I always suspected wcfeil was an 🍑🤡 tee, hee
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
- ...
- 2164 posts total
Hello Onlookers It's been a month since Michael Green has posted here on page 20. Here's the last thing he posted. "So anyway I’m very interested to see the next few posts and the agendas of the posters now that I have given the why of the OP." mg Here's the Talk but not walk? thread on the TuneLand forum. http://tuneland.forumotion.com/t440-talk-but-not-walk-an-audiophile-forum-case-study |
grannyring No, one cannot know exactly how a system sounds from a picture. Well, they can actually get a fair idea sometimes. If I see a big TV screen in between the speakers on the same plane , then I know what that does for sound. Same for many speaker placement errors. I used wood platforms and assorted wood diffusion and footers over the years and have a sense for what they do for sound also. So based on my many rigs, set ups and experience I can certainly speculate on many SQ attributes from pictures. That being said, the Tuneland rooms are extreme and while interesting to me, they will always remain a curiosity as there is no way our living room could ever look like that! >>>Like the old geezer in Chinatown told Geddes, you may think you know what’s going on but you don’t. While your detective work is not completely all wet you still would be unable to know what the sound is in the room with or without a TV. Yes, I realize audiophiles are very high on the idea that a TV between the speakers is a bad idea. But I say that idea is not entirely true. For example, a TV in the center would have little effect for dipoles. Even if there was no TV between the speakers or no TV in the room you STILL wouldn’t be able to say what the sound would be from looking at a picture. Even with lots of expensive room treatments you wouldn’t be able to say what the system would sound like. It might sound like you know what. A picture is not worth a thousand words. It’s not worth anything. |
- 2164 posts total