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
trelja
It is know that there are many ingredients responsible for “quality” of audio inhalation.

>>>>>Did you forget to exhale?
trelja
Still, I want to stress the criticality of loudspeaker positioning, if nothing more than to provide a target, and keep in the back of the mind in case one someday has the opportunity to realize it. With that, below is what I consider one of the most important treatises I’ve encountered along my audio journey, a translation of the Dead Points of Live Sound, by A. Polakov.

>>>>>>Fortunately for the sharp eared and earnest audiophile it’s not necessary to understand the logic of The Dead Points of Live Sound in order to determine the absolute best speaker locations for a given room with given acoustic treatments. And you don’t have to repeat the ubiquitous audiophile methodology of move a little, listen a little, which is guaranteed to fail as I will demonstrate. All other methodologies will fail to obtain the absolute best speaker locations.

The only sure fire method guaranteed to determine the absolute best speaker locations is the out of phase track on the XLO Test CD or similar test CD with the out of phase track. The XLO track is self explanatory, I cannot vouch for other test CDs. The objective is to find the speaker locations where the out of pbase track is the MOST DIFFUSE - where the voice on the out of phase track “sounds like it’s coming at you from all around the room with no specific direction.” That is when the sound from the speakers will be the most coherent and have the largest soundstage when the recording is in correct phase. Of course, it should be mentioned that in rooms with minimum acoustic treatments the capability to achieve a VERY DIFFUSE sound might be constrained. As proper acoustic treatments and or devices are applied to the room the XLO Test CD will be more effective, and you will be more able to hear the completely diffuse voice.

The standard audiophile method of moving one speaker at a time and listening or both speakers at a time and listening, then moving them again and listening cannot find the absolute best locations because it’s like trying to solve x simultaneous equations in x + n unknowns.

Many folks believe speakers should be placed widely apart for better soundstage. Or that the speakers should form an equilateral triangle with the listener. Or that speaker locations must be symmetrical. They also often believe speakers must be toed in for better soundstage. Both of those beliefs are not true. The best soundstage and coherence, etc. might actually be where the speakers are relatively close to each other, well, closer than you would think. It all depends. That’s where the XLO Test CD comes in. You don’t have to guess any more. It’s a no brainer. 🧠 

If room acoustics devices (e.g., panels, traps, resonators, what have you) are added later the whole process should be repeated since the room dynamics change. But the impression that the voice on the XLO track is coming at you from all around the room will get more and more definite. That corresponds to the absolute best speaker locations.

Now, having said all that, we’re not out of the woods yet. Because as fate would have it many recordings are manufactured out of phase (Polarity). This seems to be especially true for CDs. There are no standards for Polarity. So, MANY IF NOT MOST CDs you play are out of phase (Polarity) and would sound better, all things being equal, if your SYSTEM was out of phase (Polarity).

trelja, geoffkait,


Those are some longer and more complicated reads than usual on this thread, but they seem interesting enough to take time to read them and maybe learn something. Thank you for that. That is, aside of Kim Jong Un, Planck, Einstein, a few Amish proverbs, and some incidental poetry what I find valuable in this confused thread. Every now and then, something shows up that brings something new, at least to me. Cows listening to accordion somewhere in the Alps? Check. At least they were not ski jumping there. Of course, not to forget cherry pies. They will enter the classic literature of Internet audio. Along with that, comes some more audio-thought-provoking material that broadens the horizon.


Original intention of this thread, whatever that was, might have been completely missed, but as a wastebasket you can come to and pick your recyclables from, it is great.

Right. Like moopman and gloopson and trollja aren’t trolls. Cut me some slack, Jack! All the lonely trolls and pseudo skeptics, where do they all come from? All the lonely anti audiophiles, where do they all belong? One suspects they just want to be part of something big. You were obviously glued to this thread. There is no joy in Mudville today. 😢