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,

I am not a psychiatrist at all. Just noticing significant flaws in your previous post and attempting to discuss them before they become a solidified truth.

glubson, I'm pretty sure you're exhibiting at least one of the symptoms as we speak.

geoffkait,

You are likely right. That just shows that looking at selected symptoms, without considering as many variables as possible, is flawed approach.


Now, you can draw some parallel to audio reproduction.

Post removed 
In reality the grain in wood is not (rpt) not analogous to the “grain” in metal conductors. The grain in metal conductors is actually the symmetrical crystal structure of all natural metals and some other materials such as quartz and most mineral crystals. Because wood grain is usually oriented in *one plane* (not one direction) it has practically nothing whatsoever to do with why wire in cables and fuses is directional. The grain in wood in not directional itself, the wood exhibits directionality according to the *plane* of the grain, determined by how it is cut, a butcher block, for example, or the Mpingo disc. Cut that way on purpose. Capish? The directionality of wire is due to unavoidable *deformation* of the symmetrical crystal structure during manufacturing along the longitudinal axis of the wire. Like porcupine quills, it’s easier to rub them with the direction of the quills than against it.