glupson, I know you are but what am I?
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
Showing 50 responses by geoffkait
mapman "In some cases, like many expensive esoteric tweaks, there is little or no empirical information offered by anyone, including vendors. Why should people try that?" >>>>>Frankly, who cares? That’s obviously a page taken from some pseudo skeptic’s manifesto, you know, like the ones you see on just about every thread on this forum. The entire statement is a Strawman argument anyway - “many,” “expensive,” “esoteric,” “little or no empirical information,” “by anyone,” “including vendors.” Obviously written by a tweakaphobe and an anti-audiophile. “Why should people try it?” Try it, don’t try it. Who cares? |
falconquest wrote, “Since this discussion is about the integrity of information, we have to recognize that there are many aspects to this hobby that are sorely lacking in integrity. Further, since we are discussing scientific concepts, I will point out what I perceive to be the use of a scientific concept that has become a buzzword which is the use of the term "quantum". I would certainly like to know how any company that uses the term quantum in the description of their product actually applies the science. Perhaps it just sounds cool. Here is an explanation as to the root of the term. Quantum is the Latin word for amount and, in modern understanding, means the smallest possible discrete unit of any physical property, such as energy or matter. Quantum came into the latter usage in 1900, when the physicist Max Planck used it in a presentation to the German Physical Society. Planck had sought to discover the reason that radiation from a glowing body changes in color from red, to orange, and, finally, to blue as its temperature rises. He found that by making the assumption that radiation existed in discrete units in the same way that matter does, rather than just as a constant electromagnetic wave, as had been formerly assumed, and was therefore quantifiable, he could find the answer to his question. Planck wrote a mathematical equation involving a figure to represent individual units of energy. He called the units quanta . Planck assumed there was a theory yet to emerge from the discovery of quanta, but in fact, their very existence defined a completely new and fundamental law of nature. Einstein’s theory of relativity and quantum theory together explain the nature and behavior of all matter and energy on earth and form the basis for modern physics. However, conflicts remain between the two. For much of his life, Einstein sought what he called a unified field theory -- one would reconcile the theories’ incompatibilities. Subsequently, Superstring Theory and M-theory have been proposed as candidates to fill that role. A more succinct definition is here... A discrete quantity of energy proportional in magnitude to the frequency of the radiation it represents.” ———————————— >>>>There is much confusion over what quantum physics is, what audio devices employ quantum physics or operate via quantum mechanics or quantum physics. However, it might be a little bit of an overreaction to condemn all audiophile devices marketed as quantum devices as hoaxes or suggest deception or lack or integrity. For example, the CD laser itself operates quantum mechanically, or any laser; they are “two dimensional quantum wells.” More specifically, for audiophile devices, I design and market at least four products that operate quantum mechanically. Most of these quantum type products are explained in detail on my web site. The Intelligent Chip, for example, is a quantum device. It employs quantum dots as the active ingredient as it were. The Definitive Explanation of How the Intelligent Chip Works. And How the Teleportation Tweak Works. I do not necessarily vouch for other audiophile devices that employ the word quantum in their explanations. Having said that, I feel confident that there are other audiophile devices that probably do operate quantum mechanically, e.g., WA Quantum Chips. Cheers, geoff kait machina dynamica advanced audio concepts |
From the Dynamic Range Database, check out the wide variation in just one parameter, Dynamic Range, for the various releases and formats of the same Some Girls recording. This obviously doesn’t address variations in resolution or possible variations in Absolute Polarity, or skill in remastering, http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=Rolling+Stones+&album=Some+girls |
