I’m not a chance taker. I got my hip waders and raincoat ready.
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
2,164 responses Add your response
^^^^ Yet another in a long string of "why you mad, bruh?" posts, that simply ascribe a negative emotion or motivation to someone, while claiming "why not be cheery like me?" rather than address the issues under debate. (There is a frankly eerie consistency in the method of passive-aggressive discourse among MG and his followers). I just went for a wonderful walk in our neighbourhood with my son, and returned to listen happily to some Curtis Mayfield on vinyl. Well then, I guess these cheery facts mean I don’t have to address the content of anyone’s argument - including anyone raising skeptical questions about my claims. That’s convenient! BTW, I felt no need at all to re-tune my system per song or album. It sounds quite wonderful and satisfying to me on almost everything I listen to. I guess we who are extremely happy with our systems have moved "beyond tuning" to a state of satisfaction that tuners haven’t arrived at. (Because they feel the need to keep changing the sound of their system to make different recordings sound the way they want). Perhaps Tuners will get there someday. |
BTW, I felt no need at all to re-tune my system per song or album. It sounds quite wonderful and satisfying to me on almost everything I listen to. Completely agree Prof! Sometimes I feel we all lose sight of the endgame at times, I know I am as guilty of that as anybody. Not saying we should all be content or complacent but maybe the obsessive desires to endlessly tweak can detract from the very reason of our hobby. And that to me is just listening to and enjoying the music! Cheers! |
uberwaltz, To some, tweaking/tuning is the hobby, not a distraction on the way to bliss. Many seem to think of it as a waste of time and energy, but some like it so there should be nothing wrong with them having their LEGOs. If one wants to hang chicken bones, the other putting dominoes under amplifiers, third one demagnetizing plastic, fourth one disassembling an expensive piece of equipment to move the musicians in the room, so what. Silly thing is that those who are not that interested in doing such things are annoyed by those who do while those who do such things seem to think they are something much better than those who cannot care less about chicken bones, etc. That is messed up. |
The ones selling equipment? That’s pretty cynical and silly. Not even close. It’s the audiophiles who are striving for better sound, who will take great pains to do so. It’s not the ones sitting on their Barco Loungers with a contented expression on their faces. 🙄 Lets salute the ones who will not accept the status quo, who will not go along with the program, the ones who are forced to study and understand what all these tweaks and advanced concepts are all about. Why is there so much ruckus about fuses, about contact enhancers, about lots of things? Is this the flat line club? There is a revolution going on. Hel-loo! Wake up and smell the coffee! ☕️ I’ve seen a lot of knuckleheads in this line of work but you guys might take the cake. 🎂 I’m absolutely amazed folks can be so cavalier, so blasé. So content. 🐄 if you aren’t going crazy over audio these days you must not understand the situation. Maybe schedule a trip to your doctor, have him check for a Pulse. |
"I'm enjoying listening to my tunable system from Michael. That's the short and sweet of it, and a reminder to those who are getting so angry that they don't need to be." Cómo estás haciendo mi amigo ? Estoy deseando verte este otoño. Me alegro de que disfrutes de la Rev6. tener un buen fin de semana Michael |
Some of the people might have just been quicker on their way to success so they are content. geoffkait, lots of this thread is populated by people who refuse to go with the program. The program of accepting that they should do something that seems unbelievable to them or otherwise be called cows, clowns, and whatever else. That is what the whole ruckus has mostly been about. They ask questions and want to learn. First part of the thread has been full of posts demanding those. |
glupson Can I be straight up with you. No one I know, including myself in this, has ever said they can’t hear the difference between the sounds of capacitors. If someone claims to be a HEA audiophile and makes these types of claims, there’s no point for someone like me to talk to them. Do you honestly think I should be spending my time talking to them? Keep in mind I may have a project sitting in front of me where I have 10 caps ready for me to listen to and give my reports on. Is that me being rude or choosing to be practical? Now when that person takes the time to learn the differences we actually then can have something meaningful to talk about. But if they believe there are no sonic differences it’s unproductive for them to be talking to me or I them. I should be spending my time discussing the differences with the guy who is on the same page as me. Like with this tuning thing. I’m honestly not interested in talking to the guy who isn’t sure it works, when I have thousands of guys to talk to who are actually tuning. If you tell me glupson that you aren’t sure if tuning