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


michaelgreenaudio
nonoise's avatar
nonoise
11,226 posts
 
Take care Michael. It was nice while it lasted.
Leave some bread crumbs so you'll find your way back. 😄

All the best,
Nonoise
Post removed 
glupson
7,842 posts
 
prof,

I agree with many of your statements about how things and claims should be presented, confirmed, and supported. No doubt about your approach to it. Even your, now probably long-forgotten, dissection of original post is, to me at least, right to the point.


Where you may not be doing too well in all of this is putting too many emotions into something eventually completely unimportant. Some guy somewhere claiming things you see as bogus and selling it to other people who also have nothing better to do than to pay to play with bricks (wooden, or whatever) and that irritates you. So what? Let them play with their toys in whatever way they want, but do not pay with your new duodenal ulcer. It is not worth the trouble and you simply cannot win.

Michael Green did not avoid all of my questions or concerns. He explained, to the best of his beliefs, knowledge, and understanding how some of his ideas work. It took some time, but he did. Do I think his room treatments (save me from some cable elevators and such things, I would not believe it even if I heard it myself) work to change the sound? Absolutely. Do I think his explanation is correct? Not really. So what? He is trying to come up with something and present it the best he can. It would not be that hard to write down nice detailed explanation why he is incorrect on at least a thing or two in a few pages over the next fifteen minutes, but what would be the point? To show one's superiority over him on that? Not the best place to feed one's ego. To scare customers from him? It would not, they would just say some grumpy guy did not receive a memo about holistic approach to sound tuning. To put things in the world straight? Not worth it, some still believe that Earth is flat and no major harm happens because of that. To humiliate the person who has posted a fairly unfair assessment of others in his original post? Why? It is not going to change him no matter how hard you try. To force him to reveal that he has no proof for his claims that would be adhering to current scientific methods? You already know that. Why would you do it to yourself, it will only hurt you. After all, more people than just Michael Green are claiming things here left and right that are at times grotesque. Some get called, the others just slide under the radar. And the world rotates.


On a different note, who came up with the idea to disassemble a perfectly well-put together amplifier she/he paid dearly for and why? What was the initial idea about taking the cover off? Do people take doors off an expensive car to see if it corners better? Seems strange to me.
cd318
2,636 posts
 
There should be no good reason to remove an amplifier case cover. The cover protects you from a possibly fatal shock and the components from possibly fatal damage (and dust).

Case resonance issues in amplifier design are best left to the designers, but if you are concerned you can always experiment with means of physical isolation via platforms, air bladders, etc

Some manufacturers such as Naim Audio have been physically isolating/decoupling their circuit boards for decades.


Post removed 
More to discover