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
mitch2
3,973 posts
 
Devil in a Blue Dress
@geoffkait 
Good one Geoff...pretty well describes this thread...."a real humdinger"
Thanks (and apologies) to Mitch Ryder and the Detroit Wheels
glupson
7,842 posts
 
jf47t,
There’s a huge golf between "why fake it?" and "your faking it".
That is the difference between "implying" and "stating".

"MG’s not going to engage in a fight over stuff he has done..."
That is the problem that others had. If you read again, you will notice that their major displeasure was his non-responsiveness to direct questions. I cannot say my experience mirrors that one, but others complained. A few straight answers, even if incorrect in reader's view, would have been way better than nothing. Like this, it comes across as "you are not worthy of me answering to you" to people and then they start looking for details. It is easy to insult people over the Internet without ever intending or noticing. It is an art how to get out of it with dignity. In others' views, I am almost certain, Michael failed that "get out of it" part. I doubt he intentionally wanted to insult anyone, but that is what they saw. At the same time, it is also an art to curb yourself in such situations and not get overly emotional to overreact when feeling insulted.

"If you read the Tunees who have come up, it’s all positive correct? Happy successful listeners no negatives to be found."
It is true, but it does not count at all. It is a willing, but captive, audience. It is the same team and they were, from what it seemed, "walkers" in this story. They are not going to complain, they have no reason. The ones that count are those who disagree. They may be grumpy, but they me be correct, too. Those two things are not mutually exclusive.

I am not sure that word "fighting" in this context is the best one. Probably, "discussing" would be better. Ok, Robert and Michael are fighting, no matter what we call it, but that is their little gig and rest of us are just watching from outside of the stadium.

To be honest, I am still trying to figure out where "talking" ends and "walking" starts. Not to mention what is wrong with "talking".
jf47t
116 posts
 

"It is true, but it does not count at all. It is a willing, but captive, audience. It is the same team and they were, from what it seemed, "walkers" in this story. They are not going to complain, they have no reason. The ones that count are those who disagree. They may be grumpy, but they me be correct, too. Those two things are not mutually exclusive."

I disagree with this completely all day long. You see you didn’t mean to but you just did what you accuse the OP of doing. You were just prejudice toward the Tunees. You have no idea who the individual Tunees are, how long they have been Tunees or what made them go from the typical HEA over to tuning. You did however make a fair statement about the some of the gang who disagreed "they may be grumpy". Trust me they are grumpy!

Now back to the OP. The Tunees didn’t become Tunees because they were seduced by MG quite the opposite. The Tunees became Tunees because they "Walked". They tried tuning and it led them to a deeper meaning and understanding of the hobby of listening to music. You see glupson even you have a built in prejudice why? Because you assume instead of try. You see "talk and not walk"? You assume it’s a captive audience without ever doing what they do. You presume you know who Michael is based on the talk your reading instead of finding out by doing.

It’s all very simple and won’t ever change no matter who is doing the "talking" you me or anyone else. glupson your going to keep on being bias because you have no foundation past words. You will continue to recycle your words along with the rest who are talking. No matter how you try to understand there is only one way to get to understanding. You either talk or you walk. The only way you will ever know if you are walking is if you walk.

Post removed 
jf47t
116 posts
 

Hindu Love Gods

A part of rock history. HLG is one of those recordings that was done during the making of another recording "Sentimental Hygiene" (Warren Zevon). Hindu recorded these covers and never intended to release the songs but the session was so good it had to be. I had to look this up because this cd is killer and MG told me it was done with REM members. The soundstage sounds to be about 20’ x 20’ x 10’(H). The front to back goes about 3’ behind my head and there’s great side to side presence. The drums are bold and full of midrange with the cymbals splashing across the whole stage when they hit. The top end is very warm sounding and there are no holes in the stage anywhere from the beginning of this recording all the way till the end. Kick drum is perfect and together with the snare it gives off a punchy rib cage kick and also warmth. Nothing is coming from the speakers (an MG trait) and there’s that MG headphone feel to the sound. Michael loves his nearfield. I did want to mention something about the kick drum. Michael has it tuned in to almost sounding like a big floor tom. I need to go back and listen more because there’s some creative drum stuff going on later in the session where the bottom drops way down and shakes the whole room. Nice and beautiful and very deep. All the instruments are clear and in their own spaces and any pans are very obvious. An easy to follow soundstage. Garage sounding? I don’t know. It does have that in the room with you sound if that’s what you mean but I would say more of a small bar type of sound. It’s a recording one can rock to.

More to discover