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
prof,

"If MG or jf47t have diagnosed that I hate Michael, they are not the keen judges of human character that it seems they think they are."
The only person who would know those details about your character is geoffkait. You should ask him to find out who you really are.

glupson prof

Please don't do that. That was extremely heartless and cruel. I think I get it now. No matter how much soul someone pours into the entertainment business your here to rip them down.

for the first time on this thread I am actually ashamed to associate myself with you guys


jf47t,

Perhaps this gig isn’t for you; might you be a bit too delicate to be MG’s spokesman here, if you are going to be freaked out so easily?

No one here has to be convinced that Michael would "blow our minds" if we just were able to observe him, or that he’s a Focused Machine. None of that answers any of the questions we are discussing so, as passionate as you may be, actually *getting answers to some questions* would go much further for MG’s credibility than having someone continually come on just to tell us He’s So Great And He’ll Answer In His Own Time. When you (or he) go on and on about Michael’s experience, his genius, how much he loves music and has lots of friends...that’s just spending time finding ways to not engage the substance of our questions and ideas. Bragging that he *could* answer, and does elsewhere...but not actually doing it here...is "talking" not "walking."

I don’t need to share your love for Michael to consider his ideas. They may be valid.

And I don’t need to Hate him should I decide I don’t buy in to any particular thing he does.

It doesn’t need to be so emotional. Most o this "angry" stuff has been projection on your part.

Just try direct, clear, honest conversation - on the topic. It’s good for the soul.