works, what’s wrong with me saying "come back to me when you know it does and we can tune together"? It makes zero sense for me to try to sell tuning when I am engaging with people who already tune. I can share tuning with someone, and so can other Tunees, but if someone doesn’t believe or hasn’t tried it’s a mute point. I’m not going to beg someone to make an adjustment when I can have fun with those making adjustments. Why would someone who doesn’t "do" even post on a thread talking about doing? I’m never going to convince you or amg or prof or whoever. The only one who convinces you is you. What we have on this thread is people who do are doing and people who aren’t, aren’t. You can pretty much point to them after reading a couple of their posts. You can also read on here when someone is getting really upset. I can’t control someone else’s temper. That’s all on that individual. What I can do however is ignore them, because they’re really just looking for an argument. People who make arguments are usually people who defend their own lack of doing a topic. You see there is no arguments when one takes the time to "do". Someone says "oh I’ve done that and didn’t hear a difference", well why talk to me about it then? I’d rather just move on from that type of person. Why talk to someone about hearing if they can’t hear it? You know glupson, Geoff is so right. It’s one of those hobbies that is always going to go further if we have the will to do so. Someone who comes up on a thread like this and says "I’m done" probably shouldn’t even be on this thread. No one ever arrives in this hobby as long as there is one more recording to listen to, or the chance to hear more of that recording. The term walking is an action. glupson, let me ask you to do something. Find Grannyring's posts about the OP and read it again, giving it some thought. Grannyring's view of the OP is correct. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Michael, Your last post shows how arrogant and conceited you are. To assume that it's 'Michael's way or no way' shows your contempt for the other very knowledgeable Audiophile or enthusiast people in this world. That is what was exhibited in your very first post as OP and that is why people other than my self questioned you. You have a very poor attitude towards those who just enjoy music for what it is, Your glib posts screak of sarcasm and know it all behaviour. I for one will not be engaging you or your like any more. I would suggest you take a lesson in tuning up your smarmy attitude. Goodbye Michael. |
Your right amg, you should say goodbye if you think anyone here is not happy to see someone else enjoying their music. You and a few others that came looking for that fight by all means should leave, and you've been told that more than once. Why be on a thread your unhappy with and don't understand amg? You guys seriously have been trying to make something out of nothing from the very beginning and you get POed that no one wants to argue with you. If that makes me arrogant and conceited ..... well ok ..... I guess there's worse things to be. But shhhhh don't tell the Tunees cause they think I'm a fun guy, and nice. I'll tell you a little secret between you and me. These guys who have chimed in on this thread that tune, well they love tuning their systems. I know that's a horrible thing, but they just can't get enough of it. I mean think of their nerve. If they hear something they want to change with their sound, ok I gotta whisper this...they change it. Can you believe that...that's just nonsense. Imagine having a stereo system that you can tune....well it's...it's....un-hobby-ish of them. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Hi Roberjerman, hey I’ve got even a better one. Now get a load of this one. Delusional: a couple hundred thousand guys buying $500.00 amplifiers in $10,000.00-$50,000.00 chassis. Now that’s a good one. LOL oh oh I have another one. This is a hoot so hang on. I heard this one the other day. Guys buying $10,000.00-$250,000.00 speakers and (get a load of this, this will kill ya) and putting them in a living room, against the wall with (I’m not joking, I swear to God I'm serious lol) with a huge equipment rack in between them. Oh man there’s a million of em. you said it oh man delusional is right But I got 1 more, you’ll like this. It’s one thing that these guys were fooled into buying these $500.00 amps for 25 grand lets say, but when they get these amps home, they look at the front cover and there is only a volume control. $25,000.00 and only a volume control? Shoot I’m no fool, if it’s me I’m taking it back and getting the rest of my amp. lol Oh geeze now that’s some funny stuff. mg |
They are 'tuning' the atmosphere with methane. : ) Though written in partial jest, I did have a point...which supports one made here by some...that solutions are out there and being open to exploring the possibilities is rewarding. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/people-and-culture/food/the-plate/2016/11/seaweed-may-be-the-solu... |
