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 "Michael might as well be tuning a piano, guitar or any other instrument or a stereo. He's not asking how good your hearing is or if you are ever going to tune. He's simply saying if you do this it will mean more than talking about the possibility, you'll actually be "tuning".

And what we are asking Michael is "How do YOU tune a Guitar?". An unassuming question that he has been reluctant to answer. It may be that MY way may be lacking or at worst incorrect. We have only asked for Michael to offer his knowledge on the subject, as he brought the subject up on this forum. If he is reluctant to do so for commercial or IP reasons then he just needs to say so.

"safe space" "cults"? LOL talk about reality

Oh lets see what are all these magazines laying around Michael's place. What do I see some over 200 reviews and articles. Oh my what a cult lol.

Bound for sound

Stereophile

TAS

In Terms of Music

Positive Feedback

Rolling Stone

Better Homes & Garden

CCM

Video Magazine

Audio Magazine

Sounds Like newsletter

Audio Adventure

Hi Fi News and Record review

Soundstage

MMR

Widescreen Review

…...would you like me to keep going LOL It seems like there are quite a few who belong to this cult. Yep that Harry Pearson was a little demon because he tuned with MG and again.....should I go on LOL

Hm Prof how many reviews and articles have been written about you exactly? Oh and I do have another question why is it you and amg don't use your real names for your username. LOL are you guys perhaps in your "safe space"? Yep, you guys are absolutely being internet trolls. Hiding behind your keyboards LOL. Congratulating each others trolling as if your convincing folks that Michael is not a good guy. Michael is in hiding because he's been to busy dealing with clients all weekend. Aren't you boys all that LOL. Oh no I used caps with my LOL, that means I'm laughing at you out loud. If you can't lighten up than the rest of the audio world can have a good laugh "watch out it's the tune your instrument cult". I was talking to MG just now and he said "Hi". Got some tunes to go listen to.

OK here's what you do amg.

That thing at the top of your page. You type in "how to tune a guitar" now click on videos and it will take you to about a hundred or so videos on tuning a guitar. Now if you choose to pick another instrument simply type in that instrument and it will tell you how to tune it. Let us know what you learn.

jf47t,

So, are you able to answer my question about how tuneland would react to such a thread as I described?

Can you find it in yourself, just for a moment, to honestly answer questions?


(And...out of curiosity....do you live with Michael or something?  Because your posts are getting kind of weird in the access you continually seem to have to whatever Michael is doing and what is going on at his house. )


jf47t,

Oh my, slow down. Your posts eventually come across as anti-Michael Green. It is sure that you are having fun there and all is well, but to undecided your idolizing posts become off-putting. Do Michael Green some favor, slow down.

"Now I realize that each recording can and should be tuned in as an individual set of values."
That is really unfortunate as it becomes a playground only for those who either sell adjustments for living or have absolutely nothing else to do in their lives. I will accept your statement, but for most of the people whose day has only 24 hours, adjusting a system for each song becomes irrelevant possibility. Who on Earth would, if the premise is true, ever want to go down the road of tuning? It seems like a completely useless opportunity. I do not doubt that Michael Green is the master of it, but now I have thoughts about futility of such a thing.