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


michaelgreenaudio
Shadorne,

Thank you.

I was not even trying to go into that debate. I tried to clarify validity of statement from MG website that puzzled me. My question was this...

"Sound shutters organize the laminar flow that travels along the wall and ceilings" (statement copied from MG website) Isn't laminar flow organized one and turbulent flow more disorganized one? Wouldn't something placed in the path of the laminar flow make it less organized (turbulent)? At least that is how it goes in my line of business. I am not trying to question validity of any or all such treatments for the purpose of making the room sound different (better or not, your choice), but just wonder if that was an unfortunate choice of words.

geoffkait,

I am not sure what your apparently negative comment to shadorne connects to as the quoted sentence you posted pretty much confirms shadorne's claim. Could you clarify?


testpilot

Pop Quiz - Why does placing 2 or 3 bowls of ice cold water out in front of the speakers improve the sound?

The sound gets refracted back towards the listener due to the change in the transmission medium i.e. hot and cold air

>>>>>I want to get on board your explanation. I really do. Can you be a little more specific and go into detail just a bit? So far I’m thinking hmmmm, maybe partial credit.
glupson
geoffkait,

I am not sure what your apparently negative comment to shadorne connects to as the quoted sentence you posted pretty much confirms shadorne's claim. Could you clarify?

>>>>>I suggest you review the bidding again. I definitely contradicted shadorne. See if you can spot the contradiction. This is fun! A lot of pops quizes today! Oh, boy! Oh, boy!

geoffkait,

I tried to compare your (shadorne and you) statements and cannot find contradiction. I will leave it at that.

Your other pop quiz question, no matter how inspiring it may be, is not valid as a question due to too many variables that can change the outcome and therefore the answer. It is just not solid enough to be a question. It is great for exercising thoughts about "what if" and "how would". Nothing wrong with that, but valid question it is not.


As far as your comment about shadorne's diapers goes, it was neither humorous, nor civil, and was maybe even incorrect.
testpilot,

It seems that you accidentally placed word "back" into your answer about ice-cold water. "Refracting back" would be back to where it came from which is speaker and not listener. Of course, that is assuming that listener is not positioned behind the speaker.