@mapman
I just realized you have over 15,000 posts! Oh my goodness you deserve the trophy!
I just realized you have over 15,000 posts! Oh my goodness you deserve the trophy!
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
Michael Green, Thanks for your post. It does bring new questions and clarifies some of the things. First, as it was addressed to me I will put a disclaimer for myself, I am not on either side of this thread. I am more of a curious spectator, even if it labels me as a time-waster for you. I am a non-tweaker, non-tuner, music-in-the-background most of the time, etc., but do not discard me quite yet. I have minimal knowledge, and no formal education, about electronics including capacitors. I have more knowledge and more formal education about some other topics that are not within the scope of Audiogon. "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?"It depends on how much time you have, how much enthusiasm, and your personality would matter, too. Most of the people have not had an opportunity to hear the same equipment with different capacitors. They have no time or skills for experimenting with it. To those more suspicious ones it seems like a bogus claim, sort of a placebo, rather than real effect, and they would like more explanation why that would happen before they "waste" their time and try for themselves. Probably smaller group (that I belong to) would take it at face value, acknowledging they have never had an experience that would prove or disprove claims about different-sounding capacitors. They will appreciate the opportunity if it comes along, but will not actively pursue it or dismiss the claim as entirely fabricated. They are happy knowing there is some opinion/experience out there. For them, it is a cumbersome idea that may work. Dismissing both of these groups as time-wasters may be economical/efficient for you personally, but does not seem fair to them. There is also a true disadvantage to it. Surrounding yourself with only the people who see/hear things your way may be a dead end of progress that you are, I believe, still striving for. Considering thoughts and views of someone not completely aligned with yours may open up new avenues. Tweak them in some way. Not everyone out here who questions you is out to get you and prove you are a fake. Some are, but many are not. Time is one big constraint and I have been surprised how much time people on this thread, you included, have been able to put aside for this purpose. As that friend of yours said, maybe most are retired. Time is a big constraint when it comes to you debating what is clear to you and not to someone else. However, it is also a constraint for those who cannot "do" all the things as suggested. "But if they believe there are no sonic differences it’s unproductive for them to be talking to me or I them."This may be one view that I could agree with. If someone just does not want to accept the possibility that differences may exist, it is a lost battle for both. This thread is full of posts claiming "does" or "does not", but there are posts in the middle, too. Those are from curious ones with no experience. Again, most of the people cannot afford time, skill, or money to perform "doing" just for the sake of trying. They would like to be informed how believable the claim is first. "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."That is very fair to admit, but also closes you in the bubble of some sorts. It depends on your ultimate goal if that is the ideal way to approach this issue. If it is about you sharing your experience and knowledge, or sustaining your business within limited hours of the day that you have, it is almost the only way you can do it. As you say, there is enough people out there who share same passion. However, that approach is not promoting ideas you believe in. It leaves those who would like to know more about it ousted from the possibility. You may not have time or system to expand so you may be fine with that, but in a greater scheme of things, it becomes a circle, not a broadening/sharing/improving knowledge and reach. 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"?Well, that one we would have to disagree on as we may have different approaches to things because of who knows what, including personalities. Someone could say that it is wrong as you dismiss the person just because she/he is not sure about something. One thing is "tuning is crap and you are full of garbage" and that leads to nowhere. Another thing is "I am not sure if and how it works, I have never heard it". Many people would be interested in results, but where are they going to hear it first? At least to find some information that does not seem out-of-this-world? Those people get shut out of tuning. I am not implying you could or should be a guru saving them, but just dismissing them as not being worthy of talking to is also doing nobody a favor. Why would someone who doesn’t "do" even post on a thread talking about doing?That is simple. Some post just to kill time and have some interaction with other people. Others peep in, get interested, ask questions, diversify their thoughts and views in the process, and are happy they did. I, for one, am that kind. I doubt that such an approach would be unwelcome in most of discussions in any other field. In fact, such visitors are often warmly welcomed. It is fairly easy to explain something to an expert, but try explaining it to someone who is not that knowledgeable. "I’m never going to convince you or amg or prof or whoever."Here we have three different approaches. I know nothing about prof who became the loudest voice in this written communication. I disagreed with him on some of the