Trivia time. You can tune a piano but you can’t tuna fish was actually the title of an album by Reo Speedwagon. No idea if they were first to use that phrase but there you go. Now I will be leaving this thread as MG is quite right, I have no place here as I will never be walking HIS walk by HIS terms. Just an example. I returned home late last night from my daughter’s graduation and after having had to deal with real live people all night(yuk!), I plonked myself down in my fave sofa, turned on my music maker and just drifted away to heavenly sounds and relaxed. Now if tuning involves moving blocks around under components, opening up covers and snipping cable ties around caps etc to optimise each recording then I am never climbing on that bus and freely admit it. Anything of that nature would have taken all the instant gratification and relaxation out of last night. Please note I am not saying that MG tuning is not real or has its place and gets results, it is just not for me. But good luck to all who walk that path in all sincerity. I will stick to just being a tweaker. So long and thanks for the fish! |
Sorry, dudes and dudettes, listening to music is not really a hobby. It may be enjoyable and you may do it frequently and you may do it for long periods of time sometimes but it’s not a hobby. Any more than watching Model trains go around the track is a hobby, without building the tracks, painting the train cars, the scenery, town, adding automation, whatever, etc. The audio hobby means rolling up your sleeves and actively seeking good sound, and better sound. Unless you believe audio is a plug-and-play experience. In which case you’re not in the hobby anyway. Or if you wouldn’t be more entertained by better sound. In which case you’re not in the hobby, either. A hobby should be active, interactive. But maybe this a a good definition of hobby for some of you, “A hobby is something to keep you busy and stop you from getting into mischief.” |
Did anybody claim that listening to music is a hobby? I certainly did not and do not recall a post saying that either. But I also did not search too hard so somebody may have done. Rather listening to music is the end result of the hobby and such that in some instances people tend to get a little lost in actually remembering that. Now if because I choose not to follow MG method of tuning blindly and that makes ME NOT a member of this hobby club then so be it, I can live with that. My sole aim is to be able to sit down, listen to music and be relaxed. If that makes me out to "not get it"that is also cool. You will find me on my sofa...... Ciao. |
Take care uberwaltz. not for you :) we'll see! Hi Folks I've stated this earlier but nows a good time to review. I have several systems. One very much like uberwaltz just described. I come in plop down and fade away. It's pretty much a tweak and leave. I also have a plug & play HEA system. I have a casual system, a headphone system and of course the Tunable system. Why do I bring this up again? Well because it's part of my personal walking. Often on this thread I've read people trying to define the tunable system as this monster that is constantly in need of a tuning, and the truth is, I've never said that and it's not true. The fact is my tunable system is by far the best sounding one I have, but also is the most stable system able to play more music without touching it. At the same time having the ability to take it much further than my other systems it's the ultimate win win for me. Do I enjoy the other systems? You bet, I love them but here's something else that for me is important. You know how people say they have a rock system, or a jazz system, or classical system? Well my tunable system is all three. I can line up my jazz recordings and set the system to one particular sound and have a blast. A few days or weeks later I can reset that same system to classic rock and do the same thing. And classical to boot often gets a different setting. Or I can set the system up and leave it for months if I want never touching a thing but the remote and CDP. For those times when I do want to get adventurous this baby goes pretty much where ever I want to go. I know people have come up to say how they couldn't handle all the adjusting and I wonder if they've missed the point or if I explained it wrong and giving the picture of this thing with a thousand arms out of control, where the true is quite the opposite. Fact is the components in my tunable system are much easier to tune up than my turntables ever were. And I had 12 or so TTs at one time. Talk about touchy. So I mostly reject the whole going nuts tuning thing. Personally I think the objections are because this might be new to some folks and combined with that audiophile forum skeptic entitlement of pressing any persona thing (deep breath) stuff gets very weird and can turn into a complete misinfomercial event. I don't know why people do that but it turns me off to the point I won't even talk to the person. I'm sure my turn off to that made some turned off to me, but that sort of thing is separate from tuning your system. I hope in time this thread becomes more of a gel and less of a jail. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