Michael Green “Quantum, discrete, isolation, dampening, compression, NASA, EE, inert, first reflection point, transparency, revealing and many more that are a part of the selling of HEA aren’t necessarily being used in the truest sense but have been turned into tools of convincing a certain part of the public of HEA to defend the market. You take a forum like this and throw in a little internet trolling and limited experience and you can see why the transition is taking so long. But the more you have folks like Tjbhuler speaking out, the easier the pill is to swallow. >>>>Of course words are just words and they have different meanings for different people. No surprise there. also I want to throw this in from Geoff "There is much confusion over what quantum physics is, what audio devices employ quantum physics or operate via quantum mechanics or quantum physics. However, it might be a little bit of an overreaction to condemn all audiophile devices marketed as quantum devices as hoaxes or suggest deception or lack or integrity. For example, the CD laser itself operates quantum mechanically, or any laser; they are “two dimensional quantum wells.” And one more thing that you guys should think about studying are the "fundamental forces". A lot of audio is easy to figure out if you have taken a course in, or even study on the internet, the interaction of the Earth’s forces.” >>>>>Michael, The “fundamental forces” and the interaction of the Earth’s forces sound like interesting topics. Can you expound on what you mean? What are we talking about here? |
Update on my low mass Sony Walkman CD player. I’m now using “modded” Grado SR-60 headphones, which are stripped of their god awful sounding foam pads. The Walkman itself is isolated on a one off version of my Woody the Woodpecker isolation stand, which simulates the physical characteristics of a woodpecker’s head and tissue surrounding the brain, all of which is carefully constructed to prevent injury to the woodpecker’s brain when subjected to high frequency high negative g forces whilst pecking wood. The isolation stand incorporates springs, a glass bowl filled with glass micro beads, a large number of glass crystal weights that provide high mass for the springs and such niceties as Moingo disc and a bunch of the NASA grade ceramic cones from Golden Sound that act as node dampers, exit points. There are some other things I can’t really discuss as they draw too much heat. Maybe later. |
michaelgreenaudio OP Hi Geoff Thanks for the update. I know you were working with several different players, even cassettes. Are those still in use? I thought it very interesting when you went from the HEA setup to the low mass Walkmans. You know it’s weird I think that so many folks pick on the portable units being sold, and when talking to them I discover they have never really listened to the modern portables. This whole low mass thing really throws HEA audiophiles off for some reason. Around show time CES here I try to make it to some portable demos. Technology is something else. >>>>I still use Sony Cassette Players, too. I reckon my portables have gotta be ten or fifteen years old, at least. Sony’s just sound good. The other portables, Panasonic, Philips, Aiwa, and the multitude of secondary brands sound a little off. I have listed before all the technical reasons why I think portables sound so good, you know, like no house AC, no AC ground, no transformers, no interconnects, no power cords, no room acoustic anomalies, no big honking capacitors, no fuses. No more teacher’s dirty looks. Secondary benefits of low mass portable systems include freeing up of a lot of real estate and cost savings, obviously. Plus they’re easier to isolate. You could call it a low-mass system (10 ounces) on a high-mass iso stand (60 pounds). If thy nose offend thee cut it off. |
12 Angry Men Movie Quotes Juror #3: Don’t give me that. I’m sick and tired of facts! You can twist ’em anyway you like, you know what I mean? ——————— Juror #3: Six to six... I’m telling you, some of you people in here must be out of your minds. ——————— Juror #3: [interrupting] You didn’t prove it at all. What’re you talking about? ——————— Juror #3: What’s the matter with you? ——————— Juror #3: That doesn’t prove anything. I’m a pretty excitable person. I mean, where does he come off calling me a public avenger, sadist and everything? Anyone in his right mind would blow his stack. He was just trying to bait me. Juror #4: He did an excellent job. ———————- Juror #3: Well... say something! You lousy bunch of bleedin’ hearts. You’re not goin’ to intimidate me - I’m entitled to my opinion! ———————- Juror #3: Brother, I’ve seen all kinds of dishonesty in my day, but this little display takes the cake. Y’all come in here with your hearts bleedin’ all over the floor.....you listen to some fairy tales... Suddenly, you start gettin’ through to some of these old ladies. Well, you’re not getting through to me, I’ve had enough. ————————- Juror #3: What’s the *matter* with you guys? You all *know* he’s guilty! He’s *got* to burn! You’re letting him slip through our fingers! Juror #8: “Slip through our fingers"? Are you his executioner? Juror #3: I’m one of ’em! |
