Talk but not walk?

Hello Audiogon, this is my first post.

Reading this thread I have noticed a few other MGA clients and wanted to add my name to the list of proud MGA speaker owners. I am working on my full tunable system and each step is another revelation. There are a few characterizations about MG on this thread that border on insane and makes one wonder why these false statements would ever be made. kosst saying there is a beaming at 6KHz with the Rev speakers which is absolutely made up trash talking about something he has no idea about. My speakers happen to give the smoothest reproduction I have ever heard. Also the absurdity that Michael is not technical. I wonder who kosst thinks Mr. Green is.  Kosst, are you aware of MG's work before he came to home audio or that continues to the present? It doesn't sound like you know much about Michael's work as an engineer.

My take on this thread is that there was a real engineer on this forum and some of you did everything in your power to chase him away. Michael was encouraging members here to do their homework before speaking about topics that effect other listeners decisions. Some of you appeared to get upset because Michael is a straight shooter and doesn't waste time or allow his time to be wasted. I always thought that was a virtue, but not here.

@GK I like the way you and Mr. Green interact here vs the Stereophile debates

I've been wanting to post but there was a glitch in the system that Audiogon promptly fixed. It's odd to read this thread that is mostly about Michael's character instead of the OP. I'll give my take about Michael's character that I have seen first hand. When he moved from the outer part of Vegas to the heart of the strip it was easy to pick up on what Michael Green is about. When leaving the old neighborhood MG made sure those who had an interest in Michael's sound he gave a home system to, free. The movers also got systems, free. This was on top of his generous pay. Even while Michael was moving into our community, he was asking other tenants if they had systems. He gave his neighbors systems, free.

Michael Green is about sharing music and making life enjoyable for the people he comes in contact with. Painting MG in any other light is false. I see and listen with Michael almost every day. We live 5 doors away from each other. Prof and kosst you are so far off base with your posts I'm surprised you are even on this thread. Prof I have indeed read this whole thread and you and kosst ARE trolling MG. You can twist and turn as much as you wish but you ARE INDEED TROLLING Mr. Green.

Prof, when Michael is up on a forum somewhere in the home hobby or professional a post is made on TuneLand and his facebook page. No sirens needed. This serves as a good example of trolling by you. You've done nothing here but try to paint a false narrative of a man who has dedicated his life to helping others.

And MG most certainly did engage in your question. If you read MG's response to you he asked a very straight forward question. He asked if you knew the sonic difference between two capacitors. Your answer set the stage for where you wanted to go with this thread. Michael was talking about people who want to try things instead of talking about them. You have been pressing to talk instead of walk. That's fairly clear to me. Plus your temper gets the best of you and others have asked you to not take things so personally. Another thing I can tell you about Michael is he doesn't like to do anger.

uberwaltz

You said that you believe MG failed in every aspect of managing this thread. Michael's not an audiogon mod and btw the Mods have done great on this thread. There aren't any questions here Mr. Green avoided. He didn't give the answers Prof or whomever wanted so some of you decided to judge MG based on this. That's not being objective.

Prof

Why don't you talk to Michael about music or his product or tuning. Or better yet why don't you post your thoughts on TuneLand. On this thread it looks like you are obsessing over Mr. Green even stalking him. The Michael I know is someone different than you have painted a picture of. You've even been trying to convince me of changing my mind about him but sir that would be "fake". If you would have stated your case and moved on that would have been something to add to the mix of opinion. But you are being passive aggressive in trying to paint that someone else is. Your posts are repeated ramblings at this point. My opinion is you've barked up the wrong tree on a public forum.

Had dinner with MG last night and asked him about this thread. He gave that MG smile and said pull it up and read the OP again.

"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"

Then he said read the last 4 pages. The word that came to my mind was "prophecy". Everything and character Michael said was happening IS happening on this thread. He said when people are not "doing" the hobby it turns into talking aimlessly. After dinner he took me to his place where I saw another component on the tuning platform. He had me listen for a while. After that while he had me close my eyes. He replayed the music. The soundstage grew to almost double the size both side to side and front to back and height. "Lets go shoot a game of pool and come back". He didn't want me to tell him what I experienced but instead put this post up and he'll read it with the rest of the readers following this thread. When I came back from pool you wouldn't know it was the same system. He said after I post this he will tell me what he did to the system.

