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
Anyone compared different woods under turntables or/and tape decks ? I didn't get to it yet . There should be a difference, theoretically.
Michael, how about speakers made from Brazilian Rosewood or other rosewoods ? Speaking of speakers as instruments. Before tuning wall current and doing other interesting things, it's the speakers where it starts.

Hi Inna

The wood I have voiced up for people's turntables the last couple of years are..

Redwood (3 varieties) Cherry, Western Red Cedar, Poplar, Brazilian Pine, Beech, Birch, Walnut, Basswood, Purple Heart, Maple, African Rosewood, Bubinga...and I know I'm forgetting a few. I posted it somewhere on TuneLand.

On speakers there are several main parts for my use. Front baffle board, sides top bottom, rear panel, tuning bars, plates (like tweeter plates), divide (for floorstanders), seams and speaker baskets (frames).

I've used some rosewoods, but you have to be careful not to let the notes shift up or get phase-y and some woods do this easier than others, especially when you get over 1/4" thick. You can layer woods but that gets tricky too. Moving to the desert in 2004 changed my designing drastically, for the better. There are some of the best dry houses in the world here. A dry house is better than a kiln.

We also do all of our own veneering here, which gives me a lot more control. Being able to make your own layers with skins and pulp or hardwood has been a dream come true. You can pretty much ask me to create a sound you've wanted but have been missing and I can now do it. Pretty cool! There are some reviews coming out on the new Revs soon so that's exciting.

Michael Green

http://www.michaelgreenaudio.net/

Post removed 
That's a lot of work and takes a real good hearing. 
Sound I would want ? Paco de Lucia's custom Conde Hermanos guitar, to start with and go from there. Finest instrument I have ever heard live. I heard a few fine opera voices too but not top level.