approaches he has had, including not giving up when it was obvious that two of you were on two lines that will never meet. However, his questions are clearly based on the current state of research methodology. His questions are straight from the handbook for a reviewer at some specialized scientific publication. I am talking about questions about tuning results etc., not about your personality or presentation. The questions he asked would be nothing special in today's science. Anyone would be expecting them while still writing their first sentence. Now, some of that may be what I disagree with, but that is how it goes out there these days and prof decided to follow that well-established and accepted path. As for me, I abstained from arguing about results of tuning while keeping mind open that it might work and that I may one day hear it. In fact, I suggested that those who talked badly about the speakers you build just based on their description (something with white vans, I am not sure about details anymore) wait and go and hear them before dismissing them as bad. I thought that they did not separate their own annoyance by you (a person) from something inanimate that you are connected to. Someone says "oh I’ve done that and didn’t hear a difference", well why talk to me about it then?It is another simple one. The person wants to discuss why two of you, doing the same thing, came to different conclusion. If you are right, she/he should have heard a difference and vice versa. If there is a difference between your results, there may be something else at play and refusing to discuss it will not better anything. It will make two circles spinning close to each other, but still alone and closed. There may be a hundred reasons for someone not to hear what you hear. From haircut to broken equipment. It helps to try and narrow it down. It brings progress to the hobby/business that both of you cherish. Little incremental moves that, after a while, make a visible progress. What is wrong with that? By the way, in one of my recent posts I mentioned that you are the biggest talker on this thread. That was a compliment. I am not sure why your original post seems to deem "talkers" as some less-worthy crowd. It is not easy to be a good talker. Most of your posts are written quite well, despite someone agreeing or disagreeing with the content. Sure, someone may say that you evade etc., but you do it well nevertheless. I will look for grannyring's post about OP. I am curious what is there. On a different note, I did ask recently what it is about you that ignites so many people, call it rubs them the wrong way. I have a feeling it is not just the content of the discussion as responses, at least to me, seem to be out of proportion. Just your existence on this thread, as anonymous and ultimately unimportant for the world that it is, brings some combative tendencies out. Do you have any idea what it is? Does it happen to you in real life? It may have nothing to do with audio topics, but I noticed it over the days so I thought I might ask. |
Hi glupson I very much enjoyed your post! You have a gift in writing. Reading you I always feel I'm able to see your thoughts even if I have interpreted them incorrectly in the past. I think that is rare in forum settings because, like with emails and texting, we read the words but also add to them our own personalities to the mix. Like that game we played as kids where someone says something in someone's ear and by the time it gets pasted around the room it's a completely different meaning let alone words. I on the other hand am not a gifted writer and sometimes lucky if my points are intelligible at all. I'm far better at "show and tell" than tell alone. Which is why the OP applies to me as well. If I didn't have systems around me all day I doubt if I could "talk" anything meaningful or useful on these forums as well as TuneLand at all. I would say I am a walker who is constantly learning about the talk side of life in general. It's been weird that I have been asked to speak so many times through my life and even been asked to teach. I have written entire university courses and even accepted to teach at SUNY, but when I got there felt very inadequate that I would ever pull off what these amazing people do. Dr. Robert Barstow is one of these amazing personalities who at one time was pushing to build a Tuning Research Lab on the campus at Oneonta. That was one of my wow moments in life. I could ramble till your ears bleed about the people who have approached me about what I do. Again pretty wow-ish for me at least. "On a different note, I did ask recently what it is about you that ignites so many people, call it rubs them the wrong way. I have a feeling it is not just the content of the discussion as responses, at least to me, seem to be out of proportion. Just your existence on this thread, as anonymous and ultimately unimportant for the world that it is, brings some combative tendencies out. Do you have any idea what it is? Does it happen to you in real life? It may have nothing to do with audio topics, but I noticed it over the days so I thought I might ask." part one glupson, I can only give examples and hints to this cause it has been my personal mystery as well through life. I smile and think that maybe someday someone will look back and read this and other documents and say maybe I had a part (small part) in something much bigger than myself. I think it was amg who said how arrogant I was. Truth is I have no idea if I am or if I'm what the opposite side says. I get up every morning, thank God for another day, and begin tuning. My goal is to tune and build as much of a historical basis as I can through my lifetime. I use to think that while I was alive the Tuning Revolution would be in full swing and all things audio and mechanical would be sensory evaluated and self tuning, and even though it's going to be, it is still possibly beyond my lifetime. It's exciting to me though to see how far we have come in innovative technologies during our life times. The ego fights we see here on these pages and other pages of journals mean little to me. The push into what will be is what drives me. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