I am certain that he snipped the ties from the capacitors. I go back to listen tonight. I will give a report.

Hi Prof came home a couple of minutes ago, Wow! That was one amazing journey. Even though I am working on my own MGA system I'm not sure I can do what he did tonight. He says "you'll get it" but he has this intuitive spirit about him that must only be able to achieve with practice. I am no where near that level but excited to be living so close to him.

"But I wonder if the sentiment is the same "from your side of the fence" because posts like you just made does continue to imply others are not "doing" this hobby, and if not by implication "doing it wrong."

I don't think Michael believes in right or wrong, only growth vs settling for. MG believes there is always more to get out of a recording and tonight was a major lesson to that end. Where he started and where he ended up at was more than any amp or speaker change I've ever witnessed. It was also far beyond any trade show display I've ever heard by a long shot.

"And certainly, MG himself spends a lot of time posting on forums, writing evangelically about his method."

I don't think I've ever heard Michael say tuning was his method. I've only heard him talk about being a part of tuning, following in the footsteps of instrument and music tuning. He views a stereo system as an extension of the recording process. He can explain this better than me but the way he says it is the recording starts with tuning and playback ends with retuning. The recording is a code and playback is tuning in that code. With what he showed me today that makes perfect sense.

Good morning Tunees

My listening session last night with George Michael "Faith" was something I needed to digest and I'm still not sure I have the words. The sound stage was more than full it was full and enormous. I felt like I could rise from my seat and walk through the image. What's freaky is that's what I did. The speakers no matter where I stood had vanished. The room took over the sound. I asked Michael how this was possible and his answer was "that's the way pressure works when a system is in tune with the recording". I had to sit down and stand up a few times to finally hear that the seating position out did the rest of the listening area it was that good. It was like being inside of a giant set of headphones in all the right ways. I know this recording well but I realized I didn't know it at all. Sitting in the chair I could feel all the music through my body head to toe. Still with all this vibration MG didn't have the music up loud that was another mystery to me. The bass was vibrating my chest through to my back but the volume was not overly loud a first time for me. The bass was also very tight and at the same time full of body. The sound pressure was like a great set of horns without the sound of horns. Michael left me alone to learn on my own but what I was hearing was not possible. He wants to introduce me to top tuning soon.

I think MG would say there is no us vs them but for me I'm trying to justify why the lower mass less expensive systems are blowing away the heavier more expensive ones. I can now see why they are and that the low mass systems are far more flexible. However it does seem like there is a difference. The more mass systems go to a certain level of flexibility and stall whereas the low mass systems tune up to meet every recording we have played.

Not sure what you mean by a strawman, what is that?

No Thanks

You guys get too hostile for me. I'll let you posters fight amongst yourselves. MG is the father of audio tuning from what I have read in many articles now and I'm very satisfied with this. He's taken the time to show me while he explains and that goes a long way with me. Plus Tuneland the forum is a great place. Count me out on the anger and trolling like MG I want no part. There's too much music to enjoy and you guys are defeating your own purpose when you can't get along.

Hi Mapman I do want to respond to you.

Michael has been receiving emails and even calls (I've been there) during this thread and the members here are happy to see MG's presence and if anything have been asking for more of it. Their feeling is that he is refreshing honest and doesn't put up with BS. He told me a couple of days ago "the thread is not going anywhere and the OP is being played out in real time". The way to judge integrity is not by the ones speaking the loudest but instead by the ones who have peace within themselves.

Prof

As others have said, you really don't belong on this thread. Your anger and rage are apparent. I believe someone pointed out that your interpretation of MG is only because of your view of life. You don't seem like you are someone who has much joy to share. At least your not able to do so on here.

Prof

You've hit my funny bone again. Your up on this thread screaming at people and MG isn't even here. Calm down dude your getting worked up all over. Michael's off enjoying Mingus and the last thing on his mind is entertaining your spinning.

Those of you reading this pay attention to what Michael says and what the internet trolls are saying.

As one of many examples. If you read back through this thread you will not see anywhere where Michael calls tuning his method nor will Michael say listen his way. Go look for yourselves. You'll read people saying Michael said this and other things to paint a picture but you won't see MG saying this himself or inferring it. He's not inferring it because he doesn't practice it.

