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


128x128michaelgreenaudio
jf47t
116 posts
 

Hello Audiogon, this is my first post.

Reading this thread I have noticed a few other MGA clients and wanted to add my name to the list of proud MGA speaker owners. I am working on my full tunable system and each step is another revelation. There are a few characterizations about MG on this thread that border on insane and makes one wonder why these false statements would ever be made. kosst saying there is a beaming at 6KHz with the Rev speakers which is absolutely made up trash talking about something he has no idea about. My speakers happen to give the smoothest reproduction I have ever heard. Also the absurdity that Michael is not technical. I wonder who kosst thinks Mr. Green is.  Kosst, are you aware of MG's work before he came to home audio or that continues to the present? It doesn't sound like you know much about Michael's work as an engineer.

My take on this thread is that there was a real engineer on this forum and some of you did everything in your power to chase him away. Michael was encouraging members here to do their homework before speaking about topics that effect other listeners decisions. Some of you appeared to get upset because Michael is a straight shooter and doesn't waste time or allow his time to be wasted. I always thought that was a virtue, but not here.

@GK I like the way you and Mr. Green interact here vs the Stereophile debates

prof
3,485 posts
 
Does anyone know what "pseudo skeptic" means?


Only geoff knows for sure, but you can bet you can feed it to horses. ;[)
glupson
7,842 posts
 
jf47t,

Welcome. Your first post happens to be in a thread that has really been a bit weird. Most of them are not this way.

I cannot comment about MGA speakers, but believe that they may have values that some would appreciate. If I ever hear them, I will know.

It is hard to know how many people here have been aware of Michael Green's prior work and credentials, but it really should not matter as he, in his original post, said he was not asking any for credentials. So, credentials meant nothing. Only straight answers did. Unfortunately, more than one poster was dissatisfied with what they considered as Michael's lack of straightforwardness in this thread. I personally cannot say he did not try to answer/explain my questions, but some other posters were less lucky. In fact, despite my disagreement with his statements (maybe not the best word, but close to what I mean), we had reasonably cordial and productive interaction after a while.

I think that uberwaltz, in his post on 05-17-2018 10:14pm, nicely summarized the whole thread issues.
prof
3,485 posts
 
Hello jf47t,

It’s nice to hear you are really happy with MG speakers. I’d love to hear a pair as they sound really interesting.

My take on this thread is that there was a real engineer on this forum and some of you did everything in your power to chase him away.


No, simply to get some straight answers to questions that shouldn’t have been that hard.

Michael was encouraging members here to do their homework before speaking about topics that effect other listeners decisions.


1. Some of us have done our own homework, and bring some of that experience to Michael’s claims.

2. Is it not part of doing homework, and simply thinking critically, to ask Michael about the basis for some of his claims? That’s what some of us, like myself, were doing. When the claim arose that untying capacitors "freed" the sound, I was simply asking for the explanations for this, and how it was tested. Isn’t that reasonable? If I tell you that planting pennies in your garden will make your flowers grow faster, do you run out and to this first thing - especially when the concept doesn’t even make sense to you?

Or would you first want to ask "what’s the basis for that claim? How do pennies cause flowers to grow faster and how did you test that idea?"

Before we spend time on an activity, doesn’t it make sense to first determine whether it seems worth one’s time?


Some of you appeared to get upset because Michael is a straight shooter and doesn’t waste time or allow his time to be wasted.


I presume you didn’t read a lot of the thread then?

The main problem is that Michael did NOT appear to be a straight shooter in this thread. He was very evasive - and for seemingly no good reason. That’s what numerous people have commented on.

I don’t know Michael’s engineering credentials, but I personally haven’t seen an engineer refuse to answer some of the basic and obvious engineering questions I was asking (e.g. what measured parameters change between a tied cap and an untied cap?)

I always thought that was a virtue, but not here.


Agree 100 percent. That’s why it was so odd to see MG brush off so many questions and calls for clarification.

I do hope that his future threads are more engaging even with those people who may have some questions about his claims and methods.
Of course, if he wants to stay strictly preaching to the choir, he has his own forum.

Cheers.

michaelgreenaudio's avatar
michaelgreenaudio OP
1,019 posts
 

Hi jf47t

good to see you buddy!

More to discover