@grannyring "06-03-2018 8:39pm@mapman I just realized you have over 15,000 posts! Oh my goodness you deserve the trophy!" Is that why katie incessantly bullies and stalks him, jealousy? Honestly, I found the number more than surprising when you posted it. Maybe because mapman’s posts seem rational, well-informed, and kind explains why they never struck me as excessive or overly ubiquitous |
trelja @grannyring "06-03-2018 8:39pm@mapman I just realized you have over 15,000 posts! Oh my goodness you deserve the trophy!" Is that why katie incessantly bullies and stalks him, jealousy? Yes, I’m the one staliking him. 😀 Honestly, I found the number more than surprising when you posted it. Maybe because mapman’s posts seem rational, well-informed, and kind explains why they never struck me as excessive or overly ubiquitous. >>>>Yeah, right. You two must be in the same wavelength. 👯♀️ |
Chapter Two "On a different note, I did ask recently what it is about you that ignites so many people, call it rubs them the wrong way. I have a feeling it is not just the content of the discussion as responses, at least to me, seem to be out of proportion. Just your existence on this thread, as anonymous and ultimately unimportant for the world that it is, brings some combative tendencies out. Do you have any idea what it is? Does it happen to you in real life? It may have nothing to do with audio topics, but I noticed it over the days so I thought I might ask." Thanks again for the question glupson! You know how when we were kids and asked the question what do you want to be when you grow up? Sometimes nonfiction can be more exciting than fiction for those of us who lived the answer to the above kids question. I never pushed to become that grown up version of that kids question, it just happened. In fact it is kind of a curse to "be" something instead of "trying" to become something. I, like all of us, have been around people trying to be something. There’s that little bit of doctoring the resume and the ego driven one-ups-men-ship for many (maybe most I don’t know) and than there’s that guy who walks in and does it without question. He’s not a credit hound, he’s just really good at doing it. The other day I asked a maintenance guy here where I live how he changes lights on the top of the building here with such ease? He hung over the edge and said "no fear of heights". I was so freaked out that he did this that I had to grab on to the railing on my porch. I get nervous about the second step on a ladder and this guy is on my roof playing Spiderman. I’m I more skilled than him? Heck no, but he does stuff like this everyday and doesn’t blink an eye at it or need noticed. We all have those gifts. Some of them get noticed and others never even get thought about twice. In entertainment there’s a little different ego play going on. I saw this first as a child with my family and surroundings. I didn’t understand what was so weird about a music or tv "star" getting on my uncle and aunts jet and flying off. But, it must have been a big deal because of the crowd that would gather at the airport. Jets, limos, camera flashes and name dropping is a life style all on it’s own. It has made me uncomfortable all my life but I have done it (name dropping) as well and saw the results, both good and bad. In my early teens I remember a picture of a music entertainer that caught me in the background and it was on display a couple of days later on a newsstand. Riding my bike home from school two older kids knocked me over and beat me up. What was worse was my dad was a tough guy and took me back over to those kids houses and made me beat them up. Maybe that’s no big deal to anyone else but those types of things get stored and eventually play out in our lives in some way. I could give you a bunch of these types of stories based on my younger years and how they have shaped my thinking, life and what I share. They always though make me somewhat uncomfortable and maybe too shy or private, yes I am shy believe it or not LOL. Another example and I’ll move on to glupson’s question more. In 1975 or about I started to do "real" touring myself. I say "real" because when I was younger than that I was really only a studio brat and would play snare for Bluegrass bands. At 15 though I had that bug to actually get on that bus and go. What a life changer! Everything about touring life is different from domestic living, it’s a different paradigm. Throw away high school peers and activities they no longer existed. I was built for this life and it was built for me. Those who have done this will understand and those who haven’t will only be able to guess. I didn’t even know what high school was about until years later when I saw tv shows. College? My college was done by tutor and mail. The only exposure to campus life was if we did a concert there. My high school graduation was very weird, I gave the opening prayer threw my hat in the air and met up with the band two days later. I’m I totally boring you guys yet? Cause I’m boring myself lol. To cut this part short, from 15-21 I was on constant tour and studio work, a blurr would be a good description. My nickname was Natch (naturally