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
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
His ideas became...unsound.

https://youtu.be/5lKHIL1eSVU
mitch2
3,972 posts
 
Did @jf47t just repeat the entire OP dissertation?  Brilliant.
Repetition...repetition...repetition...repetition...
Sort of a longer version Maha Mantra for the tuning sect of HEA

Nice YouTube @geoffkait  - I hope you are not suggesting it is time to paint our faces and send a boat up the river
prof
3,473 posts
 

mitch,

Indeed.  And if we think this style of blind repetition and rhetorical emptiness is bad enough here...imagine the Tuneland forum! 

Though perhaps everyone there employs their Third Eye to communicate on a higher level than us mere mortals. 
glupson
7,842 posts
 
prof,

If it is of any consolation to you, most of the people here do understand your points. We may not all agree with some of your approaches all the time, but that is some healthy diversity, I hope. However, I still think you are wasting your energy on trying to prove your points. Whoever has been following this thread has already joined one of the three camps (yours, Michael Green's, or the middle one). Answers you are asking for will never come. Two of you are simply on two parallel lines, each one right and straight on his own, but never to meet. To me, Michael Green is like some picture of a renaissance man who does many things and does them out of passion or for whatever purpose he has for it. Electronics, carpentry, playing music live, studio work, debating (not your way, though), above average cars with some flair, traveling, having a diverse life along the way, and what not. You, however, bring the structured standards of 21st century and expect him to abide by them. That will not work. His approach clashes with what you are expecting big time. You, or anybody else, do not know if he is intentionally avoiding your questions or has no idea what you are even talking about and simply cannot answer. He openly admitted that he was not pursuing credentials so he may not be that familiar with approach you have. It does not matter if his claims about tuning are correct or not.

I am not trying to defend Michael Green at all. I am just observing as disparity between two camps has become so wide that it may be something else than stubbornness or arrogance at play. I mostly deal with people for whom your scientific approach is like drinking water, but I do have a number of friends who are highly educated and very intelligent who would be unfamiliar with methods you are requesting. They are just not in the field that uses such a methodology. Now, imagine someone not that young (forgive me if I am wrong, Michael, I do not know your age but have a feeling you are not underage) so has his ways already carved, with strong personality, beliefs based on his experience, and no formal education that forced him to go through the methods you are asking about in tuning. You cannot expect the person to jump up and down and give you p value of capacitor differences. Of course, the idea behind the OP is vague to me, too, and both of you can argue about it as much as you please.
jf47t
116 posts
 
Listening to "Hindu Love Gods" on my system, Absolutely Jamming! The difference between audiophile racks vs Platforms is nuts. I've now gone through the rack phase to the maple phase to tuning. The dynamic changes while going through these steps is shocking. Michael's suggestion of "Hindu" is a good one because I have heard this on other systems where it sounded congested. Before I would have rated this recording as ok to good now I would do my rating at excellent. There's dynamic range plus.
More to discover