By the way there are a couple of very obvious reasons why some records (or CDs for that matter) sound better than others and there’s not too much you can do about it. Those two things are (1) Absolute Polarity and (2) overly aggressive dynamic range compression. For the former you can switch Polarity for each record and pick the one that sounds best. Or employ a Polarity switch. Otherwise, you get what you get. News flash! At least 50% of audiophile records are actually in inverted Polarity. Alas, even in Audioland there are no standards for Polarity. Who dropped the ball on that one? For overly aggressive dynamic range compression, the only recourse one has really is to search out earlier issues of the recording that weren’t compressed as much. Otherwise you’re what they refer to as shirt out of luck. Of course, there are many other reasons why some records inherently sound better than others, e.g., they were made back when vacuum tubes were used in the tape recorders and mastering process, the engineers were superior, the recording venues were superior, etc. No matter how much you wind up with in the END you would have had EVEN MORE if you had started out with MORE. - old audiophile axiom, the Law of Maximization 😢 |
Just to be up front about the whole thing, for those that may not already know (I know you’re out there) I’m selling, but not so as you would necessarily know. I’m here strictly for the action. 😁 For the back and forth as it were. I do not (rpt not) mention my products unless cross examined; very occasionally I will use a product or two of mine as examples of something or another, you know, usually in the context of controversial tweaks, especially ones that seem to exasperate and anger skeptics and Physics majors the most. Not to mention, like everyone else, I wish to “sell” - at least to some extent - how smart I am and that I’m not gullible. 🙄 For those that don’t already know, Michael Green and I go way back, not did we engage in a whole lot of hand-to-hand combat a few years ago on Stereophile Forum (much fun was had by all, including May and Peter Belt (RIP) and a host of others, particularly in view of the extremely low key moderation, if you know what I mean) but I was also one of the first customers of Michael’s Room Tunes stuff way back, including Echo Tunes and those very cool big old ballistic brass cones he used to sell. geoff kait machina dynamica we do artificial atoms right! |
Prof wrote, “(BTW, I in no way conclude that all MG’s techniques are without any merit, or that he can not "tune" a room to possibly sound excellent.” >>>>Gosh, that’s awful decent of you. What a guy! “But I have to admit now being put off having noticed the character of his posts, and certainly a number of his claims fall well into the dubious woo-woo land of audiophile tweaks, nuzzling happily with things like demagnetizing CDs and many other tweaks that have brought our hobby in to ill-repute).” >>>>>Unfortunately for your “argument” demagnetizing CDs is actually not snake oil, woo or pseudo science. And even if was, that line of argument is just another one of your many logical fallacies, people that believe in Tuning probably believe in UFOs, that sort of thing. It’s actually people like the professor who are bringing the hobby to ill repute with his long-winded pseudo arguments, diatribes and smear campaign. Better luck next time, professor. On with the Inquisition! 👺 |
glupson However, you will have to agree that thread was successful in what you, and I have to admit me too, feel its purpose was. Some of us have gone to the website that we had not gone before, and got informed about it. Now, that is what I would call a successful marketing. I am yet waiting for verdict if my visit was fortunate or unfortunate. I hope to get an answer about laminar flow (asked in one of my earlier posts) as it would be something new learned and, in some way, a breakthrough in my current understanding and practice that relates to laminar and turbulent flow in daily applications. The question is as simple as it gets, the answer may not be, but I am willing to try and be thankful for clarification. >>>>As I recall there are certain geometrical devices used on aircraft wings to maintain laminar flow, and prevent turbulent flow. Perhaps that’s what his device does, it certainly sounds like it. Why turbulent flow would be a problem in a listening room is another story. But I do not see his lack of explanation to be as big a deal as you do. |