People oft deride audiophiles for turning a somewhat benign hobby into a ritualistic and even a fetish. Look at treating CDs. Folks twenty years ago were put off, should I say repelled, by the ritual some audiophiles, even well known audiophiles like Bob Crump and Clark Johnsen, performed before playing a CD. You know, the sprays, the buffing, coloring the stupid thing, demagnetizing it, even “chipping” the damn thing. Many audiophiles would say, Whoa! Hey, I’m not getting involved in all of that. I’m obsessive enough now. Still others would say, that’s stupid. That can’t really do anything anyway, you change the physical data on the disc. It’s all 1s and 0s. So what’s the point? So, obviously at some point there was a fork in the road, the tweakers, the doers,,went one way and the anti tweakers, the ones who touted the equipment, went another. Now, here it is twenty years down the road and audiophiles still have their rituals. Perhaps even more ritualistic, what with the long burn in periods with some of the new tweaks on the block. 😩 |
Wow this was good!!!! "Sorry, dudes and dudettes, listening to music is not really a hobby. It may be enjoyable and you may do it frequently and you may do it for long periods of time sometimes but it’s not a hobby. Any more than watching Model trains go around the track is a hobby, without building the tracks, painting the train cars, the scenery, town, adding automation, whatever, etc. The audio hobby means rolling up your sleeves and actively seeking good sound, and better sound. Unless you believe audio is a plug-and-play experience. In which case you’re not in the hobby anyway. Or if you wouldn’t be more entertained by better sound. In which case you’re not in the hobby, either. A hobby should be active, interactive. But maybe this a a good definition of hobby for some of you" I’ll take what he’s having. In fact I'll take the check. |
Katie I realise your reading and comprehension skills are a little rusty but.... Yes I said I would be leaving this thread as it serves no purpose for me and I none for the OP. However I did NOT say that was my last post or just when I would leave . So, now here is the one you thought you read. This is my last post on this thread. Got it? Keep up the good work. |
uberwaltz Katie I realise your reading and comprehension skills are a little rusty but.... Yes I said I would be leaving this thread as it serves no purpose for me and I none for the OP. However I did NOT say that was my last post or just when I would leave . So, now here is the one you thought you read. This is my last post on this thread. Got it? Keep up the good work. >>>>I suggest filing that under Whatever. |
geoffkait, "...the tweakers, the doers,,went one way and the anti tweakers, the ones who touted the equipment, went another."Although it is kind of a right description of a situation, maybe "anti-tweakers" is not the right word. Maybe "non-tweakers" would be more correct. There is a crowd out there that is not bothered by tweaking, but is not against anyone doing it, either. They are not interested in fighting about it. They even have minds open that there may be something to it, but have decided it is not what they would pursue for different reasons, inconvenience being one of them. uberwaltz suggested he is exactly that, if I understood his most recent posts correctly. "Anti-tweakers" suggest more active approach to tweaking, even if it is in negative context. I would guess, entirely based on nothing remotely tangible, that most of the people who bought anything more than a Beats portable speaker so they could listen to music in some "better quality" fall in "non-tweakers" category. Having said that, this thread is populated with a number of "tweakers", "anti-tweakers", and a decent number of "non-tweakers". Nice mix, I would say. |
geoffkait, "A hobby should be active, interactive."I think I understand the connection to audio equipment you are making, but I wonder would the principle apply to stamp-collecting, too. You buy an expensive stamp, and paint on it to make it a little better to your eyes. It would be the active part. I am struggling to imagine interactive part of that proposal. Stamp saying "What are you doing to me, I was already great", or something like that. |
Stamp collecting is not a real hobby. It’s mostly intended for invalids, stay indoors types and people who have no real interests. Same with butterfly collecting. The hobby of audio is for active types and people with wide interests in electronics, physical science, physics, chemistry, astronomy, quantum mechanics, metaphysics, poetry and forestry. |
Hooboy... It looks like even more people have had enough of the passive-aggressive marketing act. Why am I returning with this post? Because Michael decided to return to imply more nonsense about me and others. Michael Green wrote: Can I be straight up with you. I think some of us know where to place our bets on that one. No one I know, including myself in this, has ever said they can’t hear the difference between the sounds of capacitors. If someone claims to be a HEA audiophile and makes these types of claims, there’s no point for someone like me to talk to them. Of course, neither I, nor amg56, nor anyone else that I remember seeing in this thread, ever made such a claim. In fact I said clearly that I was NOT claiming capacitors sound different, and amg56 simply was asking Michael for evidence for his claims; he wasn’t declaring the claims false. Just "why don’t you answer these