I'm here for the sharing, not the snobery

I appreciate @erik_squires comment. Not sure if some responses are immaturity, "know-it-all", arrogance, or just condescending to us "lessers".
A while back I posted a similar thought: 


dreas18 posts04-17-2021 9:08amTo the simple question @kingbr posed I prefer XLR.

On a side note, this thread illustrates the best and worst of forums. While I truly respect (and I believe most do) @millercarbon and others who are far more knowledgeable, decorum might suggest another way to join in / reply. And yes, I may be inviting a host of sarcasm and hate.

I've yet to meet anyone who has audio-omniscience. One reason I enjoy Hans Beekhuyzen is that while he occasionally employs mild sarcasm, he tries to educate and explain. I think we all (?) enjoy learning, reading, listening, exploring, and enjoying different aspects of audio. I continue to learn from experts and a lot of personal experience buying, A-B testing, "upgrading", etc. To me, this is all part of the enjoyment.

I've got a very nice headphone system: dac connected to 2 different amps. I tested (A-B) with RCA and XLR. I'm no millercarbon but I could tell a significant improvement (BTW using 2 different balanced openback headphones and 1 IEM, all with balanced cables) with XLR over RCA and the cost wasn't that much steeper than good RCA cables. Additionally, my main stereo is all XLR balanced and I can also tell a difference.

As Hans closes his YouTubes videos, "...and whatever you do, enjoy the music". :-)

While not about RCA v XLR, Han's latest is a perfect e.g. of decorum, imo.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HqBYB6kEKec 

Yes, I agree +1

I'm a newbie but I really like and respect that first post. 

+1 OP

I’m in an argumentative field, and it’s very tricky to have discussions where someone wants to argue for something (prove their point) while also remaining civil. As we've seen in the wider world, without trust no fact can stand and no argument can win. Trust and care for others' dignity is the one indispensable ingredient to constructive dialogue. 

Debates and arguments remain civil in my field when people remain intellectually and emotionally open to the idea that they’re wrong, they missed something, or there’s an entirely other way to frame or approach the question.

It also helps to be as explicit as possible about what the goal sought is; that way, people are not arguing at cross purposes (i.e., for different goals).

(I don’t really understand @oldhvy’s post about not needing to "prove" things. Anyone who gives or asks for reasons is engaged in proof. His issue, I suspect has to do with people aggressively or relentlessly insisting that they’re right. Which is different.)

I think one thing that's important to get a handle on when discussing with others is objective vs. subjective. We need to give more people latitude when they make a subjective statement, as personal taste and value systems can't be argued.

"I like amps with meters" - Can't be argued.

"Amps with meters improve the sound because of the way they slow the photons as they cross the NP junction in the transistors" - well, that is completely arguable!!

We also need to understand the difference between measurement and science.  Science advances and discovers new connections. Scientists create new models to explain experience. Measurements and technicians do not.  They repeat old methods to put a dot on a chart. Don't confuse measurement with experience, or cause and experience.  Those two are rarely tied well enough together in our field, with certain actual scientists and organizations rare exceptions.