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
Post removed 
glupson
7,842 posts
 
mitch2,

You made me laugh, but you are on point, audio or not. I am with you, awaiting the result of these deliberation/ Except that I do not have an SUV. Mine is lower mass. Wait, we have not determined if lower mass system is better than a higher mass system yet, anyway.
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
Well, something’s vacating something, all right. 
glupson
7,842 posts
 
audiopoint,

In all fairness, it never says that the statement about Michael Green was made by Steinway & Co. or someone representing it in any way. True, most of us, me included, first thought of the piano makers, but it could have been anyone with last name Steinway. It may be misleading because of our views, but it may really be true. Regardless of what it is, it deserves benefit of the doubt that it was some Steinway man who said it.

The part about Ray Charles, Beatles, etc. is mentioned often on this thread. Where exactly is it on the website? I tried to find it, but could not. What I learned about myself here is that I have a hard time finding things on Michael Green associated websites. Even when many others saw it, I cannot find it. That does not include tuning description/instructions from start to finish. I am starting to believe it is not me, but the website design.

However, it would take only one project in one studio that is used for mixing/mastering/anything of recordings by said artists and a person could say that her/his work was used for recordings of those artists. Many, if not all, of those mentioned musicians have had their recordings worked on in some way relatively recently, including after their deaths. If Michael Green did contribute to such an establishment, he could truthfully say he was involved. Maybe not sitting there during recording sessions of Yesterday or Hey Jude, but there would be some involvement. Think about Bob Ludwig’s studio. Many well-known artists’ recordings have been worked on there. Whoever supplied monitors can say she/he was involved in the process and these are the names who used it.
glupson
7,842 posts
 
audiopoint,

Sorry, only later I realized you did address the possibility that Steinway was some friend or anyone else named that way and not the piano company itself.
More to discover