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


michaelgreenaudio
glupson
7,842 posts
 
prof,

I learned from observing you. I do not expect straight answers from anyone. If they come, I will happily consider them and see what I can learn from them. If they don't, I have lived without them until now quite fine so I will not miss them at all.

I do have fun reading posts marginally related to the thread. There are things to consider. I bought that Hindu Love Gods CD based on jf47ts recommendation/description and I have not regretted it. In fact, I bought another one for a friend of mine and he likes it, too. However, I do think that some of the despicably-constructed posts should be highlighted and confronted. I cannot care less if someone, I forgot who it was, is ashamed to be associated with you and me without really ever meeting us, but some of the most recent posts crossed the line of any tolerance.
mitch2
4,293 posts
 
@glupson 
Would you consider that "fully tuned"?
glupson
7,842 posts
 
mitch2,

It certainly is fully in tune with this thread.
jf47t
116 posts
 

"It would be interesting to talk to the drummer, if he still remembers it, and hear if all of that actually took place. Can it be that, by changing whatever is being tuned/tweaked the nature of what happened during the recording gets misrepresented?"

That's a frightening thought. That would mean that only one system and one set of ears is correct and all the others are misrepresenting.

grannyring's avatar
grannyring
6,626 posts
 
Can you please tell us how the Pioneer amp went from rags to riches? I must admit I am almost out of patience with all the vague posts with no specifics.  What mods were done to it...specifically?  If we cannot get any real answers, then I will also need to move on as tuning seems to be all talk with vague and invisible walk. 
More to discover