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

Jf47t,

You posted:

“Picture having a system from start to finish without any enclosed chassis? I'm not just talking about the playback part but all the way from the microphone forward. He started with the tunable studio (live room), control room, mastering room, in studio playback room all tunable. All the equipment was without their chassis, or custom built without chassis from the microphones on. No cable barrels no plugs every stage was either hardwired or clipped. No cover even on the mixers.”


First you say “imagine” then state “he started with” so which is it?

Does this recording studio exist? Does it have a physical address?

Can we book studio time in order to see and hear what it is you are attempting to tell us?


You posted:

“No cable barrels, no plugs”


I am assuming you are talking about the XLR, TRS and RCA mic and signal cables but are we also talking Alternating Current power cable plugs as in hardwired to the wall feeds? Are the steel covers then removed from the primary AC panels too?

Are you stating all the equipment covers have been removed from the total electronics package consisting of amps, compressors, all outboard digital effects, power supplies, microphones and the mixers too?

In closing, 

We would really enjoy seeing pictures of this studio to determine if in fact it does exist and is not imaginary or imaginarily engineered so do you have any?

Robert

These are all questions about audio and application so I am hoping this post remains void of a couple people filing complaint reports hence leading to the removal of this post. People want to know more...





Perhaps brother Robert is being a tad argumentative. The other feller actually said “picture” not “imagine.” It’s a figure of speech, anyway, for crying out loud. So all your huffing and puffing about imaginary and imaginary engineering come across a little bit desperate. Cut us some slack, Jack.

audiopoint,


I think that geoffkait may be right about his view of your most recent post, but it would also be interesting to see that studio that jf47t described. If for nothing else, then for the novelty of it. I am trying to imagine ("picture" in my head) it and cannot come up with anything but a place you need to walk around very carefully in order not to trip or damage something. I am probably wrong about that. Ok, I am surely wrong, but that is what I imagine/picture.

geoffkait  re. "wrong thread"
...twas early in the morning and I was sitting on the "throne" so the message on my s-phone "post deleted due to profanity" had me off ballance. ;-)