Eno is also known for his very
nice soundinglines of writings. They often REALY
sound great if the "listener" (the reader) does not care to REALLY read through ....

That's maybe why he was so good in
his art-form - good for and easy on your ear yet nothing particular
So...? hmmmmmm

What
"sonic range and depth" exactly are? And if you can define
them, then how specifically possibilities of
one, the other or both are being sacrifice when recording digitally.
Operational freedom? - that is very questionable subject, really. Computer based music production in respect to the art of music really just gives you an illusion of freedom.
Maybe there is here some sort of mix-mash confusion between
digital recording and
computer-based production (which are related but not exactly the same things).
Of course you don't need to "analyze" every word from Brian's writings, but instead just see it for what it could
mean which is:
"Digital recordings/productions sound like sh*t, but I do it, because I love all the sh*t I have in my software menue and all the sh*t I can do on my computer using all the sh*t I've got in my software menue" ...

But of course, Brian could not say that, because it would not sound like
pure Eno.
***********
He maybe is a father of the term
ambient to be used as "label" in the commercial musical genre tree in reference to a
musical form, but he is no way near being a "father" of the
musical form, which was (and nowdays is) labeled by that term. There were musicians/producers before, are now and will be in the future who did, do and will master similar art-form with no connections with and no influences from Brian what so ever - the musicians/producers who play/record/produce and release their work without
manifestations attached
..speaking of "manifestos" , ...
arghhh... I'd rather stop now... or my rant will go forever
/respects