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
 

So let's recount for a moment, in case anyone has forgotten:

Someone starts a thread talking about empiricism vs theory, criticizing "talking" vs walking.

Then at some point he starts making claims - "talking" - about things like capacitors changing sound when untied. 

He's then asked reasonable questions such as:

1. What measurements can you present to support your claim there are  changes between a tied and untied capacitor?

2.  How do you relate those measurements to audibility?  

3.  How did you test this hypothesis while controlling for variables like imagination and bias?

Then the OP runs away from those questions.  And has an underling take his place in continually avoiding any tough questions, supplying instead constant over-the-top praise of the OP.

Leaving us to question the OP's actual commitment to empiricism and "walking."

 
glupson
7,842 posts
 
prof,

do not take it that close to the heart. It is what it is.

My curiosity led me to the Tuneland forum, just as a reader as I have nothing to contribute. Not that I contributed much here, either. It is interesting there. It really is. Not so much about music, but overall approach. You got a honorable mention, I think. I was quoted. In a negative context, though. Misunderstood, too. Anyway, just like this thread ended up being a lot about personalities (with Michael Green being cited the most), the thread there is also very much about personalities here. Mostly in a subtly demeaning manner, but it brought couple of thoughts, too. One is the claim, or whatever it could be classified as, that most of the guys here are retired people who have nothing better to do (maybe not the exact quote, but something like that). I wonder if that is a fair assessment of demographics here. I cannot even try to guess which one of you does what. Nothing wrong with being retired, but is it really true that most posters here are retired?


Now, don’t go to Tuneland and then lose your cool. It is interesting there, but only if you can control yourself.

As an observation, at least two posters there make same spelling mistakes.

jf47t
116 posts
 

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?


glupson
7,842 posts
 
jf47t,

That was innovative. Thanks.
Post removed 
More to discover