Who would know who is right in this employment saga, but maybe there should be some peace treaty on that one. Let’s pretend that it was so long ago that everyone already forgot details that make the story. "Who cares how much stock Michael owned in RoomTune?" Robert does, apparently. Was it really listed on stock exchange? Just curious and, guys, this is not meant to start a fight. |
Cows were in a much nicer environment and were livelier. This last video was destructive and overall negatively-charged. |
Michael Green,
I was thinking about your sitcom deal.Maybe you should ask your agent to change it in promotional materials into a "walkcom" or "talkcom". It would be more aligned with the original name and would add the cache of something new. Sitcom just does not cut it.
I would agree with you that, at times, the topic of this thread becomes more of an argument about someone’s (not only yours although you are the frontrunner) personality which, I think, it should not be. It is understandable that, at times, people confuse it when not keeping focus only on words written. Along the way, we all got some impression about other posters’ personalities, but they should not be the topic. At least I think so or at least until someone directly starts insulting us. Benign joking comment could be fine, but not full-blown attack.
As for the original post, I think it could have been phrased differently and still promote discussion, but it was not me who wrote it so it really does not matter. That is the personal style, in this case yours, and it is what it is. I think that people got offended by being called "fakers" or something like that while they are trying their best to the extent of their abilities, circumstances, and beliefs. That is quite understandable and then they said "Look who is talking". So you were on the spot. |
geoffkait,
Why do you think that the devil is a "he"?
|
jf47t,
Another by the way, my Hindu Love Gods CD arrived. I did not get to listen to all of it, in fact I listened only to that one song you mentioned, but it was worth it.
I did my empirical testing and tried it over iHome Arc Bluetooth speaker and over bigger equipment. In both cases it sounds like a garage band playing in some garage. Maybe with open doors, but still a garage. It is all a good thing as it matches the atmosphere of the song. I am not sure how much better your experience was after listening to it with tuning you mentioned, but I doubt it will ever take a prize for the clearest and smoothest recording of the year. Still, it is just what it is supposed to be. Thanks for recommendation.
|
jf47t, There’s a huge golf between "why fake it?" and "your faking it". That is the difference between "implying" and "stating". "MG’s not going to engage in a fight over stuff he has done..." That is the problem that others had. If you read again, you will notice that their major displeasure was his non-responsiveness to direct questions. I cannot say my experience mirrors that one, but others complained. A few straight answers, even if incorrect in reader's view, would have been way better than nothing. Like this, it comes across as "you are not worthy of me answering to you" to people and then they start looking for details. It is easy to insult people over the Internet without ever intending or noticing. It is an art how to get out of it with dignity. In others' views, I am almost certain, Michael failed that "get out of it" part. I doubt he intentionally wanted to insult anyone, but that is what they saw. At the same time, it is also an art to curb yourself in such situations and not get overly emotional to overreact when feeling insulted. "If you read the Tunees who have come up, it’s all positive correct? Happy successful listeners no negatives to be found." It is true, but it does not count at all. It is a willing, but captive, audience. It is the same team and they were, from what it seemed, "walkers" in this story. They are not going to complain, they have no reason. The ones that count are those who disagree. They may be grumpy, but they me be correct, too. Those two things are not mutually exclusive. I am not sure that word "fighting" in this context is the best one. Probably, "discussing" would be better. Ok, Robert and Michael are fighting, no matter what we call it, but that is their little gig and rest of us are just watching from outside of the stadium. To be honest, I am still trying to figure out where "talking" ends and "walking" starts. Not to mention what is wrong with "talking". |
jf47t,
You might have misunderstood my sentences. I was saying that original post implied some people were "fakers" which insulted them. Then they started picking and picking and found things they thought Michael Green is "faking" in a sense. You can buy it or not, but that is what happened. Read responses and it should be clear. Maybe people did not say "Look who is talking" in exactly same words, but they focused on him and his responses, track record, whatever you want, and they came up with their own conclusions. You and I can think they are or they are not right, but that is what happened. A tiny little bit more timid original post would have prevented it and nobody would ever read this exchange between Robert and Michael. Which, by the way, seems plausible from both sides, just not at the same time. As some poster recently said "I have no dog in this fight", but I am able to witness.
|
geoffkait,
Could you elaborate on when talking stops and walking starts, in relation to this thread? I have asked that a time or two ago, but have not yielded any answer. Does "walking" mean you build your own things or "walking" is also buying already finished products from someone else and then hearing whatever you are listening for?