@glupson - Breaking News!! Laminar in listening rooms! But first allow me to say laminar flow can be produced either by an aircraft moving through still air or by air moving around or into solid objects like walls. The air is moving because the speakers are producing acoustic waves, I.e., moving air. It’s the relative motion. In a wind tunnel, where laminar and turbulent flow can be studied, the model of the aircraft is stationary and the air is moving, no? From the Star Sound web site, ”In 2008 Dr. Andrew Gear, a lifelong audiophile, approached Star Sound on the topic of actually developing such a room so that his passion for the ’live performance’ could be realized through his hi-fi system in the privacy of his own home. He issued this challenge to a few companies and in October of 2012, upon receiving various proposals, he decided to invest in Live-Vibe Technology™ infused into the structural design of his listening room. "It is not every day an experienced listener comes along and takes financial risk in further developing technology atypical to the majority of industry’s understanding of vibration management, investing it into one of his most sacred assets – his residence. "For a small research and development company like Star Sound this opportunity presented the challenge of a lifetime". Robert Maicks – President Star Sound Technologies, LLC Fueled by the passion for invention the team at Star Sound set out to procure the very first mechanically grounded room in all of audio. The thought of developing such a product has been instilled in us since the discovery of Sistrum Platforms in 2001. For years engineering has dreamed about inventing and constructing a world class sound room evolving a newfound technology for use in the structure of recording studios, modern day show environments and critical listening suites. What if...? you were listening to music in a room where all the vibrating walls, flooring and ceilings react the same to volume, frequency and dynamics and in unison? there were no ninety degree angles to conflict with the laminar flow and movement of energy? the room reduces or eliminates surface first reflection points? the design could eliminate corner loading effects from all ninety degree intersections further managing detrimental acoustic energies? the room was avoid of implemented acoustic traps or panels in order to "correct, modify or dictate and change" to the natural flows of energies and sound? a ’live pressure zone’ of energy was encapsulated allowing for a natural speed and decay of resonance transferring through a continuously vibrating environment, connecting to the same acoustic, electrical and mechanical grounding plane? What would this room sound like...? We present to the world - Energy Rooms™ by Star Sound Technologies, LLC” |
Is that your “engineer’s” side of your head talking, moopman? We were having a nice physics discussion here until you showed up with trash. Why is it every time you open your mouth garbage comes out? 🤮 Don’t you ever have anything relevant to the discussion to offer? Is that big 🧠 of yours depleted? Have you completely run out of ammo? It’s not as if I mind stalkers, but I would prefer ones who contribute something, even if it’s some pseudo skeptic argument. |
prof wrote, “Now this is obviously a post casting negative aspersions at people Green is accusing of "faking it." And also an apparent challenge for the people "faking it" to step up and answer his question.” >>>>Negative aspersions are the very worst sort of aspersions. They should be banned. Can we have a group sing-a-long of the Simon and Garfunkel song, “Fakin’ it?” |
glupson I see that we fully agree on movement of the air around the airplane wings. The only difference is that I wrote it more concisely (absolute or relative) and you more descriptively. >>>>But I was the one who pointed out the object doesn’t have to be moving for there to be laminar flow or turbulent flow. And that’s really the most important part. glupson However, sound waves emanating from most of the speakers can hardly be called "laminar flow". >>>>If they’re not laminar flow what are they? Are standing waves laminar flow? Are reflected waves laminar flow? Are they turbulent flow? Multiple choice. |
Good try, shadorne, I’m sure you had them going for a while. I guess that’s what happens when you cut and paste big words. The only thing elastic compressional are your adult diapers. “Sound (in air) is made when air molecules vibrate and move (away from the vibrating source) in a pattern called waves, or sound waves. Sound is a mechanical, longitudinal wave (that moves in all directions) and travels in waves of compressions and rarefactions (expansion) as it successively passes through a medium.” |
testpilot Pop Quiz - Why does placing 2 or 3 bowls of ice cold water out in front of the speakers improve the sound? The sound gets refracted back towards the listener due to the change in the transmission medium i.e. hot and cold air >>>>>I want to get on board your explanation. I really do. Can you be a little more specific and go into detail just a bit? So far I’m thinking hmmmm, maybe partial credit. |
glupson geoffkait, I am not sure what your apparently negative comment to shadorne connects to as the quoted sentence you posted pretty much confirms shadorne's claim. Could you clarify? >>>>>I suggest you review the bidding again. I definitely contradicted shadorne. See if you can spot the contradiction. This is fun! A lot of pops quizes today! Oh, boy! Oh, boy! |
