So the fact that they use their ears to discriminate is "anti-science"!

No. It's the 'pseudo-arguments' they propose to explain in their how
tubes /
valves are so wonderful. In fact they're simply revelling in the sound
of added
low-order distortion. The effect is well-known and indeed often
intentionally
used in the studio as an *EFFECT* !

I'll pass over the fact that these arguments are tired old rubbish from
vague memories of 60s valve equipment and simply say that there are no
"pseudo arguments" at all. Valve users do so because the sounds they
hear are closer - to their ears - to the original sound. You just can't
seem to accept this, can you? You insist on continuing this silly
crusade to ridicule valve users who, for their part, are completely
happy with their equipment and have heard all these old tired arguments
as often as double bass players have heard the comment "why don't you
take up the flute"


What we're talking about is the confusion of objective science with
subjective preferences, with the subjectivists believing that 'what
they like'
must be inherently technically superior but with no regard to any
supporting
science and a wholesale dismissal of the science that counters their
ideas.

There's no confusion - you've made all this up to create a forum for
you tired arguments. Valve users believe that valves SOUND MORE
REALISTIC. My God, how many times does it have to be said. Valve users
don't dismiss science - they are as scientific about the schematics
they use as are any other equipment builders. The fact that they make
preferences with their ears rather than a spreadsheet of figures
doesn't make them unscientific either. And if they chose a piece of
equipment that sounded worse to their ears because there was 0.1% less
harmonic distortion, they would be plain bonkers. But that seems to be
what you expect them to do! Sheesh.........