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
Post removed 
jf47t
116 posts
 

uberwaltz

You said that you believe MG failed in every aspect of managing this thread. Michael's not an audiogon mod and btw the Mods have done great on this thread. There aren't any questions here Mr. Green avoided. He didn't give the answers Prof or whomever wanted so some of you decided to judge MG based on this. That's not being objective.

prof
3,534 posts
 
jf47t,

It’s odd to read this thread that is mostly about Michael’s character instead of the OP.


You seem to have missed that Michael’s OP was an attack on the character of others - calling them out as "fakes." (And he continued to imply people on this thread - e.g. me - are faking it).

Why is your tolerance so high when Michael does this, and so low if anyone challenges Michael to back up his arguments, I wonder?

No one is chasing MG around on the forum attacking his character (I notice he managed to recently turn a speaker thread into yet another bunch of self-promotion...)

But since THIS thread is one started by MG, and he did not behave very well to people who didn’t just accept his claims, then it’s not a surprise that his posts have been scrutinized for their character.

I don’t doubt at all that any number of people can report wonderful interactions with MG. I’m sure - if you he sees you as open to conversion - he can be a great guy. But of course it’s easy to be nice to people who are thanking you for your help and pearl’s of wisdom.

It’s another test of character, for anyone not just MG, to be able to discuss differences of opinion in an intellectually honest manner and not dismiss anyone voicing disagreement or skepticism as "negative" people or trolls.

Which Michael continually implied (and sometime explicitly).

I see and listen with Michael almost every day. We live 5 doors away from each other.


And I’m sure you get along great. But none of that speaks to MG’s actual posts in this thread, which were evasive, dismissive if not outright insulting.

(written to uberwaltz)

There aren’t any questions here Mr. Green avoided. He didn’t give the answers Prof or whomever wanted

Holy cow. I asked for clarifications, and asked specific questions. Michael Green admitted he wasn’t even answering them, didn’t even feel it incumbent on him to do so at all. If you asked me specific questions and I respond with the equivalent of "I'm not going to answer your questions, you don’t get it, and btw you exemplify the problem" you wouldn’t accept my characterization "well, I just didn’t give the answers you wanted." No, that’s disingenuous - as if to put the onus on you, like YOU are in the wrong to not accept those as answers. The fact is I just wouldn’t be answering the questions AT ALL. Michael was not answering my questions AT ALL. Either early on, or when I asked about capacitors. Everyone noticed. Why don’t you?

You are taking pages right out of Michael’s playbook here. Spin something in a disingenuous manner - always imply blame to the respondent.

Prof I have indeed read this whole thread and you and kosst ARE trolling MG. You can twist and turn as much as you wish but you ARE INDEED TROLLING Mr. Green.


Here is what your post shares in common with Mr. Green’s posts: You can cast such aspersions, but you can’t - don’t even bother - to back it up. Calling people names like "troll" without actually showing how their arguments - what they have actually written - deserves that name, is rather undignified. (Whereas I only applied that term to Michael’s post insofar as I showed exactly why the *content* of his post justified that term).

Do you care to back up your name-calling and actually show how my questions to Michael was "trolling?" Point to any argument I’ve made here to be unreasonable?

It would only be intellectually honest to do so, don’t you think?

Or are you set in following MG’s example of just brushing people off with disparaging comments, rather than engaging their questions and arguments?




prof
3,534 posts
 


BTW, anyone notice there has been an influx in the thread of MG acolytes to castigate nay-sayers?

It gives the feeling a siren call went out at some point, does it not?
jf47t
116 posts
 

Prof, when Michael is up on a forum somewhere in the home hobby or professional a post is made on TuneLand and his facebook page. No sirens needed. This serves as a good example of trolling by you. You've done nothing here but try to paint a false narrative of a man who has dedicated his life to helping others.

And MG most certainly did engage in your question. If you read MG's response to you he asked a very straight forward question. He asked if you knew the sonic difference between two capacitors. Your answer set the stage for where you wanted to go with this thread. Michael was talking about people who want to try things instead of talking about them. You have been pressing to talk instead of walk. That's fairly clear to me. Plus your temper gets the best of you and others have asked you to not take things so personally. Another thing I can tell you about Michael is he doesn't like to do anger.

More to discover