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
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 

tomcy6
Geoff, You are a "walker." I think that having discovered the beneficial effects of Mpingo discs, you would make some up in maple, spruce, Brazillian rosewood, etc. in different sizes and shapes. Why would ebony discs be the only wooden objects to have a beneficial effect on sound? The tuning possibilities are endless, or maybe not. Isn’t your curiosity piqued?

>>>>Yes, my curiosity was piqued. Wasn’t yours?

I already outlined the logic behind wood, especially the highly resonant Mpingo wood. The Mpingo discs are not used as feet. Other parameters besides the type of wood are important. E.g., when wood is used for a top plate of an iso stand or a self it should be a minimum thickness to resist bending forces.  I also outlined my logic for choosing non-wood materials for coupling, I.e., extremely hard materials for grounding components and iso stands. The logic included ranking the best to worst materials for use as coupling cones, from NASA grade ceramics and diamonds to brass and carbon fiber and wood on the lower end of the hardness scale, corresponding to the best sound to worst sound. Perhaps you were daydreaming and missed it.
Post removed 
prof
3,473 posts
 
BTW,

on mpingo discs:

I had done some “walking” with the Shun Mook products in the past - their Speakers which I thought were terrific, and their mpingo discs.   I tried the mpingo discs in the ways they instructed.  Didn’t hear any effect whatsoever.
 
But of course negative results never count. I’ll just let geoffk add that to his Prof Can’t Hear arsenal of jibes.  There you go geoff: a free gimme :-)
glupson
7,842 posts
 
In case anyone is interested, the article that jf47t referenced regarding my question about people on one picture brings some unique view I had never expected to see anywhere. It is the first time that word "bureaucracy" appears as something positive what we should be grateful for. It may not help the sound, but dead ears do not hear so it may be a fair trade off.

As Michael indicated when I interviewed him regarding the studio designs, significant barriers to new ways of thinking are encountered when one comes up against the bureaucracy. In this case, state fire codes prohibited using the kind of wood materials for the walls and floors of the studio that were originally intended.
glupson
7,842 posts
 
Michael Green,

There are a few pictures in that 2006 article that jf47t referenced. One of the pictures shows the ceiling vent opening close to one of the devices you had placed (it says "The Steinway with microphones and PZCs" under the picture although I think it is not related to the picture itself). What do you do about it? Wouldn’t the air coming from the vent forcefully throw all the preconceived theories away? All the ideas and drawings would be wiped out as irrelevant in this case. Is there any secret to managing that?


I might have missed it in the article, but was that set-up and your involvement just for that particular recording or was that studio arranged by you for the longer run?

https://positive-feedback.com/Issue23/green.htm
More to discover