high) and music production came to me as easy as breathing. Besides stopping by home to kiss my mom and do a couple gospel concerts, that was all to be seen of Natch. I never got into credit collecting or in studio fights, there was too much to do and I was having too much fun doing it. Planes replace the buses by about 16 or 17 and I lived on them. I was somewhat of a bulkhead king. I could hit that seat and be out till landing, totally refreshed and shuttled off to the studio, or live gig. Anything outside of that world didn’t exist. The first time I started to become a little stationary was when I returned to studio work in Florida, moved to Atlanta, got a gig as one of the Atlanta engineers, opened a few stereo stores, toured more, had a personal life and there you have it. There’s tons more to fill in any blanks but who cares, I’m thinking. glupson, that was the super long answer (is there an answer?) to your question of why do people respond to me the way they do. I’ve had people speculate, make up their own stories about that question and create imaginary MG's that even entertain me. All I can really say is music and living it has been one fast an eventful ride. If I were to attempt at choosing one of the answers that has been given to me by several friends I would have to say the "Vibe" theory would be believable. And also, I bring out the best and worst in others. It has always happened and I don’t worry about it, better or worse it’s simply mg. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
| Post removed |
Robert I don’t know what to tell you. Hopefully the Mods will consider deleting what you said, I’m not the mod here. All I can really do is state again what I know. You worked for me for 9 months in the 90’s sometime. I guess your now claiming to know what I did 20years before that and what I am doing 20years after you were let go. That’s all there is really, except that I also distributed a product "Audiopoints" a decade before you picked up the line. And you were a dealer for me. The rest of your story is of no interest to me except that it might trigger the report post status, which I stated above. |
@geoffkait "Yes, I’m the one staliking him Honestly, I found the number more than surprising when you posted it. Maybe because mapman’s posts seem rational, well-informed, and kind explains why they never struck me as excessive or overly ubiquitous. >>>>Yeah, right. You two must be in the same wavelength." Oh, I’m sorry, Katie. It must burn you up watching the person you endlessly chase around bullying receive the compliments you pine for, but I really didn’t mean to hurt your feelings |
| Post removed |
Because it keeps getting sidetracked. At least that seems like the obvious and clear answer. This is not to say the off topic posts are completely without merit. It simply states why the thread is not marching forward with useful tuning information. I define off topic as the picking apart of words and statements looking for perceived ill motives and ammunition to call into question the character of posters. |
"Why does MG seem to think that mentioning that Audiopoints worked for him, and it didn’t work out, somehow discredits Audiopoints?" Your joking right? I love what Brent came up with in his designing of the AudioPoint! Who ever would say that I would discredit the Audiopoint? I was so excited about the cone that I made it part of my regular lineup for years. I would hardly call that an attempt to discredit, would you? Nah, you got your story messed up somewhere, I think that product along with Tiptoes, MTDs and German Acoustic Cones put the cone industry on the map. Brent hit a home run with that product, I may have helped him swing the bat a little but that young man did a heck of a job! Michael Green |
| Post removed |
@geoffkait "trollja, I’m filing your post under WHATEVER." Sorry Katie, you've put so much into that WHATEVER folder it's become too difficult for an elderly guy like you to pull things out when you need them later. Please create a new folder labeled, "GREEN With Envy Over @mapman " You can thank me later |
@grannyring 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: 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? Do you see the word "Tuning" mentioned? Nope. 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? reiterated at the end of the OP: 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. I don’t see how you could ignore that this was the subject of the OP. 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? How is one to know when one is, on this account, "doing the hobby" and not faking it? And hence what do you mean exactly by empirical testing - do you mean simply trying anything? Or being more rigorous in the method of testing, since you mentioned engineering and science? 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? Why is talking about audio theory "faking it?" And is someone faking it simply by questioning the basis for some other audiophile’s claim? 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? Does one HAVE to have experience with X in order to ask legitimate questions about 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? 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. Why aren’t any or all of those questions legitimate and applicable to ask someone who made an OP like Michael’s? 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." And those are the right-on-topic questions I was raising from the beginning, that MG decided were irrelevant. They could only be irrelevant if MG’s motivation wasn’t to discuss with any depth the topic he raised, or engaged replies that at all challenged him to clarify or even support what he was claiming, but only wanted to use the thread for yet more evangelizing about his Tuning methods (and services). And that would be an obvious bait and switch to do so, especially when he already made a thread dedicated to discussing his tuning method. So which is it grannyring? Is the topic of the thread not, in fact, what Michael wrote, and which I have identified? Or is the topic actually yet another stealth move for Michael to get people asking him about his Tuning method, get people to his website/forum, etc. when he already has threads going devoted to that topic? |
