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
uberwaltz, To some, tweaking/tuning is the hobby, not a distraction on the way to bliss. Many seem to think of it as a waste of time and energy, but some like it so there should be nothing wrong with them having their LEGOs. If one wants to hang chicken bones, the other putting dominoes under amplifiers, third one demagnetizing plastic, fourth one disassembling an expensive piece of equipment to move the musicians in the room, so what. Silly thing is that those who are not that interested in doing such things are annoyed by those who do while those who do such things seem to think they are something much better than those who cannot care less about chicken bones, etc. That is messed up. |
Some of the people might have just been quicker on their way to success so they are content. geoffkait, lots of this thread is populated by people who refuse to go with the program. The program of accepting that they should do something that seems unbelievable to them or otherwise be called cows, clowns, and whatever else. That is what the whole ruckus has mostly been about. They ask questions and want to learn. First part of the thread has been full of posts demanding those. |
geoffkait, "A hobby should be active, interactive."I think I understand the connection to audio equipment you are making, but I wonder would the principle apply to stamp-collecting, too. You buy an expensive stamp, and paint on it to make it a little better to your eyes. It would be the active part. I am struggling to imagine interactive part of that proposal. Stamp saying "What are you doing to me, I was already great", or something like that. |
geoffkait, "...the tweakers, the doers,,went one way and the anti tweakers, the ones who touted the equipment, went another."Although it is kind of a right description of a situation, maybe "anti-tweakers" is not the right word. Maybe "non-tweakers" would be more correct. There is a crowd out there that is not bothered by tweaking, but is not against anyone doing it, either. They are not interested in fighting about it. They even have minds open that there may be something to it, but have decided it is not what they would pursue for different reasons, inconvenience being one of them. uberwaltz suggested he is exactly that, if I understood his most recent posts correctly. "Anti-tweakers" suggest more active approach to tweaking, even if it is in negative context. I would guess, entirely based on nothing remotely tangible, that most of the people who bought anything more than a Beats portable speaker so they could listen to music in some "better quality" fall in "non-tweakers" category. Having said that, this thread is populated with a number of "tweakers", "anti-tweakers", and a decent number of "non-tweakers". Nice mix, I would say. |
Michael Green, Thanks for your post. It does bring new questions and clarifies some of the things. First, as it was addressed to me I will put a disclaimer for myself, I am not on either side of this thread. I am more of a curious spectator, even if it labels me as a time-waster for you. I am a non-tweaker, non-tuner, music-in-the-background most of the time, etc., but do not discard me quite yet. I have minimal knowledge, and no formal education, about electronics including capacitors. I have more knowledge and more formal education about some other topics that are not within the scope of Audiogon. "No one I know, including myself in this, has ever said they can’t hear the difference between the sounds of capacitors. If someone claims to be a HEA audiophile and makes these types of claims, there’s no point for someone like me to talk to them. Do you honestly think I should be spending my time talking to them?"It depends on how much time you have, how much enthusiasm, and your personality would matter, too. Most of the people have not had an opportunity to hear the same equipment with different capacitors. They have no time or skills for experimenting with it. To those more suspicious ones it seems like a bogus claim, sort of a placebo, rather than real effect, and they would like more explanation why that would happen before they "waste" their time and try for themselves. Probably smaller group (that I belong to) would take it at face value, acknowledging they have never had an experience that would prove or disprove claims about different-sounding capacitors. They will appreciate the opportunity if it comes along, but will not actively pursue it or dismiss the claim as entirely fabricated. They are happy knowing there is some opinion/experience out there. For them, it is a cumbersome idea that may work. Dismissing both of these groups as time-wasters may be economical/efficient for you personally, but does not seem fair to them. There is also a true disadvantage to it. Surrounding yourself with only the people who see/hear things your way may be a dead end of progress that you are, I believe, still striving for. Considering thoughts and views of someone not completely aligned with yours may open up new avenues. Tweak them in some way. Not everyone out here who questions you is out to get you and prove you are a fake. Some are, but many are not. Time is one big constraint and I have been surprised how much time people on this thread, you included, have been able to put aside for this purpose. As that friend of yours said, maybe most are retired. Time is a big constraint when it comes to you debating what is clear to you and not to someone else. However, it is also a constraint for those who cannot "do" all the things as suggested. "But if they believe there are no sonic differences it’s unproductive for them to be talking to me or I them."This may be one view that I could agree with. If someone just does not want to accept the possibility that differences may exist, it