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
prof, why would I use a part without researching it? Prof, it’s my job to not only consider but to test. Also many of the producers of these types of products are happy to exchange info, like folks doing field testing for them.


Excellent.

So this time will you answer my question?

Can you tell us exactly what measurable performance parameters change when a cap is tied down with a tie wrap? And explain why one would expect those measurable changes would be audible, especially with the character you describe?

Can you supply any such measurements for us to see, so we don’t have to just take your word on it?


How would you describe the difference in sound between the Vishay 1813 (yellow) and the ERO 1822? 3.3 of course.

I wouldn’t describe the sonic difference between those two caps, as I do not presume, without hearing more reason to think so, that they would sound different. (Not that I couldn’t be convinced they could produce sonic differences)

So wouldn’t make a claim either way about their sonic difference.

But your question clearly implies YOU think they are sonically different.
And if you would claim this, then what type of evidence you have for it? As in the tie wrap above: what measurable parameters change between those caps and why would one would expect those changes to be audible? After all, one can alter signals/measurements in ways that are not audible. 

And if you have "tested" for these audible changes, please explain how you controlled for the variable of your imagination. (If you understand science, as you alluded to in your OP, you would know that pointing to additional tests done with poor control of variables isn’t a way to increase confidence level).

Finally, please note the obvious fact: that the question of the audibie difference between caps in certain implementations does not resolve your claim about the effects of tie wraps. (Which is why this seems to be another red herring to avoid answering my previous question).

I look forward to hearing more about your careful empiricism on these subjects, Michael.

Cheers.


glupson
geoffkait “Help me out, I can’t figure out, are they mildly retarded or are they just very conservative?”

It would be hard for anyone to help you out on this one as you omitted at least one more very possible answer. Maybe they thought of it, applied some theory, did some testing, and decided it was not good enough, or not good at all. In short, maybe they thought and realized something someone else did not.

>>>>>Oh, didn’t I mention, I am an audio insider? I know many top notch high end amp designers. It was strickty a rhetorical question. It’s what I call hyper circuit focused. It’s like having blinders on a racehorse. They never got the memos and if they did they threw them in the curcular file. Even judging by those amp designers who post on this forum, and those who DIY amps they either never heard of the tweaks, don’t care if they did by chance hear of them or are afraid of bringing down the heat if anyone found out they were using controversial audiophile tweaks in their amps. There are a precious few like Mietner who employs cryo, but he’s in the minority. If I’m missing someone who’s been paying attention please let me know. Then there’s the argument, “why should be use tweaks? Our amps are already perfect.” 🙄

gluoson
geoffkait: "...or the myriad other tweaks and concepts audiophiles hold dear."

Just following this thread you can see that tweaks and concepts audiophiles hold dear are not that universally held dear. Some of the manufacturers that are embracing what you hold dear may be considered "snake oil salesmen" to others who would rather that manufacturers that they prefer stay away from that kind of approach. That is why there are so many manufacturers and products on the market. Pick and choose what you like.

>>>>Maybe you haven’t been paying very close attention. The ones who don’t hold audiophile tweaks and concepts dear are by and large the ones who never try them, who are just having a hoot going after audiophiles who do hold them dear. You, know, audio forum whack a mole.  As I said, lots of folks are a little uh, sensitive about being linked to the dark arts. ☠️ As far as any manufacturers embracing these audiophile products there aren’t any. If I’m wrong, please, no angry emails.😁

glupson
I cannot find it now to quote it, but someone in the previous few threads mentioned something to the effect of "or flow does not move at all". If it is not moving, would you still call it a flow? "Flow with velocity of zero?"

>>>>I am pretty sure I already answered that question a number of different ways since last night. I have been known to sing like a canary under water boarding, perhaps if you ask enough times I’ll change my tune. 😬


Shear waves are just transverse vibrational waves. In solids you get both P (longitudinal) and S (transverse) waves. In liquids and air you get only P waves.
At interfaces you can get rolling or orbital progressive waves travelling along the interface.

Generally the goal is to try and damp shear waves in speaker cabinets, baffles and speaker drivers. The term most people use is critically damped. This means the system will return to zero (stop vibrating) once input excitation stops without any further positive and negative oscillations? This is what your car shock absorbers do....it prevents your springy car suspension from boinging around after a bump.

Tuning speaker cabinets in order to have them resonate at specific frequencies is adding coloration at any other frequencies than specifically to match the woofer and porting to get an optimal response from the system. Best response is flat in the bass (no resonance peaks) and critically damped - generally this produces a smooth 12db per octave roll off below corner frequency.



Hey, listen, people sometimes explain things the best they can. Not everything is Albert Einstein or Charlie Rose. You don’t like the explanation? Tough toenails. You don’t see any explanation? Too bad. You don’t see something that fits nicely into your little playbook? Personally, these days I advise anyone in the business of tweaks not to offer ANY explanations, even ones they’re pretty sure of. There’s no real payoff. You wind up having to deal with a whole lotta nonsense. Of course, drama does have its advantages. A little drama never hurt anyone. 😬 Everybody’s a genius. It’s pretty obvious this thread has become a magnet for all the die hard pseudo skeptics and pretend engineers on the forum. Are they importing them from Hydrogen Audio? From Randi’s Education Foundation? Is prof a ringer from Skeptics Society? Well, whaddya expect? “Build it and they will come.” All you get is the, “Well what about this? What about that?” routine, repeated ad nauseum. Shut the cave door and back to Pygmy Country!
Post removed