| Post removed |
I am not taking the bait. I just want this thread to be something useful not an ongoing grey matter bantering competition. Prof, you may be right that this thread will never get there. I think the OP intended to get there, but it won’t happen it seems. I like reading your other posts on speakers etc...we just see this one far differently. Let’s enjoy some music and agree that music and audio is one of life’s pleasure. |
I find it odd the free reign Audiogon seems to be giving *certain* manufacturers to promote their business on the forums, especially given A-gon's own stated policies. But a post which suggested a web site makes claims that seem to be less than substantiated with evidence...gets deleted. ? (I will re-iterate: I'm all for participation by dealers and manufacturers. So long as it of course is done in good faith, is actually informative and conducive to open discussion, vs being overt advertisement or deceptive versions of advertisement where the discussions are channeled to promoting mainly the manufacturer's methods and points of view) |
Here’s a story. Once upon a time there was a thread, the threads name was OP. It was a simple enough thread but soon after it began there came along two groups of people One Happy and the Other Angry. As the Happy people began sharing their happiness the Angry people became even angrier with the hopes to delude all the happy smiles. The Angry people became so unsettled by the Happy ones that they got together and baked a bunch of cherry pies. Sneaking up on the Happy people the Angry people started throwing the cherry pies into the faces of the Happy people. As the Happy people were getting hit in the face with pie being thrown by the Angry people, the Happy people started to taste the pie "gee that’s good cherry pie". Soon all the Happy people became even more Happy because that was their nature. The Happy people became great cherry pie makers while the Angry were never able to get their cherry trees to bloom again. If your an Angry person, sorry we can do nothing for you. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
@michaelgreenaudio "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." Sadly, that's always been how a lot of folks set up their loudspeakers. That's also why every one of us have heard modest systems easily and surely outperform much more expensive ones. Unless we invest in good setup, we lose out on so much the investment we make in our equipment |
What an absolute shock that MG made yet another "angry people" post instead of one with content relevant to what people have written, or even content relevant to his own thread subject. But, I doubt any of us can get enough about what a cheery, nice guy he is...and how much music he listens to! Michael, how can I learn more about your products? Oh, there it is, right under your name again. Thanks for thinking of us! |
trelja, Sadly, that's always been how a lot of folks set up their loudspeakers.This is certainly true, but the biggest part of that is that it is inconvenient to walk around the speakers that are in the middle of the room, or something like that. Perfect position may not always be the livable-with one. There comes a trade-off. I am sure that modest systems may outperform more expensive ones when everything is aligned well, but I would expect that, if both are placed where they are allowed to be placed, expensive ones will still be better. Of course, I have no examples to provide, but simply have that feeling based on my own very limited experience. Strangely so, in my own room, speakers really did not have that much difference when moved away from the walls and the trade-off was clearly on the side of "closer to the wall". I wonder how many people who read these threads (not only this one) have an actual dedicated listening room. It must be a good number. Putting your music reproduction system in the living room may not allow for perfect positioning and tweaking/tuning, but adds the benefit of having it close to ears. That may be good enough of a proposition to some. If I am correct that more expensive system under the same circumstances will still outperform more expensive one, in some areas it may end up being cheaper investing more in equipment than in another room. A person just has to accept that the system is not playing to the full potential which, I am aware of that, may drive many people who visit Audiogon up the wall. Along the lines of speaker positioning, some speaker manufacturers, not the shabbiest ones at that, proudly display speakers on their websites right next to the wall or really close to it. There are even those placed right in front of the glass wall. Check Dynaudio and Dali websites for such examples. |
