Elizabeth, I stole your phrase "bla bla bla". That was another profound moment for me on this thread.
Also for those of you who are now tuning, I'm very happy for you. It's a real mind and door opener.
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
- ...
- 2164 posts total
Sound engineers Ed Long and Ron Wickersham developed the concept of the PZM. "Pressure Zone Microphone" To my delight, Carter was well aware of the technology, writing back:“I was part of the class at Syn-Aud-Con that helped in the development of the PZM back in 1978. The technique was first shown to us by Ed Long and Ron Wickersham. We were all aware of the problems of reflected sound combining with direct sound to cause combing interference to the frequency response. Not only did PZMs eliminate that, it also gave any microphone 3dB more output. We were given tiny Knowles microphones and instructed to take them home and experiment with different configurations. Knowles made tiny omni, cardioid, and even bi-directional microphones.”Michael, I do not see any reference to you or Turner Broadcasting in my research. It would appear the PZM was developed in 1978 at Syn-Aud-Con. Any fib will eventually be caught out. |
Yep, that would be them! A pretty fun time. It changed stage performances dramatically. We did a mixture of shotguns, PZM, wireless and hand held wireless and centipedes. The patterns up until then would leave holes in the performance, but using the floor and walls as the actual microphone was the beginning of a whole new way of tracking and EQing. lol amg, so I'm taking it that you would like a pay stub from me of all the places I worked? Pretty weird dude! Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
- 2164 posts total