In fact, there are a few questions that I had asked for which you replied that you were still thinking about the response. Are you pretending to be a little slow or what? It does not bother me, we both seem to be slow then, but I have not forgotten.
"Talker" or not, I make my own sentences. Can you beat that? |
jf47t,
That was a really detailed description of the CD. Very specific. I cannot say I heard it the same way in my, still, very limited listening, but I have to agree about "in the room" description. To me, it was like a small space, rough overall sound, but, yes, with a kick of some sorts. Something like a starting band practicing in the garage and getting it just right. Maybe a small bar, I can take that, but the feeling would be of a dive bar rather than of some more upscale establishment. It was definitely worth getting. Well, hoping that other songs are at least close to the level of the one you mentioned. |
jf47t,
Thanks, but no need, I am really a very low level music user. More of a plug-and-play and accept some imperfections. That does not mean that I am not interested in learning about things, call me a "listener" I guess. Did I just invent the third category now?
As I was turning the computer on, I put earphones in (Sennheiser IE80, SONY Walkman, my original ears and fairly clean at the moment) and started Raspberry Beret. I will go with that bar instead of a garage now. I also started noticing the drum you were talking about. Yes, it is quite lively. I guess I have two CDs now, for the price of one from Goodwill. One recorded in the garage and one recorded in the bar. Both are just fine. |
geoffkait,
How many of those fires 🔥 were caused by audiophiles who were Tuning? Zero. Where did you get that data? |
geoffkait,
I doubt anyone could prove you wrong on that one. At the same time, it is as accurate as me stating that Tuning audiophiles caused 327 fires. It is a speculation and not an educated guess. In essence, a worthless piece of quasi-info. |
trelja, I was not aware of the movie or that it had anything to do with Baudelaire. This thread is good for these small pieces of knowledge that can be picked from time to time. Thanks for the explanation. We will not clarify anything about walking and talking or who employed whom in the previous century, but there are little pieces of puzzle that show up occasionally. |
mapman, Agreed, but I am trying to exhibit some self-discipline. This is the first thread that I have really participated anywhere, except for a post or two at rare times. I learned a lot from geoffkait, believe it or not. About how not to write posts. I judge what I am about to post against his. If I feel he would not write it that way, it is probably fine to be presented to people. I am not kidding at all. I am grateful for that. |
geoffkait, "Typical talker jibber jabber, argumentative til he turns blue." Nobody could come up with better description of geoffkait. Otherwise, your posts should be in a textbook of non-creative writing. Why don’t you try to improve? |
geoffkait,
Sometimes I wonder if the geoffkait person even exists. For now, it seems like some computer program that randomly collects/copies words from the Internet. It is rare, if it even ever happens, that posts under geoffkait contain anything but sentences scavenged on the Internet. As a program, it is quite undeveloped as the words written rarely have anything to do with anything they should be response to.
|
jf47t, "Or the guy who needs measurements because he isn't able to hear results." Try not to think of it as incorrect for a moment. Think of it as a two-pronged approach to the potential issue. In some, if not most, areas of science these days, it is an acceptable way. It is meant to add one more layer of certainty while attempting to exclude experimenter's bias. It is not always conclusive (who to trust, ears or measurements?), but there are patterns. As much as I would always go for the subjective approach, there is some value in cold calculated measurements, too. These two things are not mutually exclusive, but from the beginning of the thread we are led to believe that they are. |
jf47t,
I did not firmly believe that tuning of any kind set any fire. However, once there is a statement, even with a numeric value (zero can reasonably be considered numeric value for this purpose) attached to it, there is a question of legitimacy of the whole statement. If there is some count of tuning fires, the whole thing becomes much more meaningful than someone just stating things left and right and then making fun of the one who questions it. Add a little bit of the "educated guess" claim which, as sophisticated as it may seem, was just a dust in our faces to detract from worthlessness of everything that was written in sentences preceding and following it.
