citizenkeith said:
Then why even respond to this post? If you don't give a shit about the quote, then why even fucking bother? .
You've posted a quote. - I've responed to the quote.
You also posted a comment with the quote: "...pure Eno. His music is very visual"
I've responded to the comment as well.
MadAudio posted a comment: "Of course that makes sense! And after all, he is the father of ambient."
I've responded to the comment...
etc.
********
citizenkeith, that's the way it goes. Sorry that it didn't generate something what you expected

. But that's the way it goes.
I am not sure what gets you to become so emotional about this. But what ever it is - it's not my problem, man.
You post something - people are going to post something in reply. Expect no more no less.
citizenkeith said:
If you don't care, why fuck up a thread with this shit?.
Ah, crap! OK, no problem. Sorry for this. I gotta get outa' here.
*******
Go on -
get on with it - discuss the "concept".
You may want to start with stating (or explaining) what the f*ng "concept" is in the quote, and thus Helping out some of "us" here who are not up to the task - "visualising" the concept in all its shiny brilliance that is.
*********
and, so:
"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 sacrificed when recording digitally."
citizenkeith, any thoughts on this one? Or is it too
low to ask. Or is too dumb? Or do we have to discuss it ONLY on somewhat "higher level of consciousness", or maybe even above it!???? If so, then You'll have to write a "Manifesto of How Eno's quotes and concepts shall and shall not be discussed".
....
whatever
/later