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


128x128michaelgreenaudio
prof,

You nailed it again. Not everyone is able to put thoughts into well-written sentences with clear argument around here, but you remain the standard. Despite occasional disagreements with your approach to it, it has been pleasure to read it. Even at the lowest point, when you and Michael Green started exchanging what I would call insults, it remained somewhat humorous and Michael gets half a credit for it. I hope to come across your posts and points of view in the future and I certainly hope that Michael Green remains on the block, too. Like him, or not, he does bring a different whiff and forces you to think. Regardless of final outcome and agreement or disagreement you may have. He certainly provided fodder for my thoughts over the last couple of days.


Keep on a good job, both of you. Michael to make his customers happy, and prof to keep reins on it all.
Oh, brother! Just when you thought it couldn’t get any sillier.

Let me put it another way. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, looks like a duck...it’s a duck! 🦆

“Ask not for whom the troll bellows. He bellows for you.” - audiophile saying

“Idle hands are the Devil’s workshop.” - audiophile axiom

“Sound quality ultimately has very little to do with technical specifications.” - audiophile axiom

Gonna raise me an army, some tough sons of bitches
I’ll recruit my army from the orphanages
I been to St. Herman’s church, said my religious vows
I’ve sucked the milk out of a thousand cows

your friend and humble scribe,

geoff kait
machinations dramatica

Post removed 
Wish I had been able to contribute something of substance to this thread but that was its largest problem, there really was NO substance.
A lot of promise remaining unfulfilled.
Some good questions mostly ignored, derided or chastised.
A lot of self congratulatory back slapping.
And well that is about it.
Did I miss anything?