....is it that most of the posters here suffer from RCD (Reading
Comprehension Disorder)?

A few things are obvious:

1. That most people seldom actually try to understand what another
poster is trying to say. They go off on little tangents and hissy fits,
frequently having little or nothing to do with what the message they
are responding to actually said. Or they find a niggling point that
they can expand into the theme of the discussion and that obfuscates
the original point. Or they change the meaning of a posters statements
to suit their agenda. Or...

2. That to many here, how the musical data are processed is more
important than what makes audio (and listening to music) more enjoyable
to an individual.

3. That to others, what makes listening to music enjoyable to them
supercedes how the musical data are processed.

4. That some define 'musicality' as 'accuracy,' which is what makes
them want to listen to music, and those people want things to be as
accurate to the original recording as possible.

5. That some others define 'musicality' as what they like, which is
what makes them want to listen to music, and those people do not seem
to care about ultimate accuracy to the recording.

6. That the group is called 'audio' and not 'fidelity.' Therefore, both
positions are valid as far as the individual that holds them.

7. That some people apparently have a problem differentiating
'preference' vs. 'scientific claim.'

8. It appears that since amplifiers, preamps, tuners, CD or DVD
players, other electronic components, wire and interconnects are
'solved' issues to some, discussing them for that group should not be
necessary.

9. It appears that since turntables, LPs, tonearms, cartridges and tape
are worthless legacy equipment for some people, discussing them for
that group should be irrelevant.

10. The only area that I see the two groups agreeing is that
differences can exist in speakers.

11. nob is an idiot. slick and scott are idiots too.