Michael Green Audio has always been about the listener being able to listen to their music their way. Michael for 30 years has been designing "Tunable" products. He makes these products so you as an unique listener have some tools if you decide to use them to help you. Michael doesn't care if you use other tools or follow any method of listening you want including doing nothing but plug it in. Michael's whole concept of listening is about being able to play any recording you have and showing you how variable an audio system is.

Tuning is the oldest and most established music technology. Tuning is simply a method of adjusting the variables. Nothing to get mad over. If you buy a guitar your probably going to want to tune it, or not, your choice. Same with a stereo, your choice, or not. Michael has no intention on telling you what to tune something to, that's meant for your ears only. If you read on this thread the Tunees comments you will find that they have found a way to get closer to their music collection.

Prof amg or whoever your getting angry at a guy who is doing nothing more than tuning a guitar. Michael might as well be tuning a piano, guitar or any other instrument or a stereo. He's not asking how good your hearing is or if you are ever going to tune. He's simply saying if you do this it will mean more than talking about the possibility, you'll actually be "tuning". No hidden message just something if you never do you will only be talking and not trying. Like right now I am talking to you based on what I have being doing this week, nothing more and nothing negative. I tuned I heard, I walked and I talked about the walk. There's nothing more. It's simple I don't have to fake what I am saying cause I did it. Anything more is making something out of nothing.

Michael doesn't care if the subject is tuning or any other subject. What he is saying is there's a difference between reading and talking about something vs actually doing it yourself. He encourages people to do more than the talking, go ahead and give something a try if your so incline. There's nothing more to the message than that. Your not a bad person if you don't do but I bet if you try something it will give you more experience and knowledge. And more to talk about.

OK here's what you do amg.

That thing at the top of your page. You type in "how to tune a guitar" now click on videos and it will take you to about a hundred or so videos on tuning a guitar. Now if you choose to pick another instrument simply type in that instrument and it will tell you how to tune it. Let us know what you learn.

Got to listen to some nice Charlie Mingus this afternoon. Going back over in a little bit. As I said earlier MG's showing me the tuning experience and with each step I'm learning more. We're even starting to tune my system now. A couple things that have hit me strongly is how much info is on each recording and the idea of a bad recording has no meaning to me like it did before. And there's something else I am learning quickly that each recording has it own "recorded code". When I use to hear Michael say this I didn't understand what he meant. Now I realize that each recording can and should be tuned in as an individual set of values. With every recording we play it is slightly out of tune as compared to the last tuning. With some simple adjustments the soundstage becomes full and the tone balanced. For example the bass line on each recording is completely different from the next. The highs are too but the bass more so. Once we get that bottom end tuned it seems like the rest of the range falls into place or is at least easier to fine tune.

amg I understand that you have questions as many do when talking about tuning but again I believe patience is a virtue and you guys who get so upset should let the answers come in Michael's way and in Michael's timing. If these are indeed interesting questions for Michael he's not shy about answering, he answers all of mine and I hear him answering questions on the phone. But answering questions about the intent of his OP is silly and has been rehashed 10 million ways. Michael's answer to prof was and I'm sure still is "your reading something that isn't there". That's MG's answer no need to ask that question over and over you either accept his answer or you go off on a rant but as people have said here many times Prof simply is turning it into something it isn't. I don't see where that can possibly be misunderstood. It's a big issue about nothing.

Hi Glupson per whole cd as the engineers usually make each full playback source a package. Some best hits you will find the song have different settings but for the most part if you tune to the LP your good to go. It’s very much like adjusting a turntable slightly per vinyl. Or you can set the tune to one particular sound and leave it till you want to make a change.

You say not for you? OK next time you change out an amplifier think about it. Or as far as that goes anything in your system. Tuning is much more practical and easier than HEA plug and play and you end up with better sound and sound the way you want it on your whole music collection.

Beats the heck out of never quite being content with a piece of music or a piece of gear. One system and your done. Pretty appealing to me. Oh and for about 1/5 the price. Not for you? That’s cool no harm done.

futility? More like hobby saver!

"safe space" "cults"? LOL talk about reality

Oh lets see what are all these magazines laying around Michael's place. What do I see some over 200 reviews and articles. Oh my what a cult lol.

