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
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
9,788 posts
 

Speaking of tuning, and that of a drum in particular: To proport that a drum that has been "tuned" (the reason for the use of the quotation marks to follow) in one room, and then moved to another where it is now "out of tune", is to unwittingly reveal something about oneself. Except for "tuned percussion" (tympani, vibes, etc.), drums are not tuned, they are tensioned. The threaded rods which pass through the holes in the hoop that holds a drum head in place on a drum shell are called tension rods, not tuners (as on guitars and basses). A drum is not tuned to a note, so can not be out of tune.

A drum produces many fundamental tones, with many, many harmonics and overtones---some related to the fundamentals, some not. Those that are not are referred to as "partials"---tones in between the dominant fundamentals and their harmonics. A drummers adjusts the tension rods until the drum produces the mix of fundamentals/harmonics/partials he prefers (as well as the tightness of the head, which affects drumstick rebound). A drum does NOT produce one, single, dominant note, it produces a vast mix of related and unrelated tones. If that were not true, a snare drum would need to be tensioned so as to match the key each song is played in.

What DOES happen when a drum is moved between rooms, is the balance between all the tones the drum produces is affected by the acoustic properties of the two rooms---the decay times of the rooms at various frequencies, the tones reinforced or diminished according to the resonant characteristics of the room, a result of it’s dimensions. And by the absorptive and reflective nature of the material used to construct the room, which varies at different frequencies, of course. The rooms affect the timbre of the drum(s), not their pitch. The most extreme change occurs when a drum is played outside; their IS no room, so no room-related decay times or resonances. I hate to play outside---drums always sound thin and flat there.

lwal22's avatar
lwal22
76 posts
 
Verbose technical debates...aren’t we talking about listening to music?  Measurements and theories are essential to providers in this field, true. They need such things for development and deployment ..when done for other listeners.  
But for the end user, the entire experience is by nature subjective. The questions are ‘what do you like?’  What fulfills your musical needs?  By definition, subjective evaluation is never wrong. 
Unless of course, hardware is your primary interest. 
In that case, enjoy..but recognize you probably shouldn’t press your opinions on those who relying on their ears and own interpretation of what they hear. 
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Michael Green
“Quantum, discrete, isolation, dampening, compression, NASA, EE, inert, first reflection point, transparency, revealing and many more that are a part of the selling of HEA aren’t necessarily being used in the truest sense but have been turned into tools of convincing a certain part of the public of HEA to defend the market. You take a forum like this and throw in a little internet trolling and limited experience and you can see why the transition is taking so long. But the more you have folks like Tjbhuler speaking out, the easier the pill is to swallow.

>>>>Of course words are just words and they have different meanings for different people. No surprise there.

also I want to throw this in from Geoff

"There is much confusion over what quantum physics is, what audio devices employ quantum physics or operate via quantum mechanics or quantum physics. However, it might be a little bit of an overreaction to condemn all audiophile devices marketed as quantum devices as hoaxes or suggest deception or lack or integrity. For example, the CD laser itself operates quantum mechanically, or any laser; they are “two dimensional quantum wells.”

And one more thing that you guys should think about studying are the "fundamental forces". A lot of audio is easy to figure out if you have taken a course in, or even study on the internet, the interaction of the Earth’s forces.”

>>>>>Michael, The “fundamental forces” and the interaction of the Earth’s forces sound like interesting topics. Can you expound on what you mean? What are we talking about here?
uberwaltz's avatar
uberwaltz
13,381 posts
 
MG
Yes tbh I am just about in heaven with my system for sure
I can and do sit and listen for 5, 5 or more hours at a time with no fatigue or desire to stop the music flowing.
Twas not always that way of course, I have had the same room for 11 years and when I think back to what I started with in their and where I am now.
The biggest mover was the Lyngdorf 2170 that basically did all the room tuning I need for me.
Not much more I need to achieve and changes I make now are just because I feel like it or the desire to "upgrade" like new cartridges.
So yes ring that bell!
jssmith
312 posts
 
I don't participate much here because as an objectivist I am clearly in the minority. Early in my audiophile hobby I participated in two blind amplifier tests, from Hafler and Adcom to Levinson, McIntosh and Conrad Johnson. I'm sure you can guess the outcome. That led me to read more blind tests and about why a component should or shouldn't make an audible difference. That knowledge let me kill off many more myths. Since then I pay no attention to people's opinion ... unless it regularly matches my own. My outlook is that if you didn't hear it blind, you didn't hear it. I don't care what you think you heard. That's not to say you shouldn't be happy with your confirmation-biased system. Because happiness is the ultimate goal of our lives ... or should be. But it's going to have no effect on what I think or buy.

Now when I purchase a system my first filter is speaker measurements, and then I break out REW to tune the room or the system (EQ). I don't care about amps, wires, DACs or anything above 320kbps (another blind test conclusion).

Michael, I'm sure you know this is a phenomenon in likely every hobby. I've run into and debunked golf and bowling myths. But my current main hobby is guitar and the myths are just as bad, although blind tests are not quite as ostracized ... yet, but you can tell that's starting to take hold in the tube amp and "tonewood" communities. One of the funniest blind results was regarding tonewood when the same electronics were transferred from one guitar to the other ... that other guitar being made of Lucite. I'm sure you can guess the results of that test too. Another test I found interesting was a $2,000 Mesa amp against a tiny $170 amp voiced specifically to mimic the Mesa. They sounded slightly different, but the $170 amp sounded BETTER!


More to discover