Hi Trelja Yep, there are so many great speakers out there in that modest price range that sound great against the walls, and then you walk into a friends house and it's a heartbreak, cause you know what's going to happen when they turn the system on. That gets back to the OP. Who was the guy who told this guy it's ok to throw that speaker in a room that hasn't a prayer of gelling with the speaker. It's not the speaker designer's fault and it's not the end users fault, but somewhere in the chain of that research and purchase something went horribly wrong. Now he's got a very expensive work of art and unless he does something drastic he'll never get to enjoy their magic. Obviously there are going to be bad designs out there. But I'm sure there's that perfect setup that the designer had in mind where the speaker sings with the music the designer used to build his sound with. I get the after calls, lots of them, where the listener is stuck "what do I do now". It's not a fun time for them, unless the system is nothing more than a trophy to start with. I have built walls ontop of walls and floors ontop of floors to help as much as can be, but it makes you just sick to hear a mismatch, and you know someone in the loop was giving "talk" and not walking them through the process properly. There's a little part of all of us who walk, when we read an obvious mismatch in the making. But I think that's why we need to keep pushing to raise the bar on advice. It's not about the person who comes up wanting to be known as an authority, it's about our friends who deserve to have their dream system, dream match, dream music and the ability to make everything they want to hear a success. Good post! Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Walk but no talk. Just asking was this you too? What happened in Nasville? http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/8nerve/8nerve.html |
Hi glupson There's a lot of DIY designs being done, I think that's a smart move for a lot of folks. And then there's a lot of custom designing going on which is maybe even better. If I was a start from scratch client, getting into the hobby right now, I wouldn't spring for a big purchase. I would buy a simple system and learn my space. The listener paradigm is changing and has changed quite a bit. Systems don't have to cost the big bucks anymore. Do you have any idea how many people are getting into the hobby? Groves and groves. They're not HEA people they are regular folks doing basic systems. I have one to do this week where I'm helping some folks out. Front speakers, rear speakers, sub, receiver and source. It will sound great, as great as any HEA system (maybe better) that hasn't been setup well. It's a very good time to be into stereos. These speaker sub combos are fantastic to work with. They're really very easy to setup and they're out of the way. Next move up for those who have a little flexibility in their rooms, tons of good speakers old and new. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Michael Green, It is absolutely true that with a bit of adjustment, whatever way that adjustment happens, overall sound can be bettered. What I was actually referring to is the idea of positioning speakers and making inconvenient room changes if a person does not have a dedicated listening room. In such a case, it may be difficult to apply whatever needs to be applied and that for whatever reason (not enough space, looks of it, etc.). The ideal solution would have to be a separate room for listening to music in which a person could do whatever she/he finds helpful to achieve whatever sound is desired. Now, additional rooms can cost upwards of a million dollars and that is for a very modest size. At least, in some locations, you may be talking about half a million. What I meant was that the sound could be bettered by buying more expensive equipment when you have no spare room to play with. It would be far from the ultimate environment for that equipment, but would still improve the sound for less money, making it more cost/effective option. Again, far from what anyone wants to do, but the reality is that many cannot have all their wishes fulfilled. |
Hmm...happy people, angry people and cherry pie. This is a weird thread. This thread hasn't made me happy or angry and hasn't delivered anything close to cherry pie. My summary: OP started out shooting at unnamed "talkers" that refused to be "walkers." Walkers accused of being merely talkers have been shooting back since OP's opening salvo. MG exits for several scenes. Surrogates appear to plead MG's cause and character. MG reappears to declare victory while the shooting continues. I have no dog in this fight. But, make no mistake it is a fight no one wins. MG isn't going to answer skeptics questions to their satisfaction. I suggest MG and the skeptics all throw in the towel and let this thread die of starvation. Peace Al |
| Post removed |
astewart8944, I kind of enjoy this thread because of its occasional bizarreness. Cherry pies are, in my opinion, nothing compared to Kim Jong Un, Planck, and Einstein who somehow appeared here in the early days. I cannot remember how they visited, but that was a breakthrough moment in my interest so I continued following. |
| Post removed |