Bound for sound

Stereophile

TAS

In Terms of Music

Positive Feedback

Rolling Stone

Better Homes & Garden

CCM

Video Magazine

Audio Magazine

Sounds Like newsletter

Audio Adventure

Hi Fi News and Record review

Soundstage

MMR

Widescreen Review

…...would you like me to keep going LOL It seems like there are quite a few who belong to this cult. Yep that Harry Pearson was a little demon because he tuned with MG and again.....should I go on LOL

Hm Prof how many reviews and articles have been written about you exactly? Oh and I do have another question why is it you and amg don't use your real names for your username. LOL are you guys perhaps in your "safe space"? Yep, you guys are absolutely being internet trolls. Hiding behind your keyboards LOL. Congratulating each others trolling as if your convincing folks that Michael is not a good guy. Michael is in hiding because he's been to busy dealing with clients all weekend. Aren't you boys all that LOL. Oh no I used caps with my LOL, that means I'm laughing at you out loud. If you can't lighten up than the rest of the audio world can have a good laugh "watch out it's the tune your instrument cult". I was talking to MG just now and he said "Hi". Got some tunes to go listen to.

Hi Prof

We live in a cool place just off the strip on the edge of the Arts District in Vegas. There are 4 audiophiles and a few other musicians that all live within a few feet of each other. This whole area is basically an entertainment hub and Vegas is pouring a lot of money into making from Sahara to downtown one giant arts center. Lots of music playing all the time and when MG moved in we all got systems and it's been one big listening party ever since. Many times MG doesn't even lock his door folks come in and jamm out, it's a cool hang. It's gated of course with good security. It's been nicknamed TuneLand on the Strip. I think MG's going to put in a tunable room here which will probably be open to anyone.

Hey guys gotta go. Have a great and safe night!

Jay

Hope you guys had a meaningful holiday.

Michael was playing classical chamber music most of the day and of course said I could come by anytime. When I did the music that was playing was featuring the flute. I believe it was flute, violin, viola and cello with a sprinkling of harpsicord but the flute was taking the lead for sure. MG said "what would you like to hear differently" and I replied that it would be nice if the other instruments moved more forward and present or is that the way the recording was done? "the playback can be almost anyway you want it to be, the content is all there" he said. Michael looked through a drawer of blocks and picked out 4. He placed them underneath the crossover and immediately the flute moved 2 feet back into the mix and mellowed and the strings became fuller featuring the mid and bottom tone of the instruments more. He said give it about an hour to fill in but I was already happy with the change. I went about my day and called to see if MG had moved on from that recording he said no he wanted to see where the settling ended up. I popped in upstairs to give a quick listen. I stayed for the whole recording hunting for the flute solo it wasn't there. All the instruments were now feeding off of each other with equal presence. I have to admit I asked MG if he had switched recordings "nope just let it settle in after the mechanical change". That was another WOW moment for me.

I was mistaken Michael told me the instrument is an oboe not a flute. He played me two recordings so I could identify the difference. My apologies to Mr. Holliger.

I'm also sorry glupson I thought you were kidding me. After the adjustment and settling the "oboe" didn't stick out over the other instruments.

"I eventually found difficulty in taking the required time and patience to dial in a single recording because listening time is always cut way too short."

The opposite is true for me. I find tuning to be a must for listening. You can tune to one setting and leave it like that, or you can tune per recording. Since meeting Michael I spend all most all my free time listening to my system or going to hear live music. Everything music means more to me now like I'm a part of it.

I'm surprised you had difficulty tuning. I find it surprisingly easy and fun. Of course MG is a very good and patient teacher. He gets you thinking and doesn't waste time on theory building. He simply knows how it works and does it. Again talk and walk. I find the hobby of listening to be more enjoyable than someone talking maybe and if. I also feel good in the fact that tuning has been around forever and stereo is still a baby. There's something about tuning that makes sense out of the hobby. Especially when you read all these conflicting theory builders go at it like they discovered something new. I feel better about using what has always been there.

Michael Green

Your a genius! You knew exactly how this thread would develop. You know this hobby's personality better than any of us.

Only you could have made this OP I am convinced.

Robert and Prof

Michael does walk on water fairly well :)

He’s also a very happy camper which it doesn’t appear you two are doing so well with that. Michael is also an excellent marketer! It comes natural to him. When you love what you do and your as good at it as he is some people are going to love it and some are going to be in a rage about it. I doubt rage makes a dent on Michael with the exception that he doesn’t hang out with hostile personalities.

Let me also add this, it's a thread guys. Some of you treat this forum like the last word spoken with anger wins. But when you write on a public site, it's there for all to see. Front to back side to side.

