical discs of all types will likely be replaced by downloads because the files are the same. This holds for audio and video. When you really get down to it, computer audio and CD are basically the SAME format (ie using the same files). Computer audio is COMPLETELY backwards compatible but has way more flexibility and the potential for higher resolution.

Does this mean that I (or anyone here) wants optical discs to disappear? Absolutely not! We're not trying to rob you of anything. Go ahead, enjoy music in whatever format you choose!

Petty...accusations without proof are not even worth the paper / web space they're printed on. See ya later, troll.

Oh give me a break Petty - just when I think you're verging on a breakthrough and making a bit of sense you start talking in circles again. Obviously a better master will lead to better sound quality - no matter what the format. You have to look no further than the latest Rush album - which I downloaded in 24/96 but is well nigh unlistenable on my system due to ridiculous compression. Output resolution does not always correlate with ultimate sound quality.

But you are being ignorant and hypocritical if you have the nerve to criticize - well I'm not sure who you're criticizing, sometimes it appears to be us - for downsampling the original recording to lower resolution downloadable files. At least with computer audio there is always a possibility that they'll make available a higher resolution master - and they are starting to with increasing frequency. With CD you'll always be limited to a 16/44 downsample - HDCD, XRCD, XRCD2...whatever, there is no way of getting better than 16/44. You're criticism here is nothing more than ignorant hypocrisy - and I would hope that deep down you know it.

In the end, I frankly don't really care what you think, as I've said before. Sometimes I just wish you would actually pay attention and stop double-talking out of your you-know-what.

Um - who said sampling rate doesn't matter? I believe that what was actually said is that the recording quality and technique matters more - which is absolutely true in my experience. While higher resolution recordings do sound better in general, crappy recordings / masterings sound crappy no matter what the resolution. In fact they may sound even worse with better fidelity - like the latest Rush album - which sounds like absolute crap in 24/96 on my stereo but decent via MP3 through my iPod or car stereo.

So...what we are saying is that the resolution matters, but the recording and mastering quality matters more.

Petty...when having a conversation, it helps if you actually listen.

Is it heartless on my part that I enjoy watching Petty's outbursts get more and more ludicrous as his feeble arguments go up in flames? Kinda like watching people self-destruct on those old reality shows.

So let me get this straight...first it's "lower-than-CD MP3" that is the problem...and now it's Chad imposing a 24/192 bottleneck on downloads?

You got to be kidding!!!

Thanks Petty - I needed a chuckle!

Petty - 5 pages in, same baseless, preposterous accusations...yet still providing no evidence. Here is your challenge: re-read the posts and find me one...O-N-E example of Chad, Timlub, myself or anyone stating that they would like to annihilate ANY format.

O-N-E
E-X-A-M-P-L-E
P-L-E-A-S-E!!!

Put up or shut up already!

I think timlub hit the nail on the head - Petty give the impression of arguing for the sake of arguing. What's that that someone said on an earlier page about reminding him of an ex-wife...?

Dover...I might stand to be corrected regarding 32-bit, not sure, haven't really looked into it because 32-bit recordings aren't yet available - regardless, my point stands that computer audio and my digital front end is capable of far higher resolution than any redbook CD player. There is no such thing as the 32-bit CD that Petty keeps talking about. Likely never will be.

If you want to call my DAC mid-fi - well that is a matter of opinion and we're all entitled to our own opinion. The sound I get from my current digital front end certainly does not sound like "mid-fi" to me. I have had a number of high end CDP in my system, including the >$6K Ayre universal, and this sounds better to my ears.

I notice that you don't have your system listed, so it's hard for me to have a frame of reference for your opinion. But thanks for your comments on mine.

May I ask what DACs you have heard that have allowed you to come to the conclusion that they all represent "mid-fi"?

Strange example, Petty. You complain of listening to the MLP, SACD etc...and there being no high res download? As if the availability of MLP, SACD, Blu-Ray audio are any better?

Yes, we'd all like a wider selection of high res recordings - but at least to my eyes, high res downloads, while still limited in selection, is the only current digital high res format with any momentum and showing any sign of picking up. There are new high res downloads in all musical categories coming out every week. So much so that I have abandoned SACD altogether (lack of selection, especially for anything other than classical). Nobody is trying to kill any format here...just choosing whichever works best for us.

