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
Post removed 
prof
3,473 posts
 
Why don’t you talk to Michael about music or his product or tuning.


I did. Remember?

I asked honest questions that he refused to answer.

As I said: I’m not trying to get you to change your opinion of the Michael you know. He may be a great fellow. But I certainly am trying to get across why this thread went to crap, and it started with the character of Michael’s original post. I know Michael’s followers think he can do no wrong...so yes, it’s a bit quixotic to think you will recognize this thread didn’t have the best efforts of MG.

Or better yet why don’t you post your thoughts on TuneLand.


Because I have seen that this would be useless - both Michael and his followers here have all shown that skeptical questions are not welcome, that they are seen as bad vibes and trolling. I’ve also seen someone else dismissed before from the Tuneland forum simply for asking skeptical questions, daring to bring up measurements, blind testing etc, so it doesn’t seem worth the time to go there unless I’m just going to embrace anything Michael presents with "geeze, thanks!."

Your posts are repeated ramblings at this point.


They are "repeated" because no Tuner answers them.

I’m hardly following him around the forum - this is the only MG thread I’ve ever entered.

But MG tuners keep showing up to defend him and while doing so, cast me and others as the bad guys. And since you came in and called out my (among others) posts as off-the-mark, even trolling, of course I’m going to respond and explain where you are wrong.

prof
3,473 posts
 

Anyway...

I have indeed been a dog-on-a-bone in this thread, I certainly admit that.

However, the whole thing really touches issues I find of interest and importance - the role of empiricism, science and skepticism in high end audio, and the approach to discussing differences of opinion or debating the issues. Like I’ve said, it does no one any good to be dismissive of someone’s skepticism, to imply it is only a form of defective negativity, to ignore good questions and arguments, and only embrace those who believe exactly as we do. That’s why I bristled at the lack of honest interaction in the thread and have felt it important to identify and critique.

But I don’t plan on adding any more.

Unless...of course...other people show up and continue to insist on mischaracterizing my posts and arguments. ;-) .

(Though actually, even then, whatever.  People will mischaracterize them if that's what they are after, no matter what I do.  That's obvious at this point.  But my views, arguments and clarifications are all there for anyone to make an honest assessment). 
jf47t
116 posts
 
I wouldn't sweat it prof.
glupson
7,842 posts
 
geoffkait,

"I’ll show you mine if you show me yours."

Could you please refrain from showing us yours? Most of us are not interested in it.
More to discover