is a lost battle for both. This thread is full of posts claiming "does" or "does not", but there are posts in the middle, too. Those are from curious ones with no experience. Again, most of the people cannot afford time, skill, or money to perform "doing" just for the sake of trying. They would like to be informed how believable the claim is first. "I’m honestly not interested in talking to the guy who isn’t sure it works, when I have thousands of guys to talk to who are actually tuning."That is very fair to admit, but also closes you in the bubble of some sorts. It depends on your ultimate goal if that is the ideal way to approach this issue. If it is about you sharing your experience and knowledge, or sustaining your business within limited hours of the day that you have, it is almost the only way you can do it. As you say, there is enough people out there who share same passion. However, that approach is not promoting ideas you believe in. It leaves those who would like to know more about it ousted from the possibility. You may not have time or system to expand so you may be fine with that, but in a greater scheme of things, it becomes a circle, not a broadening/sharing/improving knowledge and reach. If you tell me glupson that you aren’t sure if tuning works, what’s wrong with me saying "come back to me when you know it does and we can tune together"?Well, that one we would have to disagree on as we may have different approaches to things because of who knows what, including personalities. Someone could say that it is wrong as you dismiss the person just because she/he is not sure about something. One thing is "tuning is crap and you are full of garbage" and that leads to nowhere. Another thing is "I am not sure if and how it works, I have never heard it". Many people would be interested in results, but where are they going to hear it first? At least to find some information that does not seem out-of-this-world? Those people get shut out of tuning. I am not implying you could or should be a guru saving them, but just dismissing them as not being worthy of talking to is also doing nobody a favor. Why would someone who doesn’t "do" even post on a thread talking about doing?That is simple. Some post just to kill time and have some interaction with other people. Others peep in, get interested, ask questions, diversify their thoughts and views in the process, and are happy they did. I, for one, am that kind. I doubt that such an approach would be unwelcome in most of discussions in any other field. In fact, such visitors are often warmly welcomed. It is fairly easy to explain something to an expert, but try explaining it to someone who is not that knowledgeable. "I’m never going to convince you or amg or prof or whoever."Here we have three different approaches. I know nothing about prof who became the loudest voice in this written communication. I disagreed with him on some of the approaches he has had, including not giving up when it was obvious that two of you were on two lines that will never meet. However, his questions are clearly based on the current state of research methodology. His questions are straight from the handbook for a reviewer at some specialized scientific publication. I am talking about questions about tuning results etc., not about your personality or presentation. The questions he asked would be nothing special in today's science. Anyone would be expecting them while still writing their first sentence. Now, some of that may be what I disagree with, but that is how it goes out there these days and prof decided to follow that well-established and accepted path. As for me, I abstained from arguing about results of tuning while keeping mind open that it might work and that I may one day hear it. In fact, I suggested that those who talked badly about the speakers you build just based on their description (something with white vans, I am not sure about details anymore) wait and go and hear them before dismissing them as bad. I thought that they did not separate their own annoyance by you (a person) from something inanimate that you are connected to. Someone says "oh I’ve done that and didn’t hear a difference", well why talk to me about it then?It is another simple one. The person wants to discuss why two of you, doing the same thing, came to different conclusion. If you are right, she/he should have heard a difference and vice versa. If there is a difference between your results, there may be something else at play and refusing to discuss it will not better anything. It will make two circles spinning close to each other, but still alone and closed. There may be a hundred reasons for someone not to hear what you hear. From haircut to broken equipment. It helps to try and narrow it down. It brings progress to the hobby/business that both of you cherish. Little incremental moves that, after a while, make a visible progress. What is wrong with that? By the way, in one of my recent posts I mentioned that you are the biggest talker on this thread. That was a compliment. I am not sure why your original post seems to deem "talkers" as some less-worthy crowd. It is not easy to be a good talker. Most of your posts are written quite well, despite someone agreeing or disagreeing with the content. Sure, someone may say that you evade etc., but you do it well nevertheless. I will look for grannyring's post about OP. I am curious what is there. On a different note, I did ask recently what it is about you that ignites so many people, call it rubs them the wrong way. I have a feeling it is not just the content of the discussion as responses, at least to me, seem to be out of proportion. Just your existence on this thread, as anonymous and ultimately unimportant for the world that it is, brings some combative tendencies out. Do you have any idea what it is? Does it happen to you in real life? It may have nothing to do with audio topics, but I noticed it over the days so I thought I might ask. |