One big flaw of this thread is that there are many things mentioned without ever clearly determining what it means. Participants start talking about it without knowing if they are talking about same thing. It started with OP and talking and walking. I am serious when I ask where is the border between those two. What is considered talking and what is considered walking. The only response was from geoffkait telling me that I am a bit slow, or am putting on a good act, adding that Internet description of "talker" has my picture next to it. Those pseudo-humorous comments is as far as this thread has gotten with clarifying first words in original post. 20 pages, statements being thrown around without any merit, but they seemed strong. Like zero fires. It was not licencia poetica, it was cheap bluff.
As far as that historic employment dispute goes, I do not think that anybody should pay much attention to it. It is a dispute between two people who have known each other and are talking things that are basically opposite. Robert is definitely upset, but it does not necessarily make his statements incorrect. Same goes for Michael. None of us on the thread have enough knowledge to be judges what really happened. Not even you, unless you were hanging out with both of them a couple of decades ago. At the same time, this thread, even if started by one of them, may not be the right place to argue their dispute.
I noticed some deleted posts and I noticed frequent use of word "troll". It appears that anything can be called "troll". At the same time, posts in which a person calls the other one "crazy" do not get deleted even when flagged. Apparently, this deleting process is not flawless. Not to mention that, given the track record here, "troll" may have different definition for everyone. I would not give too many negative points to posts deleted because of "trolling". I would rather see their content first.
|
geoffkait,
Regarding your comments about amg56, knowing when to curb yourself or stop is necessary in any communication. You lost any residual credibility that anyone might have thought you deserved based on an occasional post or two where you did seem to compose a lucid sentence. Your views of Internet forums as a vehicle for sadistically insulting people from safe distance are deplorable.
Regarding your comments about prof and me, please see above. |
jf47t,
My comments may not be that useful, but neither is that poetic divide between "talkers" and "walkers". No matter how many times I try to ask, there is no answer how to recognize either of them. Where is the line that separates talking from walking for the purpose of this thread? What does the "talker" have to do to become a "walker"? Build his own listening room with his bare hands? Find a contractor to built it to his specifications? Buy as good/expensive of equipment as he can in hopes of achieving better sound without constructing or doing anything else?
I understand that Michael Green is a "walker" because he does something. I take it that you are the same for same reason. I accept that I am a "talker" because I have not done those things that you do daily. That is clear, but maybe neither of you have done things to improve your daily enjoyment of music that others have done. If I am correct, are you just "talkers" then? I do not think it matters, really, but that was the original topic.
Having said that, somewhere in the original post was a statement that it is easy for certain people ("walkers", I believe) to figure out through few Internet posts who is a "talker". How? Unless a person declares herself/himself as such. How do you (whoever that "you" is) decide it? |
geoffkait,
I will have to repeat myself. Knowing when to curb yourself or stop is necessary in any communication.
Nobody should expect you to be deeply familiar with practice of medicine, but your... "If things were so dire, why is it taking so long to get a diagnosis? It’s been what, a month, since he mentioned it?" make me remember that knowing when to curb yourself or stop is necessary in any communication. Also, it may be hard to grasp a mind and thoughts of a cancer patient and ways she/he copes with that problem, but there have been many pages written about it. It does not matter if you read them or not.
Stop insulting people around here. Even if you think it is funny or witty, it is not.
