Out of curiosity, out of all the mind-boggling stupidity to be found on audiophile sites, what is it about this particular link that put you over the edge?

Audiophiles should read Nyquist-Shannon theorem.

They are not hearing anything that you do not hear.

Damn that's funny. . .

That hint of glaze on QNAP1 also showed an impaired subjective noise floor elsewhere. In hi-fi parlance, QNAP2 had the blacker silences and deeper spaces between notes.

By now we should know better, and acknowledge that digital audio is very far from immutable. Most of the troubling inconsistencies in CD playback, for example, have been at the point of domain conversion, typically the digital-to-analogue conversion in the playback chain. But the movement of digital bitstreams around the system, such as over a 75-Ohm cable from disc transport to DAC, have been prone to known and definable transmission problems — more so for the venerable S/PDIF standard that rolls up the clock signal within the data channel.

Carriage of digital data over Ethernet, for example, ought to be less troubled by the vagaries of the cable and interfaces. And what of the data being unraveled at the source, from the hard disk or solid-state drive? Why should the type or brand of the disk have such an audible impact on the final sound quality? Clearly, there's scope for more hypotheses to be set and tests undertaken, with lab measurement as well as subjective listening. Maybe we can solicit logical explanations from engineers who understand the low-level mechanics and operation of computer file and storage technologies, and can suggest specific avenues to explore.

An even deeper question is: Are these guys total idiots, just living without their meds, or both?

I suspect it's the endless, stupid repetition of this same, stupid, dishonest meme by people who should know better.
...

How do audiophile sites write articles about attracting younger hobbyists into their ranks, and then also write how hard drives sound different? What a turn off it would be to take an interest in hi-fi and then get told your western digital sounds [insert poetic adjective] so you'd better start thinking about your HDD/SSD, then data cables, then USB purifiers, then DACs, then power supplies, then power cables, then wall outlets, then... 

Let there be no doubt about it - the audiophile (or whatever we wish to call them) does indeed hear a difference. (Let's not start calling them liars). And upon hearing this difference, they seek a scientific explanation.

Everybody seems to be concerned with how good their system sounds. I have been their myself, but the key for me was to start listening my music and enjoying it. Sometimes coffee and a hit of Adderall helps, and I'm grateful for being able to enjoy my music without all this stuff about digital versus analog. I did pick up a Schiit Bifrost a few months ago to replace a broken HRT MusicStreamer, and it sounds so great to me that I feel I will not need to upgrade for a long, long time. Quit complaining and arguing, and get into your music!     

I guess we have a winner!
"EVERY time you use an audio editor to open a program and make ANY changes whatsoever,including removing samples you are further exposing the files to RF/EMI"

I guess we have a winner!
"EVERY time you use an audio editor to open a program and make ANY changes whatsoever,including removing samples you are further exposing the files to RF/EMI"

What about when I play it? Doesn't that expose it?
What about leaving it on a playlist in the player? Is that dangerous?
Look... is it safe to even think about some music on my hdd?
How do I know it isn't contaminated already?
How do I know if the thing is alive or dead? Oh wait, that was something else, not music.

The madness potential of the computer audiophool is infinite.