astewart8944, I kind of enjoy this thread because of its occasional bizarreness. Cherry pies are, in my opinion, nothing compared to Kim Jong Un, Planck, and Einstein who somehow appeared here in the early days. I cannot remember how they visited, but that was a breakthrough moment in my interest so I continued following. |
trelja, Sadly, that's always been how a lot of folks set up their loudspeakers.This is certainly true, but the biggest part of that is that it is inconvenient to walk around the speakers that are in the middle of the room, or something like that. Perfect position may not always be the livable-with one. There comes a trade-off. I am sure that modest systems may outperform more expensive ones when everything is aligned well, but I would expect that, if both are placed where they are allowed to be placed, expensive ones will still be better. Of course, I have no examples to provide, but simply have that feeling based on my own very limited experience. Strangely so, in my own room, speakers really did not have that much difference when moved away from the walls and the trade-off was clearly on the side of "closer to the wall". I wonder how many people who read these threads (not only this one) have an actual dedicated listening room. It must be a good number. Putting your music reproduction system in the living room may not allow for perfect positioning and tweaking/tuning, but adds the benefit of having it close to ears. That may be good enough of a proposition to some. If I am correct that more expensive system under the same circumstances will still outperform more expensive one, in some areas it may end up being cheaper investing more in equipment than in another room. A person just has to accept that the system is not playing to the full potential which, I am aware of that, may drive many people who visit Audiogon up the wall. Along the lines of speaker positioning, some speaker manufacturers, not the shabbiest ones at that, proudly display speakers on their websites right next to the wall or really close to it. There are even those placed right in front of the glass wall. Check Dynaudio and Dali websites for such examples. |
Michael Green, It is absolutely true that with a bit of adjustment, whatever way that adjustment happens, overall sound can be bettered. What I was actually referring to is the idea of positioning speakers and making inconvenient room changes if a person does not have a dedicated listening room. In such a case, it may be difficult to apply whatever needs to be applied and that for whatever reason (not enough space, looks of it, etc.). The ideal solution would have to be a separate room for listening to music in which a person could do whatever she/he finds helpful to achieve whatever sound is desired. Now, additional rooms can cost upwards of a million dollars and that is for a very modest size. At least, in some locations, you may be talking about half a million. What I meant was that the sound could be bettered by buying more expensive equipment when you have no spare room to play with. It would be far from the ultimate environment for that equipment, but would still improve the sound for less money, making it more cost/effective option. Again, far from what anyone wants to do, but the reality is that many cannot have all their wishes fulfilled. |
trelja, geoffkait, Those are some longer and more complicated reads than usual on this thread, but they seem interesting enough to take time to read them and maybe learn something. Thank you for that. That is, aside of Kim Jong Un, Planck, Einstein, a few Amish proverbs, and some incidental poetry what I find valuable in this confused thread. Every now and then, something shows up that brings something new, at least to me. Cows listening to accordion somewhere in the Alps? Check. At least they were not ski jumping there. Of course, not to forget cherry pies. They will enter the classic literature of Internet audio. Along with that, comes some more audio-thought-provoking material that broadens the horizon. Original intention of this thread, whatever that was, might have been completely missed, but as a wastebasket you can come to and pick your recyclables from, it is great. |
jf47t, "n) There is no replacing physically doing. Talk does not replace walk." You just hurt the feelings of all the theoretical physicists in the world. Thankfully, it does not appear that any is on this thread. Many times, it is easier to do something than to figure it out by thinking about it. There should really be nothing wrong with learning how to swim before trying to swim the marathon. You can practice and perfect it by doing it, but first learn what to expect. Many events cannot replace something else, but they can complement it. It is synergy that brings benefits, not exclusiveness. It may not have anything to do with the intent of this thread, but that is how it goes in general. |
jf47t, Oh my (again), it is all fine but tone it down. You are not doing Michael Green much favor with this kind of descriptions. I really have nothing against him or his business, but you make it seem freaky. I believe it is accurate and it does not hurt anyone, but it is a bit odd. "If you saw the amount of decisions he makes a day and the types of decision it would probably blow some circuits."If this sentence does not blow about twenty fuses here, we are lucky. None of us knows how many and what kinds of decisions Michael makes a day, but some may make even more and types you may be surprised, not to say scared, to imagine you or Michael have to make. This is generally an anonymous forum and most of us do not know much about what other people do every day. Save for geoffkait, he knows it all. |