PS The cancer patient has the right to talk about her/his illness. You do not, unless specifically called for. As a dark reminder. Age is a significant risk factor for cancer. None of us is getting younger. You would be granted same above-mentioned right, if you found yourself in amg56’s situation, with no questions asked.
|
geoffkait, To paraphrase you, Give us a break. Do not bother anyone else. |
unreceivedogma,
Another Amen. |
There are no loaded questions. I guess, being a pedestrian makes me a "walker". |
jf47t,
What is not a rocket science?
|
mitch2,
Now, that was a funny surprise.
|
jf47t, "I can see exactly where the drumstick is hitting the drum and how the drummer uses the striking differently for tone changing." It would be interesting to talk to the drummer, if he still remembers it, and hear if all of that actually took place. Can it be that, by changing whatever is being tuned/tweaked the nature of what happened during the recording gets misrepresented? Nothing wrong with that as long as the listener likes it, but it may not be just plucking hidden information from the recording. It may be skewing recording into what it never was to be. "...and converted this amp into a variable music machine that now can easily rival the very best of the best." What does conversion include? How was it converted? Changed parts? |
prof,
I learned from observing you. I do not expect straight answers from anyone. If they come, I will happily consider them and see what I can learn from them. If they don't, I have lived without them until now quite fine so I will not miss them at all.
I do have fun reading posts marginally related to the thread. There are things to consider. I bought that Hindu Love Gods CD based on jf47ts recommendation/description and I have not regretted it. In fact, I bought another one for a friend of mine and he likes it, too. However, I do think that some of the despicably-constructed posts should be highlighted and confronted. I cannot care less if someone, I forgot who it was, is ashamed to be associated with you and me without really ever meeting us, but some of the most recent posts crossed the line of any tolerance.
|
mitch2,
It certainly is fully in tune with this thread.
|
grannyring,
I would second your question about modifications of the Pioneer receiver. In fact, I already got curious about it in my earlier post. I do not doubt it can be done, but it would be great to know what made the difference.
Addendum: I would also think that knowing the exact model of Pioneer receiver would be interesting to those who are more adept with technical aspect of its build. |
jf47t,
It would not mean that all the others are misrepresenting, at all. In fact, changing anything in the system (from CD to composition of the air in the listening environment) could potentially have some effect on the perception of sound for the listener. After all, that is the purpose of tweaking/tuning. Altering what was initially heard. It still stands that the drummer would be the only one to know if he really hit something in a certain way that we imagine, after a heavily-modified process, as him changing angles of sticks to the drum or whatever else. There is nothing wrong with listeners adjusting sound to their liking, why wouldn't they enjoy even more. The simplest, for the end-user, way of adjusting is probably tone controls on an amplifier but there are many many more ways, including whatever kind of wood is used somewhere in the system.
Maybe one could say that virtually every system is misrepresenting (ears do not represent, though, they are a receptive link in the chain).
Remember how the room got bigger when you did something? It sounded more interesting/pleasing to you, at least that is how it read. Well, room was only one size originally. It has not changed since 1990 when the CD was recorded. Being able to manipulate the perception of the size of the room is misrepresenting the real room. Nothing wrong with that, but it is not a true representation of how big the room was during the recording, or what was adjusted during the mixing/mastering/some other process shortly afterwards. Many pieces of electronic equipment have modes "jazz club", "church", "stadium" which are aiming exactly for the same effect of changing listener's perception of the original room size. Of course, they may change other things in the process and not be acceptable to "audiophile" crowd, but they are aiming to be a simple and convenient solution for those listeners who would like the effect, but have no knowledge or time to do what you did by placing different things in different positions of your listening room. Both achieve similar result by different means. I would speculate that one does it conveniently while the other one does it less conveniently but without affecting other parameters. At the same time, both may misrepresent the size of the real room which is the only correct size.
What sound level (dB) do you listen to Hindu Love Gods at? I feel it needs a little bit louder setting, but am curious at what level do you feel you gain the best results. |
audiopoint,
I think that geoffkait may be right about his view of your most recent post, but it would also be interesting to see that studio that jf47t described. If for nothing else, then for the novelty of it. I am trying to imagine ("picture" in my head) it and cannot come up with anything but a place you need to walk around very carefully in order not to trip or damage something. I am probably wrong about that. Ok, I am surely wrong, but that is what I imagine/picture. |
sisyphus51,
Come, stay for a while. It is fun here.
|
thecarpathian,
I am rushing there. Nothing like a good old talk in circles. Thanks for recommendation.
|
thecarpathian,
Are you telling us that there is a thread about tweaks where questions go unanswered? Oh, no. Those must be some shameless talkers.
