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
Post removed 
prof
3,473 posts
 
Robert,

The issue mentioned in your observation certainly has been an obvious one.   I’ve been heavily involved in many forums and discussion groups since around ‘96 or so and I’ve never had a post removed.  Yet in this thread “someone” has flagged and had 3 of my posts removed!   

Could this be the same person who has continually yelled “troll” in this thread yet no one else has been thin skinned enough to have those posts removed?   Could it be the same person who in the self-protection of his own forum liberally rags on people here as trolls and other disparaging comments, but where replies correcting his mischaracterization would surely be blocked?

Nah, couldn’t be!....
audiopoint
208 posts
 

You say you and Robert both have worked in recording? Room conditioning is priority one so the instruments and equipment work consistently. Sorry but again it raises questions for me about your methods. Michael is meticulous about room conditioning, I'm surprised your not. Is there a reason why you choose not to condition your rooms?


Prof, check this out… the same grammatical mistake by jft as we previously noted earlier that is made all the time by mg in his writing.


MG is jf47t. One in the same  - now it all makes sense!


By the way MG, the correct spelling is you’re and not your…


Ha Ha funny thing happened on the way to the forum!



prof
3,473 posts
 
jf47t

above is what is called a fake statement, as anyone can read on this thread


Infortunately for you, anyone on this thread can see how assiduously Michael avoided answering questions raised about measurements that would support his claim that tied and untied capacitors alter a signal audibly.

Can you point to where Michael replied with such measurements? A link perhaps?



What Michael said was "let’s set up a lab and test these claims together in real time for everyone to witness".


So Michael has set up a lab to test these claims? Good! Where are the measurements showing the signal of a capicitor is audibly altered when untied, or the measurable differences of an amp, preamp, CD player signal with a case on vs a case off? We can presume you are making claims within the same natural world science describes, right, and you are not claiming magic?

Remeber that Michael has already been making these claims as true. He didn’t need our help before doing so, hence if this is really empirical Lab Work, isn’t it reasonable to ask for both a coherent technical explanation of the “problem” AND measurements suggesting the technical parameters have been altered in a way that fixes the problem?

BTW, a link to a cover of widescreen review does not do anything to address the reticence MG has shown on his claims being discussed in this thread.

Post removed 
More to discover