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

Wow this was good!!!!

"Sorry, dudes and dudettes, listening to music is not really a hobby. It may be enjoyable and you may do it frequently and you may do it for long periods of time sometimes but it’s not a hobby. Any more than watching Model trains go around the track is a hobby, without building the tracks, painting the train cars, the scenery, town, adding automation, whatever, etc. The audio hobby means rolling up your sleeves and actively seeking good sound, and better sound. Unless you believe audio is a plug-and-play experience. In which case you’re not in the hobby anyway. Or if you wouldn’t be more entertained by better sound. In which case you’re not in the hobby, either. A hobby should be active, interactive. But maybe this a a good definition of hobby for some of you"

I’ll take what he’s having.

 In fact I'll take the check.
All I can say is "preach it brother". Folks Geoff Kait is laying down some good reads!!
Katie
I realise your reading and comprehension skills are a little rusty but....
Yes I said I would be leaving this thread as it serves no purpose for me and I none for the OP.
However I did NOT say that was my last post or just when I would leave .
So, now here is the one you thought you read.
This is my last post on this thread.
Got it?
Keep up the good work.
uberwaltz
Katie
I realise your reading and comprehension skills are a little rusty but....
Yes I said I would be leaving this thread as it serves no purpose for me and I none for the OP.
However I did NOT say that was my last post or just when I would leave .
So, now here is the one you thought you read.
This is my last post on this thread.
Got it?
Keep up the good work.

>>>>I suggest filing that under Whatever.
geoffkait,

"...the tweakers, the doers,,went one way and the anti tweakers, the ones who touted the equipment, went another."
Although it is kind of a right description of a situation, maybe "anti-tweakers" is not the right word. Maybe "non-tweakers" would be more correct. There is a crowd out there that is not bothered by tweaking, but is not against anyone doing it, either. They are not interested in fighting about it. They even have minds open that there may be something to it, but have decided it is not what they would pursue for different reasons, inconvenience being one of them. uberwaltz suggested he is exactly that, if I understood his most recent posts correctly.

"Anti-tweakers" suggest more active approach to tweaking, even if it is in negative context. I would guess, entirely based on nothing remotely tangible, that most of the people who bought anything more than a Beats portable speaker so they could listen to music in some "better quality" fall in "non-tweakers" category.

Having said that, this thread is populated with a number of "tweakers", "anti-tweakers", and a decent number of "non-tweakers". Nice mix, I would say.