|
jf47t,
If the pictures become available, could you post a link? |
prof,
We all learn from advertisements, too. However, I doubt that this thread is turning into Michael Green tuning promotion. Whoever visits appears to have already picked sides and is solidified in it. Save for a few who seem interested, but are reasonably sure they would not jump on a tuning wagon for their convenience/time/expense/doubts reasons. I would be surprised if Michael Green gets a new customer from this crowd. I am curious to see how the place, with what would seem strange to many, actually looks like. I will not know the sound, but may figure out if it even looks acceptable. I am even more interested in modifications done to that Pioneer receiver and what model it is. That way, I could put picture together with words. Maybe we will find out, once the guys have some time to answer. |
What are all those clubs? |
theaudiotweak,
You have nailed it. I mean, nailed wood.
|
It was definitely a Total Contact. Nail contacted wood. Brass screw is usually quite musical, but improperly hit nail is even better. Makes you sing high notes very very loud. |
jf47t,
I may be a troll, or I may not, as that term seems to be applied very liberally. I do not understand why we would be denied pictures of something described in details on this thread, but so be it. However, given that Pioneer receiver was mentioned, too and at least three people showed interest in learning about it, it should not take much to mention what was done to it and what model it is.
Everyone pushes their ideas on Audiogon forums and some subtly, or less subtly, even advertise their products. That may, if not exaggerated, be helpful to participants as they learn about what is mentioned. However, using a thread on one website to steer people to another website could be described as poaching. It may not be illegal, but is surely not a gentlemanly activity. Not to mention, asking participants from this particular thread to migrate to Tuneland seems self-destructive. They have had very firm and logical questions that would shake much stronger theoreticians than those who provided answers here. Do you really want a sanctuary like Tuneland to become a sad sight defending itself only by "they are all trolls, they are all trolls"? Most of the people on this thread have nothing against very existence of Tuneland and, from what it seems, they have shown quite a courtesy not to infiltrate there.
|
In case anyone is interested, Pioneer receiver in question is sx4300. Yes, I did go to Tuneland to see. Click-bait, or not. From what can be seen on the picture, it is an older receiver with cover removed. No other signs of modification can be seen on those pictures as they are not showing inside clearly. There is also an older Magnavox DVD player nearby and that one also seems to have cover removed. I have not noticed any electrocuted cats. In fact, it was informative to go to Tuneland for those pictures as now I learned how that room looks like. It irresistibly reminds me of sauna. Lots of light-colored wood.
On the other hand, I would strongly recommend that those who find Michael Green's approach on this thread not to their liking or standards not go there. For the benefit of Tuneland and for the benefit of people on this thread who may get ballistic reading it. I read a few posts, they are long, and I have to say that Michael Green there does not appear as the one here. I prefer this one here, though.
|
jf47t,
The sad fact is that I informed people what receiver is in question before you did. I guess I woke up first. I should not mention those modifications that people were also asking about.
There may not be trolls on Tuneland for more than one reason. Here, whoever you call trolls, found it engaging. Could it be that on Tuneland, they cannot find anything as engaging? I have always praised Michael Green for starting this thread. It takes some talent/skill/feel/whatever else to do something so inflammatory. Now, when we are talking about Tuneland, I went only through one thread (the one with pictures of the room and Pioneer receiver). Maybe other threads are different, but that one had no deep discussion I could find. There were lots of deep words and almost-philosophical monologues, but not much in a way of healthy discussion. Some will like it. It could be made into a lecture.
|
jf47t,
By the way, how is that Pioneer receiver plugged in the wall? The pictures are a little unclear, but it looks as if it is just wires stuck in the outlet. Is there some trick to that? Lower outlet, the one receiver appears to be plugged in, is orange while upper is white. What is the story with different colors?
|
jf47t,
Please do not direct people from here to Tuneland. It is not nice. Tuneland obviously has different clientele. Crowd here is way more analytical and more into "walking". Posts on Tuneland are long winding poetry (by Michael Green), call it "talking", and responses from other "tunees" read as if they are staged/fake. You do not want guys from this thread there. They would have a field day. It is better that everyone stays in her/his own little yard. Michael Green can come back here from time to time, he is much better here than there.
|
jf47t,
I have no friends here, just for the record, and it is great that people went to Tuneland and enjoy it. Maybe some other threads there are more into "walking", but that one with pictures is not. In fact, posts there are very strange, to say the least. Even approaching it with very open mind, it does read like nothing more than self-praising form of poetry. People have different styles of writing and that is fine, but content is missing on that thread. Pictures are valuable, though, despite them being only teasers.