Drewster88

Hallelujah and Amen to that brother! Bring on the tunes. Let us have church in this house.

and Prof, just saw your post

Couldn't be happier for you. Have a great day with your son and music!

Robert

I could never picture MG saying "the truth hurts". Why would the "truth" hurt? That sounds like a description of a difference between Michael and you. I don't know you Robert but I do know that if you think that Michael would say "the truth hurts" you have no idea who Michael is. I can picture MG saying "I love the truth" but never "the truth hurts".

"If you are looking specifically for talk on "Tuning," why would you be coming to this thread? There is already an A-gon thread Michael G created specifically devoted to his method of tuning:"

a) This is the OP’s thread. He can take any approach he chooses to make his points.

"The Method Of Tuning:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/the-method-of-tuning

You refer to "off topic" posts or comments in this thread...but what do you actually think IS the topic described in the thread title and OP?"

b) The OP is "Talk but not walk?"

"Do you see the word "Tuning" mentioned?"

c) Tuning is a form of walking, just as tweaking or any other form of adjusting your system (already covered several times in this thread)

"The topic was this:

MG: 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’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?

So, as communicated by the words MG actually used in his OP, the topic wasn’t directly about tuning, but was concerned the hobby of High End Audio - which of course is what you and I and everyone else is doing here. And then he was saying some people are faking it in high end audio, only talking (e.g. talking theory) but not in fact testing empirically what they are talking about."

e) The topic is directly about "Talk but no walk" Making adjustments to your system is walking.

"I don’t see how you could ignore that this was the subject of the OP."

f) Covered earlier. The OP is "talk but not walk".

"Now, given that was actually the subject he raised...how is it not on topic to ask questions like:

How might that critique actually apply and to whom?"

g) Explain in more detail please.

"How is one to know when one is, on this account, "doing the hobby" and not faking it?"

h) Making adjustments to your system is doing the hobby.

"And hence what do you mean exactly by empirical testing - do you mean simply trying anything?"

i) The definition of empirical testing is covered in depth on the internet.

"Or being more rigorous in the method of testing, since you mentioned engineering and science?"

j) Please define your use of the word "rigorous" in the context of testing methods.

"And is it actually illegitimate, or even not part of the hobby, to talk about theory, and whether a theory actually seems cogent, explanatory or realistic?"

k) Theory covers a wide range of talking. Some are close to walking and some are more imaginative what ifs.

"Why is talking about audio theory "faking it?"

l) It isn’t. Faking it is faking it.

"And is someone faking it simply by questioning the basis for some other audiophile’s claim?"

m) Faking it is faking it. It’s when an event is made to appear like it is happening yet it is not really being done.

"Why wouldn’t it make sense to FIRST want to see good reasons for why a tweak or product is likely to be efficacious, when deciding whether it’s worth one’s time or money to try it out?"

n) There is no replacing physically doing. Talk does not replace walk.

"Does one HAVE to have experience with X in order to ask legitimate questions about X?"

o) What specifically is X?

"And as to the division between questioning a claimed phenomenon via theory or personal experience: Why can’t one point to empirical evidence gathered by other people?"

p) In HEA this would be called a review. Reviews don’t determine what a product would sound like when used under different conditions.

"If to speak about a phenomenon, or to have a belief about it without direct experience was illegitimate, then we could never avail ourselves of all the scientific evidence and knowledge that WE ourselves didn’t gather."

q) There is doing and there is theory. What conclusions you draw from that, would be your belief.

"Why aren’t any or all of those questions legitimate and applicable to ask someone who made an OP like Michael’s?"

r) Michael and I are doing the answering of these questions while we are driving to one of the shops and back. I’m asking and he’s answering. It’s not a matter of MG not wanting to answer as much as it is needing to take care of issues based on importance.

"Isn’t it fair to inquire further about whether Michael’s appeal to empiricism, science, experience and why someone might, or might not, deserve to have their own methods, or interaction with the hobby characterized with the derogatory phase "faking it."

s) This question has been beat to death. Others will need to come to their own conclusions. MG doesn’t see his choice of words with the same meaning as you do. I’ve looked it up. MG says more like this sentence "all the experts agree that you can’t fake it". He used faking but not in a negative sense but more of a factual sense.

