Neither was I confronting you, but merely the idea that these "filters" exist in the first place (or are instituted nearly as frequently as some propose)...perhaps even the mention of the word trips my trigger at this point, so sorry, there.
I don't mean to get on a soapbox but all of this- which really comes down to sub specsmanship (with a small number) infinitely more than anything else- is really starting to ruin things for me when it comes to these review threads.
Unless I missed it somewhere, this is about the experience
, not graph plots, and that comes from guy who's heavier into stats than about 99.9% of the populace.
Yes, they (stats) can and do have validity, but when does what they indicate begin to (degeneratively or beneficially) color our experiences? Again, an honest question.
Something can still be an A -level experience without executing perfection in every single nuance of the category (including, ironically, "bass extension" without reaching down to 15hz)...this cannot and should not be forgotten and I'm glad Ralph makes no bones about how he goes about assigning very high- even perfect- scores while alluding to this reality.
Still (sigh), seems some have now reached the point where they are inventing things rather than simply accepting the reality of the "art" for better or worse. Actual humans mixing these films have said point blank that they (filters) do not exist where some have purported otherwise (Marc Fisher comes to mind) but yet it rages on, still.
So then, at this point I simply want to see the evidence- and posting a BD response graph is not evidence that there exists a difference between it and the master.
I don't think it's asking too much.