jf47t, "Please don't do that. That was extremely heartless and cruel. I think I get it now. No matter how much soul someone pours into the entertainment business your here to rip them down."Huh, now that is bordering on bizzare. Ripping down? Who is? Whom? When? Why? Cruel? Heartless? Extremely? Whose posts you are commenting on? This is really strange. I would like to correct my mistake, but I am lost in these woods. Do not be ashamed of being associated with us. We really are not associated. I have no idea who prof is and how he looks like and what he does and where he even is and I am as sure that prof is the same with me. We know nothing about you, either, except for what you write. Really, I do not want to be extreme in any way, nor would I like to be cruel or heartless. I read prof's last post again and was kind of proud of him how mellow and peaceful he was in it. Can you help me, or maybe us (prof and me) out of this twilight zone? |
audiopoint, One for your collection of interesting reads... https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jopy.12396 |
stevecham, Once you find out, let the rest of us know. The meaning ended up being a little chat with unknown people, relevance is still mostly missing, knowledge was there if you were patient enough and if you were willing to extract it between issues that were promoted. It is not your usual thread with questions, answers, and moving on to another question. |
Whatever it has been, I am much more puzzled by sudden appearance of jf47t. That seems like a hit job. It was like a character assassination. Gradually trying to portray Michael Green as a weirdo incapable of almost anything but listening to music. To me, Michael Green leaves an impression of a person who can engage in polite conversation, probably pleasant to hang out with in real life, and trying to promote and support his opinions, regardless of if you agree with them or not and regardless if he answers directly or not. jf47t just made him seem like some really strange human which, I think, is not fair. |
prof, If it is of any consolation to you, most of the people here do understand your points. We may not all agree with some of your approaches all the time, but that is some healthy diversity, I hope. However, I still think you are wasting your energy on trying to prove your points. Whoever has been following this thread has already joined one of the three camps (yours, Michael Green's, or the middle one). Answers you are asking for will never come. Two of you are simply on two parallel lines, each one right and straight on his own, but never to meet. To me, Michael Green is like some picture of a renaissance man who does many things and does them out of passion or for whatever purpose he has for it. Electronics, carpentry, playing music live, studio work, debating (not your way, though), above average cars with some flair, traveling, having a diverse life along the way, and what not. You, however, bring the structured standards of 21st century and expect him to abide by them. That will not work. His approach clashes with what you are expecting big time. You, or anybody else, do not know if he is intentionally avoiding your questions or has no idea what you are even talking about and simply cannot answer. He openly admitted that he was not pursuing credentials so he may not be that familiar with approach you have. It does not matter if his claims about tuning are correct or not. I am not trying to defend Michael Green at all. I am just observing as disparity between two camps has become so wide that it may be something else than stubbornness or arrogance at play. I mostly deal with people for whom your scientific approach is like drinking water, but I do have a number of friends who are highly educated and very intelligent who would be unfamiliar with methods you are requesting. They are just not in the field that uses such a methodology. Now, imagine someone not that young (forgive me if I am wrong, Michael, I do not know your age but have a feeling you are not underage) so has his ways already carved, with strong personality, beliefs based on his experience, and no formal education that forced him to go through the methods you are asking about in tuning. You cannot expect the person to jump up and down and give you p value of capacitor differences. Of course, the idea behind the OP is vague to me, too, and both of you can argue about it as much as you please. |
geoffkait,
Some people will and do agree with you on description of the CD sound. Maybe not all CDs and not all the words you used, but in that direction. At least part of the answer is that, despite admitting all those annoying shortcomings, they have no other option but to enjoy the way it is or stop enjoying altogether. They are content because improvement is not feasible under reasonable terms for them. The more I read about descriptions of tuning and tweaking, the more I am sure it, at this stage, cannot be something too many people would or could go for. It is time and effort expenditure that may outweigh potential benefit in the sound improvement. Many CDs really sound crappy, we all have a bunch of them, I am sure, but most people have no interest in playing with equipment on an hourly basis just to extract one more Hertz from it. It detracts from other things, including actually listening to that same CD. And that is even without opening the topic if all those tweaks. tunings really make a difference for which everyone has her/his own ideas. |
That is probably true. Thread has developed in so many directions that anything that was planned could be found here. You could say it would have geography in it and you would be right. Philosophy, poetry, mathematics, even some history of audio that I just learned, it is all here. |