"And those are the right-on-topic questions I was raising from the beginning, that MG decided were irrelevant."

t) Your assuming something that may never change in your mind MG understands and accepts this. He also doesn’t have a problem with this. But MG only has a certain amount of time on his clock. He’s not saying this to be rude but to be factual. His view of you personally prof is MG may not have the time to get into a never ending debate.

Have to run we are here.

Robert, you don’t want the old school designers here?

I think Audiogon could do no better than to have some of HEA’s founding fathers hanging around here.

Can I make a suggestion? Wouldn’t it be wiser of you to start a different thread on the topic. When you make that statement here it looks like your agenda is to bump MG (a former employer of yours) off of Agon somehow. I know you have issues with Michael because of some of the posts you have made here (most have been deleted) but the proper way to deal with those types of issues is not to air them out on the Audiogon forum.

"At it’s most basic, empirical means "based on experience." And most of what we infer is based on experience. And to add the word "testing" to "empirical" doesn’t help much because there is a huge gulf between "empirically testing" an idea...and "empirical testing" in the scientific sense."

The answer is Yes. All the above but I want to tell you something about MG

Here’s Michael’s description of the situation between the two of you. The post you wrote a second ago is something that MG would dive into answering over the next several months. When I first met MG it didn’t take long to realize he has two modes. One is based on time allowed and the other is based on what he calls, all in. Michael as of a few weeks ago has been mentoring me to potentially becoming his assistant. I’m not the only assistant he has but we’re both hoping that I will develop into his immediate needs guy. In some ways he wants me to be a clone in other words. MG calls it being, his brain. If you saw the amount of decisions he makes a day and the types of decision it would probably blow some circuits.

Prof Michael is not a mean person at all he’s a machine a single minded extremely focused 24/7 machine. Your either going to love him or your going to hate him but it’s important that he exist. I’ve now had talks with several of his friends and advisors and the common theme is, good luck. Today when we were heading out on our adventures MG said hey lets go through some of prof’s questions totally out of the blue. At that moment you were as important as any audio project he has. He was totally dedicated to prof and nothing else till we got to our stop. As soon as we got to our stop if I would have said prof, he wouldn’t have a clue as to what I was talking about because he had shifted gears to going through wood. That’s MG.

I know your probably expecting an exchange with someone seeing this is a forum but MG is not the guy to have that with if your wanting fast answers. He’ll hit that next need and you won’t see him for days. It works good for TuneLand cause he can set the pace and I know he would like to be available here but I see something like this thread as being he will stop by choose his point make it and be gone. He’s told me he hopes things can happen that way here but feels that may never happen.

glupson prof

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.

for the first time on this thread I am actually ashamed to associate myself with you guys

Some of you get it (I think), but the majority of posters still haven't a clue. The on lookers who have emailed Michael "get it". MG said this is exactly what would happen (watch) on this thread. Here's the OP

"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"

brilliant MG! 

glupson

Hope you enjoy it! It includes "Raspberry Beret".

MG is 58 years old. His schooling was and is tutored. I say "is" because I believe he still takes courses.

Prof

LOL

Robert, is the story now that you didn’t work for RoomTune? I’m confused. So Michael introduced you to Brent’s audiopoint in your store, you moved to Ohio and worked at the RoomTune factory. And now your saying you weren’t there? Second why are you obsessing over a brief period of employment in the 90’s? Who cares how much stock Michael owned in RoomTune? Michael is RoomTune. It reads like your trying to make a story line that changes as facts come out or even that you are trying to change the facts themselves. Robert no offence but why would I or anyone else wish to call you about your again brief stay at RoomTune for 9 months back in the 90’s?

I’m sure MG has had lots of employees during the original RoomTune years when there were many mom and pop stereo stores who carried the product. It’s my understanding that MG was either developing or traveling tuning up people during the 90’s. That’s what the magazines were indicating. I’m not trying to be disrespectful Robert but hasn’t it already been shared that you were an employee of MG’s or RoomTune or whatever the company was for 9 months? My question is who cares?