glupson testpilot, It seems that you accidentally placed word "back" into your answer about ice-cold water. "Refracting back" would be back to where it came from which is speaker and not listener. Of course, that is assuming that listener is not positioned behind the speaker. >>>>It’s nice to see someone with a sense of humor. Good for you! 😬 Reynolds number? Are you for real? 😂 |
Actually, it appears to me, an objective observer of the scene, that Michael assessed his audience correctly, as one talking the talk but not walking the walk. This is not Michael’s first rodeo. 🤠 That’s what makes this whole thread so amusing. And talk they do. Little chatterboxes. He baited them and they took the bait. |
glupson, as a matter of fact Michael and I both talk the talk AND walk the walk. He and I have both been exploring room acoustics for a very long time, independently. He and I have spent extraordinary effort and time finding out how things work. I was one of Michael’s first customers around thirty years ago and have measured the effectiveness of his Echo Tunes and Corner Tunes. Of course many others also were getting their hands dirty and developing products. I designed and developed quite a number of room acoustics devices that address a wide range of room acoustics problems. My very first product was going to be Ortho Ears for improving dynamic range, modeled after Mr. Spock’s ears, but that product was overcome by events, perhaps fortuitously. Off the top of my head I have at least SEVEN room acoustics products, including some quantum mechanical ones. I developed the first comprehensive crystal-based product line for resonance control and room acoustics control. I have also spent much time and effort studying room acoustics dynamics, including mapping out the sound pressures of the entire 3D space of the room. I have built my own Helmholtz resonators of various sizes, including a 15 foot long folded horn resonator for very low frequencies. I have my own ceramic version of the tiny little 1” bowl acoustic resonators. My hands have not been soaking in Ivory liquid, Junior. Getting back to the whole laminar flow issue for a second, we know that air moves in the room while music is playing. We also know that acoustic waves themselves travel through air at the speed of sound. These high speed acoustic waves striking a surface would be like waves of water striking the beach, no? So the dynamics of the acoustic wave + air hitting a surface would obviously have a much greater impact than one might imagine. That’s why I measure sound pressure peaks in some locations around the room that are 10 times higher than the average sound pressure in the room. That’s a lot of energy, no? |
Turbulent flow occurs at high Reynolds numbers and is dominated by inertial forces, which tend to produce chaotic eddies, vortices and other flow instabilities. The Reynolds number Re is defined as, Re = fluid density x fluid velocity x characteristic linear dimension / dynamic viscosity of the fluid where: ρ is the density of the fluid (SI units: kg/m3) u is the velocity of the fluid with respect to the object (m/s) L is a characteristic linear dimension (m) μ is the dynamic viscosity of the fluid (Pa·s or N·s/m2 or kg/m·s) ν is the kinematic viscosity of the fluid (m2/s). Reynolds number is proportional to the velocity of the fluid (air) which is rather low in a listening room, so Reynolds number will be relatively low. I don’t recall my pants legs flapping in the breeze whilst listening. It’s not exactly a wind tunnel. So turbulent flow is very unlikely or perhaps impossible. This is not to say there might be some advantage sonically to “organizing” laminar flow using shutters. Remember organizing laminar flow doesn’t mean there has to be turbulent flow or that turbulent flow is prevented. I personally would have to experiment with the shutters to see what happens sonically. The viscosity of the air in a given room will be fairly constant except in the case of bowls of ice cold water, one or two or three or more, that I mentioned, in which case the viscosity and thus the Reynolds number will be different lower in the room than higher up. Reynolds number is mostly a function of temperature. And the speed of sound is slower in cold air than warm air. Therefore the part of the acoustic wave higher up in the room will be faster than lower down so that the wave will bend over and down toward the listener position. He will hear more of the sound, especially the treble, including ambient information. But because of the speed of sound issue not really Reynolds number. |
