2. tech-talk
  3. 135904-110926

Talk but not walk?

Hi Guys

This isn't meant to start a fight, but it is important to on lookers. As a qualifier, I have my own audio forum where we report on audio issues as we empirically test them. It helps us short cut on theories and developing methods of listening. We have a wide range of systems and they are all over the world adding their experiences to the mix. Some are engineers, some are artist and others are audiophiles both new and old. One question I am almost always asked while I am visiting other forums, from some of my members and also members of the forum I am visiting is, why do so many HEA hobbyist talk theory without any, or very limited, empirical testing or experience?

I have been around empirical testing labs since I was a kid, and one thing that is certain is, you can always tell if someone is talking without walking. Right now on this forum there are easily 20 threads going on where folks are talking theory and there is absolutely no doubt to any of us who have actually done the testing needed, that the guy talking has never done the actual empirical testing themselves. I've seen this happen with HEA reviewers and designers and a ton of hobbyist. My question is this, why?

You would think that this hobby would be about listening and experience, so why are there so many myths created and why, in this hobby in particular, do people claim they know something without ever experimenting or being part of a team of empirical science folks. It's not that hard to setup a real empirical testing ground, so why don't we see this happen?

I'm not asking for peoples credentials, and I'm not asking to be trolled, I'm simply asking why talk and not walk? In many ways HEA is on pause while the rest of audio innovation is moving forward. I'm also not asking you guys to defend HEA, we've all heard it been there done it. What I'm asking is a very simple question in a hobby that is suppose to be based on "doing", why fake it?

thanks, be polite

Michael Green

www.michaelgreenaudio.net


michaelgreenaudio
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Good try, shadorne, I’m sure you had them going for a while. I guess that’s what happens when you cut and paste big words. The only thing elastic compressional are your adult diapers.

“Sound (in air) is made when air molecules vibrate and move (away from the vibrating source) in a pattern called waves, or sound waves. Sound is a mechanical, longitudinal wave (that moves in all directions) and travels in waves of compressions and rarefactions (expansion) as it successively passes through a medium.”


testpilot
991 posts
 
Why does placing 2 or 3 bowls of ice cold water out in front of the speakers improve the sound?
The sound gets refracted back towards the listener due to the change in the transmission medium i.e. hot and cold air
glupson
7,842 posts
 
geoffkait,

In interest of not extending the argument who said it first, I will accept that it was you who put it more precisely described although I intended to say exactly the same with my "...as stationary walls are not exactly moving in one direction (absolutely or relatively) as airplane wings are.". So you get a credit of saying it first in the way both of us could understand without further explanation.

To answer your pop quiz correctly, the question should be more precise. Is it two or three bowls? The difference is 50%. Not to mention, what is considered an improvement for this purpose?

On the more focused note, if you have any answer to my earlier questions, I would appreciate it. Formulae are fine, I will manage with time.

I have to thank you for intriguing me with objects on the plane wings. I learned quite a bit about wings since then although I have not found anything that would explain MG's method of "organizing" laminar flow, yet. Even well-known Saric et al. study about Discrete Roughness Elements would not come close to it as their DREs are on the level of micron and applied in a completely different environment.

We need Michael Green to return to this forum as the only way to reliably know how much of a certain flow emanating from the speaker is laminar and how much is turbulent (even at the minimum distance from the membrane) is to measure it. I have no equipment and only relatively small expertise to do it.
glupson
7,842 posts
 
Shadorne,

Thank you.

I was not even trying to go into that debate. I tried to clarify validity of statement from MG website that puzzled me. My question was this...

"Sound shutters organize the laminar flow that travels along the wall and ceilings" (statement copied from MG website) Isn't laminar flow organized one and turbulent flow more disorganized one? Wouldn't something placed in the path of the laminar flow make it less organized (turbulent)? At least that is how it goes in my line of business. I am not trying to question validity of any or all such treatments for the purpose of making the room sound different (better or not, your choice), but just wonder if that was an unfortunate choice of words.

geoffkait,

I am not sure what your apparently negative comment to shadorne connects to as the quoted sentence you posted pretty much confirms shadorne's claim. Could you clarify?


geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
testpilot

Pop Quiz - Why does placing 2 or 3 bowls of ice cold water out in front of the speakers improve the sound?

The sound gets refracted back towards the listener due to the change in the transmission medium i.e. hot and cold air

>>>>>I want to get on board your explanation. I really do. Can you be a little more specific and go into detail just a bit? So far I’m thinking hmmmm, maybe partial credit.
More to discover