To clarify, your inaccurate rewrite of my sentence...
glupson says Please Please don’t visit TuneLand and then he asks a direct question of TuneLand LOL
has changed the meaning of what I wrote and which was... Please do not direct people from here to Tuneland Nice try, but still a feeble attempt to tune it your way. I did go to Tuneland and I will probably observe it some more. I will also recommend it to other people I know who may find it interesting, even if it may be just for their amusement. What I meant was that you do not advertise it that strongly to the people on this thread as, no matter how hard you try to explain that some have migrated there, the posters here seem to be much more exact and their presence on Tuneland would dilute Tuneland itself. In short, just as what I recommended to you after your initial posts about Michael Green, you may not want to work too hard. It becomes grotesque. You have improved since then and you might have noticed that nobody is ridiculing your way of talking about Michael anymore. I understand that public relations may not be your strongest quality so I thought I might try to help. Take it or leave it. Thank you will suffice.
As far as my questions about things I saw on Tuneland go, they were a pure curiosity as it all seems way out of ordinary. They may not have an answer (orange vs. white outlet, wires directly stuck in the outlet, modifications to the receiver, maybe something else that I forgot), but they remain questions.
If you look at two or three of geoffkait's posts above, he did bring something valuable to this thread. We may agree or disagree with it in the end, but there are statements that include how, why, what, etc. If anyone responds to them with contra-argument, it will be called a discussion. LOL-ing brings nothing but a shrug of the shoulders aimed at the LOL-er..
|
audiopoint,
Thanks for reading my post. What I meant was that it seems like just wires stuck in the wall outlet. However, pictures are not that clear and that outlet is in the back so there may be something else that is there and which I did not notice. That is why I asked about it. If there is such an unnoticed thing involved, I would guess it has something to do with the orange-colored receptacle wires appear to be plugged in. It is truly intriguing to see it so I thought I would ask about the story behind it.
You are way more technical than some of us so you may understand differences in materials and what to expect from certain configuration much better. Your praise of those amplifiers is interesting although I have to admit I got lost in the description of why they work in a certain way. Still, I would keep my mind open that someone very capable could, indeed, make a Pioneer receiver sound great. Seems unlikely, but we will not know until we try. And try we cannot unless we know how to make it that good.
On a totally different note, but fully connected to that poor nostalgic-looking Pioneer we are dragging into this mess, I have another question.
Many of the modifications/tuning/tweaks are on a very small level, yet they are allegedly producing significant changes in sound. Earlier in the thread, there was talk about removing covers, freeing capacitors, etc. with some theories how and why it may work. Removing a cover from a receiver, let it be this Pioneer for this purpose, exposes it to much more dust. Would the layer of dust on electronic parts influence the sound in any way? Does anyone have any theory about it? In case it does, would dusting it off be considered a tweak, tuning, or something third? If it does not influence the sound, why doesn't it? |
|
twoch,
Thanks for bringing that up. I also noticed that people involved in making music rarely, if ever, obsess over the equipment they could be listening to recorded music on. I have never asked why.
|
geoffkait,
Your oboist was a little different than my guys as he seemed to care about the sound, regardless of the outcome in our ears. I wanted to make a point that at least some of the people in the music-making business in fact do not care that much about the sound as we think about it. Of those two I mentioned, one had a solo piano concert at Carnegie Hall and the other one is Mozarteum-trained conductor who did conduct Vienna Philharmonics at times (not their resident conductor) and did Carnegie Hall, too. Had I not known the conductor since first grade of elementary school, I would have thought that such people cherish music reproduction and would be ardent audiophiles. Not even close and, yet, it is hard to say they do not care about music. |
