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
 
Today Michael had me pick out another CD he said choose any you want. I chose "Aqualung". As soon as MG saw the title you could see him looking at the system plotting a course. The recording when he hit play sounded ok but it didn't have anywhere near the impact I was listening to last night. We let the recording play one pass through while we did something else. Coming back to the recording it sounded much different but unorganized. Michael made 3 adjustments to the tuning blocks he had underneath the sub crossover the amp and the cd player. He told me he usually doesn't go this fast but he could fine tune later. When he got the blocks rearranged we took another 15 minute break. I could hear it as soon as we walked back into the room. MG did his shaking of his head thinking of his next move probably and I sat down. Amazing the dots to the recording were connecting this was night and day. MG had me put the player on pause as he gently lifted each component and set them back down. When I hit play it was yet another level reaching closer to the experience I had with George. Michael made a couple of adjustments on the sub amp and stood in the hallway while I listened. One song played MG had me put it on pause he walked to the power strip did something and had me hit play again while he went into his writing room. Blew my mind. Like with Faith never have I heard Aqualung any thing like this. Michael has traded places with me while I write this and it will be interesting if he does any other tuning.
prof
3,473 posts
 

Robert,

I have less time thus far to post today, but I just want to drop in to say: 
Now THAT is a good response!  You clearly took the questions seriously and took care to understand the relevance and reply to the points I was raising. 

Thank you, much appreciated.

I'll try to get back with a more worthwhile reply.
glupson
7,842 posts
 
geoffkait,

I do not think I am overthinking it. In fact, I barely give it a thought. My question is due to the repeated statements including "empirical testing" that nobody questioned. It became the basic postulate while, to my current understanding that I am eager to expand if someone gives me an explanation, it is just three words meant to make it seem legitimate and serious. Both sides accepted it while they might have not needed it. That part is relevant to the debate of this thread. My real personal intention is to learn more about the matter that involves "empirical testing lab" so I can be aware of different approaches with no sway to either of the two sides of this thread (that battle is lost for both, in my belief). Just claiming that something is "empirical" is not that hard to come up with. Of course it is. What else would it be? Now, think about using the word "lab" there. That is a pretty heavy stuff. It is a nightmare to set up a lab. And here, I saw it thrown around as if it is my living room which was not that complicated to set up. But using "lab" and "empirical" in one sentence insinuates something really strong. At the same time, it implies the existence of a "theoretical testing lab" which is my interest as I have never ran across one. I gave up on figuring out if tuning works, if people walk or talk, but am hoping to learn something here.
glupson
7,842 posts
 
audiopoint,

Thanks for your post. It was informative and well-structured. It opened some new ways of understanding, for me at least.
amg56's avatar
Ag insider logo xs@2x
amg56
887 posts
 

@audiopoint  Well explained and well written. Of course there will be further questions and enquiries regarding the behaviour of elements that make up HiFi systems in general, realising each system is unique, in environment, componentry, wiring and power. I realise there are a lot more factors to be discussed but for those who are of curious mind, its a good read.

@jf47t Thank you for your descriptions of what occurred to influence the change in sound/musical experience you had at MG's. It gives a better mind's eye picture of what may be available in our systems to change.

More to discover