But there is air flow in the listening room, you silly goose. 🦆 For heaven’s sake, don’t have a conniption. 😫 The air molecules are pushed by the high speed acoustic (mechanical) waves, just as waves in the ocean push the water. So, there is laminar flow in the room, and in many directions, obviously. There would not be resonance without mass and there would not be mas without air molecules. Some examples where baffles are used to organize or maintain laminar flow for audio applications include air baffles for air tubing for my air bearing everything Maplenoll turntable, 500 feet of air tubing, between the air compressor and the air bearing platter and air bearing tonearm AND a small baffle in the air spring connecting air fitting between the auxiliary air canister and the air spring per se, maintaining a smoother flow of air during operation, the air flow velocity in this case must certainly be quite low, no? |
The reason it’s said that you want a large size woofer or large excursions of the diaphragm is because it pushes more air is uh, it pushes more air. The air moves. Hel-loo! As I said acoustic waves require air to propagate, analogous to waves on the ocean. The air molecules like the water molecules are moving, at least when the wave pushes through it. So when an acoustic wave hits a wall, air molecules are moving. It’s the frequencies of the of the (complex) wave that we hear and that produces resonance of objects in the room, not of air molecules. A standing wave has a frequency, although the air molecules at that location move along with the wave. Reflected waves have frequencies, the air molecules resonate at whatever frequency or frequencies the wave is moving. In a sense you cannot separate the acoustic waves from the air, there would be no sound without air. In space no one can hear you scream. Pop quiz - do sound waves have mass? |
Then don’t over damp it. Hel-looo! Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. There’s a right way and a wrong way to do everything. You’re obsessed with rubber and rubber tires. Expand your mind. Besides it’s not that tires that are isolating the car. And don’t start up with the old but there’s no such thing as isolation routine. That got old a long time ago. Almost as old as shear. |
testpilot 182 posts 05-15-2018 9:30am The sound gets refracted ("back" removed) towards the listener due to the change in the transmission medium i.e. hot and cold air >>>>>I want to get on board your explanation. I really do. Can you be a little more specific and go into detail just a bit? So far I’m thinking hmmmm, maybe partial credit. It’s based on the same principle as why can we hear sound for longer distances in winter than in summer. You have already given the theory as to the why and how in the post above. >>>>Not exactly. You’re close. Very close. The analogy is why we hear better from across a lake on a cold morning rather than later in the day. It’s because the temperature of air higher up above the lake is warmer than the air closer to the lake surface. And sound travels faster in warm air. Thus, sound waves higher above the lake surface up fall over the slower sound waves lower down and bend down toward the listener. So he hears better than if there were no temperature gradients. There would be no temperature gradients in winter or in summer generally speaking. Except fir the case I gave of a cold morning and warm afternoon. The temperature of air near cold lake water slows the speed of sound. In the afternoon the temperatures above and near the lake surface are more equal. |
I said it before and I’ll say it again. What type of wave is a sound wave? In this case, the particles of the medium move parallel to the direction that the pulse moves. This type of wave is a longitudinal wave. Longitudinal waves are always characterized by particle motion being parallel to wave motion. A sound wave traveling through air is a classic example of a longitudinal wave. Hel-loo! |
WaveMotion Motion of the water is different than the motion of the wave. Water at each location moves in a circular path, but the motions at different locations are “out of phase”, which means that when water at the left of the diagram is moving to the right, water a quarter of a wavelength to the right is moving down, and water next to it is moving to the left, and next to it is moving up, etc. The overall effect is a an “apparent” wave moving to the right. Thus, the velocity (speed) of a wave is not at all the same as the velocity of the water. The horizontal movement of the water when a wave passes is approximately equal to the up and down movement of the water. If you are on flat water and are parallel to waves made by a passing boat, your boat will move side-to-side as much as up-and–down as the wave passes under you. The side-to-side movement actually creates most of the difficulty in balancing the boat in such a situation. However, under typical conditions in the bay there can be such varied wave action that you can’t easily distinguish horizontal and vertical motion. Case closed. |