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
Look it up? Oh, my gosh! See, that’s the problem. There is no real definition of Tweaking. Even advanced audiophiles disagree what Tweaking entails. That’s what I was trying to say. People think they kind of know what it means. But you won’t find the real definition in Wikipedia. Not for audiophiles. What you will find on the internet and Wikipedia is a lot of anti audiophile and tweakaphobe diatribes warning people about fringe tweaks, woo and snake oil. Like the guy the tells the private detective in Chinatown, “You may think you know what’s going on but, believe me, you don’t.” That’s what I meant by Strawman. You’re trying to compare Tuning to something you’re obviously not particularly adept at or even knowledgeable about. Strawman is a logical fallacy.
This is causing you to troll tuning and myself.


No, Michael, if anyone has trolled, you have trolled this forum.  And that is why it truly is worth trying to make sure this kind of stuff is called out.

And unlike you who just throws that word out in a knee-jerk fashion at anyone who asks you clarifying or skeptical questions, one can actually point to your actual posts and behaviour on this thread to show how troll-like it has actually been.

You started a thread that was about castigating some members as fakers. When challenged on your claim, all you’ve done is reply without actual interaction with the challenges, instead using passive-agressive "Oh, what lil’ ol me? I’d never be negative; that’s on you...YOU must be a negative person or a troll."

That is the behaviour of a troll. Make a post you KNOW will rankle feathers, never own up to it or directly address arguments against your claim, and instead pretend the onus for negativity is on whoever challenges your claim. Keep characterizing the person asking you to back up your claims with versions of "you must be one of the people I’m talking about."

That’s trolling 101 behaviour, and it’s worth calling out when a manufacturer comes here and engages the forum this way. And then this is accompanied by an utterly transparent motive of self-promotion, to get the subject to your tuning, and your forum. (Which you as much as explicitly admitted at one point, saying this thread was a door to Tuning).

As I said, there could be nothing LESS helpful to open, honest, civil dialogue than to simply cast people who bring challenging questions as "trolls" which is the card you play constantly to evade, evade, evade giving direct substantive responses. Again...I’m far from the only one who has noticed this modus operandi.

Perfect example, after my continued questions to you ON TOPIC - "what do you mean by testing? What do you mean by empirical? What methods are you using? Can you clarify exactly what you mean and what would fit your claim of "faking it?" and can you give some more explanation or evidence for the other claims you’ve now made (e.g. tied caps)....

.....you again avoid answering any substance of my argument or questions to you, and instead reply only with baiting insults like this:

In other words your smelling of something fishy is probably because you have been wiping your nose with your freshly fish covered hands.


You see, this is the behaviour that keeps the negative thread you started going along the wrong rail. You didn’t have to act this way.

As an example, look at the recent reply to my skeptical questions from
"audiopoint." He acted like someone engaged in honest dialogue: saw the questions were reasonable, and did his best to directly answer them. Even if someone doesn’t accept everything in his answers, that’s no biggie, we can disagree but at least show each other the respect of ENGAGING one another’s ideas, instead of evading anything that doesn’t support one’s own marketing goals and trying to cast challenges in a negative light.

We’ll end with this:


Prof, your not going to win here because listeners are tuning as we speak in real time which is the proof of and for the hobby of listening.


This is just more vaguely self-aggrandizing gobbledygook.

Again, you are carelessly (or...carefully!) mixing up terms to serve your own agenda. What the heck does it mean to say people Tuning (the name for your method and claims) are "proof of and for the HOBBY OF LISTENING"????

That’s absurd. I’m engaged in the "hobby" of listening and so is EVERYONE on this forum, even though most of us are not one of your disciples "tuning" by taking apart our gear, putting it on wood blocks etc.

You seem so blinkered and driven by your own marketing concerns - sorry..."spreading the world about tuning"...that you conflate the most basic universal terms like "Hobby" and "listening" with "Tuning" (which just happens to be your self-marketed term for your methods and services).

It’s a disingenuous move because, hey, who could put down "listening" right? And if you are tuning you are doing the hobby of listening!

No. We have to be able to be conceptually clear and separate these things. You make certain technical and perceptual claims that people who are in the hobby of high end audio, and who LISTEN, can disagree about.

And if you want to say "Oh, gee, whoever would take my claim to be that other people not tuning aren’t listening? I didn’t mean THAT" then don’t bother with that bait and switch. If you DID NOT MEAN to conflate our Hobby or "Listening" with your tuning methods, then DON’T WRITE IN A WAY THAT CONFLATES THOSE THINGS. Don’t shove off your own responsibility for your careless, or self-serving, confusion of terms and twist it into the negative motives of other people.

And note: every further reply you may want to make that avoids my questions and arguments, to say I’m just being a meanie, only re-enforces that you will take the easy, trolling route of "calling names" over "replying to the arguments."

Over ’n out.

(Whether Michael reads this response or not, I still think it’s worthwhile to point out modes of interaction that are pernicious to honest discussion, and Michael seems intent on supplying a never ending stream of examples).


Crazy threads like this surely must scare some curious newcomers away.   Too bad.

No Thanks

You guys get too hostile for me. I'll let you posters fight amongst yourselves. MG is the father of audio tuning from what I have read in many articles now and I'm very satisfied with this. He's taken the time to show me while he explains and that goes a long way with me. Plus Tuneland the forum is a great place. Count me out on the anger and trolling like MG I want no part. There's too much music to enjoy and you guys are defeating your own purpose when you can't get along.

mapman
Crazy threads like this surely must scare some curious newcomers away. Too bad.

>>>>The Peanut Gallery checks in. The Euro-nator is back.