obvious questions??" And yet here is Michael suggesting the people he won’t interact with have claimed capacitors don’t sound different, in order to not answer their questions. This is so indicative of the level of intellectual integrity shown by MG on this thread. Contrast that with the response by another manufacturer on the thread, e.g. audiopoints, who simply took questions seriously and answered them. Even if it didn’t remove all the reasons for skepticism, no problems ensued because this was how honest interaction works and they received kudos. This shows the difference between the way Michael portrays people - the people asking skeptical questions must be angry trolls - and the way they are: people here asking legitimate, honest questions who respond quite happily to being treated with some respect and honest interaction. And that’s why many people here are being turned off by MG’s posts. Do you honestly think I should be spending my time talking to them? No. Because because that would be how someone familiar with, and respectful of, actual empirical science would act: they would welcome challenging questions. Anyone who actually spent time much of his life in "empirical labs" and hanging with "empirical science folks" would know this. It’s also what good engineers do. They explain things to each other, and are happy to educate anyone asking good, relevant questions. But that is not how MG has behaved in this thread. It is the salesmen, not the hard nosed empiricist, who seeks the easy sell - looking to anyone who "already believes" or who can be readily made to believe a claim. Why would someone who doesn’t "do" even post on a thread talking about doing? Micheal didn’t make a thread about "doing it" (he has made a thread about that already: the method of tuning). He made a thread on the topic of NOT DOING it - critiquing people for not "doing" and asking people WHY they are NOT doing it. It’s in the very title, down to his very last sentence! Imagine being this confused about your own authorship of a thread: You enter a forum devoted to car enthusiasts with a post suggesting that some members of the forum were not being honest or consistent in their approach. For instance, they profess to be loyal Americans who talk about American cars, but their actual activity doesn’t support this: they are buying foreign cars. Your whole post calls these people out for hypocrisy or being fakers. And you end with the challenge, for those engaging in this behaviour, "Why buy foreign?" Naturally the very people your thread is addressing, and who you have just challenged to explain themselves - show up to challenge the assumptions in your thread and explain themselves. And then you wonder: "Wait...why would anyone buying foreign cars even post in this thread? This thread is about being a loyal American and buying American cars, it’s not about the people buying foreign cars!" Just imagine how bizarre that is. To make a thread whose content ACTUALLY concerned criticizing the people who buy foreign cars, and in which you addressed questions to those people, and then acting confused why anyone you are criticizing would respond to the thread! The obvious inference is that such a person is either being clueless...or disingenuous. MG’s behaviour demonstrates that he didn’t want any real conversation with the people he was criticising - this thread only appeared to serve his purpose to the degree he could turn the attention to his tuning and gaining more exposure for his website. As numerous others in the thread have pointed out. And people notice how condescending and blinkered it is to keep implying, as Michael has done continuously from the OP, that people who are not doing Michael Green Room Tuning are not "walking the walk" or "doing the hobby" or are only "talkers not doers." EVERYONE here is "doing the hobby." We’ve all put plenty of time into carefully selecting and dialing in our systems. I myself put years into my room, working with acousticians, doing my own work, playing with acoustic treatments (which I will still do from time to time), speaker placement, trying various components, (including using many different cables over the years!) etc. I recently spent months re-constructing my own equipment rack for my new turntable to isolate it - even testing using measurements to see the results of various materials on absorbing vibration. I’m learning about and altering VTA, impedance, and all the turntable tweaking goodies, etc. I’m seeking advice on and learning about good subwoofer integration - buying the right components, measuring devices and have already spent effort "doing" in initial testing with the subwoofers. Yet Michael Green continually implies that I, and others like me who have our own ideas and experience, are not being "empirical" like he is, and he places us in the category of "talking" and "not doing." This happens when we dare challenge Michael to provide explanations or good evidence for his own claims. We are "doing" - we just aren’t "doing" the specific methods - and/or using the products - that Michael evangelizes and self-promotes. And this level of B.S. richly deserves to be called out whenever it is pushed around here. Not to mention, using this to barely conceal self-marketing. |