Fine to complain about the lack of selection in high res downloads...but when you compare to SACD, MLP 24/192 surround or Blu-Ray audio your complaints become a bit laughable.

And...once again (in case you didn't hear me asking the first time)...who the heck is saying the sampling rate makes no difference? You lose credibility when you continually misquote us.

"You wish to exclusively replace High Res. Disks with High Res. Downloads i.e. "Soon all New Music will only be available as Music Downloads". Your exclusionary Theory severely limits the High Res. Music
Selection available to me."

Huh? This has been the crux of your argument all along (at least I think it has - it's been awful difficult to follow at times) but not once have I, or anyone else, said that we "wish to exclusively replace all high res. disks with hit res. downloads". Not once. Again, nonsense like this makes you lose your credibility. Most of us don't like being misquoted and having words put in our mouth. The only one here taking pop-shots at anyone or any format is you - and most of your beefs continue to be hypocritical since your beloved high res optical discs in even shorter supply.

If you're looking for someone to blame for the failures of past formats you are looking in the completely wrong place. Many people here (including myself) were adopters of these formats. Many of us have made a conscious decision to adopt computer audio and high res downloads. You can choose whatever format you want, buddy.

Petty, regarding your fine example of MLP - I'm referring to you saying you have a high res surround disk of this and you can't find a high res download "due to limited selection of high res downloads". As if MLP is easier to find and has a better selection?

Furthermore, it's also a poor example because anything in DVDa format can be ripped to your hard drive using easily-installed freeware (DVD Audio Extractor). I have burned all 25 or so of my DVDa to my hard drive and continue to enjoy them on my computer / DAC system. If I had a surround system I could even do that. Again, computer audio is not really a "new format" just a different way of handling the files without an optical disk and transport. It is highly backwards-compatible and doesn't require that adopters burn all their CDs - and even DVDa's.

Petty - there is no such thing as 32-bit CD. It is 16/44 - period. It may be mastered in 32-bit but you are NOT hearing 32-bit resolution.

With computer audio, the possibility exists for 32-bit resolution but not with CD. My current DAC is 32-bit so all I need is the download resolution and voila - I'll have true 32-bit resolution in my system. Just a matter of time before that becomes a reality. I would be very surprised if there is ever a commercially available 32-bit optical disc and player.

If resolution is what you want, a CD player is most definitely NOT the answer.

If availability and selection is what you want, MLP, SACD and DVDa are most definitely NOT the answer.

Why are YOU continually proving MY point?

Nobody trying to deprive you of anything here - just trying to set the record straight and address your confusion, misunderstanding and paranoia.

Excellent question Timlub. I believe it was asked on page 2 of this thread and surprisingly - Petty had NO ANSWER!! I would think that he certainly must have done something by now?

Oh I wouldn't hold my breath Timlub! I think by post 235 or so and page 5 it is quite obvious that Petty is not the least bit interested in anything but posting a litany of complaints, blaming us for his problems and pushing his own misguided agenda. Same thing over and over..."soon all new music will only be available as downloads", "impending doom" etc. Doesn't matter what anyone says because our words just get twisted around and other words put back in our mouths.

Brace yourselves...here it comes again...

Much more going on than the actual chip itself. The implementation is at least as important. My understanding is that Wavelength's proprietary asynchronous USB technology also dispenses with the clock information from the transport / computer. I'm no techno guru, but the sound I'm getting definitely does NOT sound like mid-fi to my ears. Indeed, it's the first digital front end I've had that can rival the natural, organic sound I get from the best analogue.

Petty we have been answering your "questions" - you just are not listening. These are not "pot shots" as you put it. As Chad stated - you came here for an argument, and an argument you found.

Thanks in advance for no longer responding. We win. You lose.

Very sorry that you can't seem to find music. We can!!!

Um Petty - I asked for an example - O-N-E example - no surprise, you weren't able to come up with one - because you are living in your own paranoid fantasy land.

Your entire argument is based on lies and you know it.