"Look who is talking".

glupson I don't buy into the "look who is talking" bit. In MG's case it's "look who is walking". I don't know anyone in the business who has gone from start to finish like Michael has. I'm not saying they're not out there but I haven't met them. Picture having a system from start to finish without any enclosed chassis? I'm not just talking about the playback part but all the way from the microphone forward. He started with the tunable studio (live room), control room, mastering room, in studio playback room all tunable. All the equipment was without their chassis, or custom built without chassis from the microphones on. No cable barrels no plugs every stage was either hardwired or clipped. No cover even on the mixers. A system from start to finish completely stripped down or built stripped.  Another studio where you had 3 close to identical rooms. You start at the live room then the control room then the playback room all in a row. You entered by the control room and the live room was on the left and playback room on the right. For demos you could walk through all three stages of the recording to get a reference.

Hi glupson

I believe I understood you correctly, thanks for explaining again. My take of this sentence however is different.

"What I’m asking is a very simple question in a hobby that is suppose to be based on "doing", why fake it?"

I don’t think MG was implying anything or he wouldn’t have put a question mark there. There’s a huge golf between "why fake it?" and "your faking it".

If you read the Tunees who have come up, it’s all positive correct? Happy successful listeners no negatives to be found. Now compare this with the ones who "challenged" Michael. Defensive, angry, accusing, assuming and creating false narratives and made up stories.

Also glupson take another read through. There isn’t a prof vs MG or a Robert vs MG, read it again. MG doesn’t engage in the fight with the exception of a couple "get real" moments. I engage with both prof and Robert more than Michael does. In the cases with both prof and Robert Michael attempts to give both of them an out. Prof Robert Kosst are getting their posts removed cause they are "abusing another member". Michael isn’t getting his posts removed cause he is being a gentleman.

glupson if you see MG fighting anyone it’s because either you or someone else has painted those pictures. MG’s not going to engage in a fight over stuff he has done that’s pretty stupid wouldn’t you think? Michael’s more likely to crack a joke. However if you look at prof Robert kosst and a couple of others you can clearly see some issues. And you don’t have to look on this thread alone. Look at their posts on other forums. Pretty much the same MO where ever these guys show up. Again look at the OP and then go check out other threads. MG’s not down on any of these guys he’s just letting them paint their own pictures of themselves.

Hindu Love Gods

A part of rock history. HLG is one of those recordings that was done during the making of another recording "Sentimental Hygiene" (Warren Zevon). Hindu recorded these covers and never intended to release the songs but the session was so good it had to be. I had to look this up because this cd is killer and MG told me it was done with REM members. The soundstage sounds to be about 20’ x 20’ x 10’(H). The front to back goes about 3’ behind my head and there’s great side to side presence. The drums are bold and full of midrange with the cymbals splashing across the whole stage when they hit. The top end is very warm sounding and there are no holes in the stage anywhere from the beginning of this recording all the way till the end. Kick drum is perfect and together with the snare it gives off a punchy rib cage kick and also warmth. Nothing is coming from the speakers (an MG trait) and there’s that MG headphone feel to the sound. Michael loves his nearfield. I did want to mention something about the kick drum. Michael has it tuned in to almost sounding like a big floor tom. I need to go back and listen more because there’s some creative drum stuff going on later in the session where the bottom drops way down and shakes the whole room. Nice and beautiful and very deep. All the instruments are clear and in their own spaces and any pans are very obvious. An easy to follow soundstage. Garage sounding? I don’t know. It does have that in the room with you sound if that’s what you mean but I would say more of a small bar type of sound. It’s a recording one can rock to.

"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 disagree with this completely all day long. You see you didn’t mean to but you just did what you accuse the OP of doing. You were just prejudice toward the Tunees. You have no idea who the individual Tunees are, how long they have been Tunees or what made them go from the typical HEA over to tuning. You did however make a fair statement about the some of the gang who disagreed "they may be grumpy". Trust me they are grumpy!

Now back to the OP. The Tunees didn’t become Tunees because they were seduced by MG quite the opposite. The Tunees became Tunees because they "Walked". They tried tuning and it led them to a deeper meaning and understanding of the hobby of listening to music. You see glupson even you have a built in prejudice why? Because you assume instead of try. You see "talk and not walk"? You assume it’s a captive audience without ever doing what they do. You presume you know who Michael is based on the talk your reading instead of finding out by doing.

It’s all very simple and won’t ever change no matter who is doing the "talking" you me or anyone else. glupson your going to keep on being bias because you have no foundation past words. You will continue to recycle your words along with the rest who are talking. No matter how you try to understand there is only one way to get to understanding. You either talk or you walk. The only way you will ever know if you are walking is if you walk.