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
prof
3,473 posts
 
glupson

When geoffkait claims to have identified a fallacy, this is as good as a guarantee that you have not used that fallacy.

(And of course your post contained no such fallacy).

Congratulations, the point you made has received the geoffkait seal of approval.

;-)
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Wow! I just relayed the story, gentle readers, of the musician high up in the food chain who was apparently unable to hear properly or didn’t know what he was listening to. Then right out of the blue I’m attacked by the professor who, if memory serves, cannot for the life of him hear the difference for vibration isolation or cables. Coincidence?

I’ve seen stalkers o’er my day....😬
glupson
7,842 posts
 

geoffkait,

Regardless of others' views of music vs. sound, what Authority were you appealing to when you mentioned...


"He was a musician, first oboe in National Symphony Orchestra, DC."

It seemed like a reasonable statement of facts that served its purpose of describing the situation very clearly. Who would have thought that it had hidden meaning, too.


"...who was apparently unable to hear properly or didn’t know what he was listening to."

I understand that you disliked what you heard there, but may it be that said musician simply had different preferences than you did? Or, may it be, that his perception of sound is biased because of the position and surroundings, not to mention loudness level, that he frequently finds himself in while playing music himself?

geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Gee whiz, glupson, you’re over thinking again. I judged his system sucked. No hidden meaning. That’s the advantage of knowing the difference between bad sound and good sound. I realize as I’m typing you probably have no idea what I’m talking about. 😀 I know what’s coming next. But what about this, what about that? 😛 look, I’m going to help you out. Here are some suggested questions,

1. What makes you a better judge of sound than a professional musician?

2. What if your hearing is actually bad and you’re deluded?

3. How can you be so sure of your hearing ability? Don’t you have any doubt?

4. Can you prove your hearing ability in a blind test?
glupson
7,842 posts
 

geoffkait,

"I know what’s coming next. But what about this, what about that?"

That is kind of funny. I do not have more questions of that kind at this moment, but am glad that you think of me that way. After all, isn't it you who thinks one should never be content and should always try to improve? I will take it as a compliment. Thank you.


Hidden meaning I was talking about was you saying that your mentioning of the oboist was an appeal to authority. It did not come across as such. It came across just as a plain easily-understandable sentence. I was obviously underthinking.


More to discover