@glupson @michaelgreenaudio thank you for your perspectives, I appreciate it. Yes, life trumps audio. We need to adhere to the constraints, demands, and desires of both our listening environment and other members of the household. Still, I want to stress the criticality of loudspeaker positioning, if nothing more than to provide a target, and keep in the back of the mind in case one someday has the opportunity to realize it. With that, below is what I consider one of the most important treatises I've encountered along my audio journey, a translation of the Dead Points of Live Sound, by A. Polakov. The only thing I add to it is to make the analogy of loudspeaker positioning with focusing the lens of a camera. In proper focus, EVERY thing becomes exponentially more right and better. And outside of that incredibly small point of focus, EVERY thing else is not right ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is know that there are many ingredients responsible for “quality” of audio inhalation. Unquestionably one of the most important is the listening room’s reaction to the installed loudspeakers. There are countless solutions how to work with listening rooms and the cost of this “working” in many cases might exceed the cost of the playback components. Yes, the performance of loudspeakers might be very dramatically changed by the rooms and most of those improvements would be centered to find a correct positioning for the acoustic system in a listening room. Everyone knows that the positioning loudspeakers have an impact on Sound. However, with the REAL depth and imperativeness of this impact very few are familiar. It is pointless to perform any actions targeted to improve performance of playback, including the change of the component of the playback chain or the room acoustic treatment, unit the correct positioning of the loudspeakers in a given room would be found. There are no formulas, programs of any methodology that would simplify this process and the only “tool” that might be use is subjective perception of the audible result. The rules, circulations, abstraction, approximations and the entire practice of position of loudspeakers according to minimization of stay-waves are a juts very rudimental and primitive approach. After the optimum stay-waves location was found it might be considered only a very beginning. An optimum location of loudspeakers might be called an “optimum zone” beyond which the subjective characteristics of the loudspeaker’s performance degrade very rapidly and very aggressively. For a typical “box” loudspeaker and within an average 400-700 sq feet room the dimension of the “optimum zone” usually within .5-1 inch and the deviation form the towing-in usually within 2-3 degree. Some audio people (approximately 15% of them) were able to determine the correct “optimum zone”. Whoever did not do it was not able to utilize a full potential capacity of thier playback systems. However, practically no one, even among those lucky 15%, knows anything about the “dead points of live sound”. When an acoustic system is placed into those “dead points” than all improvements that comes with placing the loudspeakers into the “optimum zone” really jump over the roof. The “performance yield”, when loudspeakers hit the “dead points”, is much higher then when the loudspeakers are juts placed inside the “optimum zone”. To describe what the “dead points of live sound” I would say that inside of the “optimum zone” there is one smaller zone. The dimensions of this smaller zone are within the scale of 1/16” –1/32” and therefore this zone might be called - a single point in space, or the “dead point of live sound” (or the DPoLS further on) This effect was found purely accidental within context of one installation. Then the DPoLS was found within others installations, which suggests that this effect is a typical. In all occasions the gain of sound’s quality took place very aggressively and the gain of quality disappeared when the loudspeakers were removed out from the DPoLS. This suggests that the DPoLS might be discovered if one is intentionally searching for it. The probability that the DPoLS will be hit accidentally is practically equal to nothing. There are no publications or methodologies on the subject. Therefore, below are listed some subjective characteristics that an acoustic system do when the loudspeakers are placed into the DPoLS: 1) When the loudspeakers are placed into the DPoLS then all characteristics of sound improving very strongly: imaging, space localization, transient, dynamic range, space presentation, tonal contrast and many other. Even the tonal imperfections of reproduction become way less notable and less prominent. What is characteristic that the improving takes abruptly, very expeditiously and swiftly. 2) The strongest improvement takes place in the subjective domain, reflecting the emotion and spiritual content of recording. The DPoLS highlights the energy of performance; boosts the ethical load of the musical content, highlight the intonations and the timbre connections of the musical phrases. Starting with a certain level of capacity of the rest reproduction chain it is possible to talk about not “reproduction” but about the reinstating and resurrection of the “original energy of live”. 3) A conversion from a regula-audio sound to the “alive sound” takes place very rapidly when the speakers enter the DPoLS. This conversion is greatly catalyzed by an ability of a playback to handle LF. 4) DPoLS exist for mono and stereo installations. In case of stereo the DPoLS is a correlation of both DPoLS for each channel. The DPoLS spots for the individual left and right channel might not have the same location when the system operates in stereo mode. 5) The relation between the towing-in and excursion the loudspeaker into the room, when the loudspeaker is located in DPoLS, is very high. In DPoLS this relation is way higher when in a satiation when the loudspeakers are juts positioned on the “optimum zone” of a given listening room. 6) The correction of “quietly of Sound” by moving loudspeaker within DPoLS is imposable. Any deviation from the DPoLS is worsening sound. Since the loudspeaker is in the DPoLS then the room/system operate in its absolute maximum capacity. 7) When the loudspeakers are in the DPoLS then the “sweat spot” increase very dramatically and in many cases it might spread across the entire room. If the output from one loudspeaker would be even blocked then it be less significantly impact sound compare to the impact if the loudspeaker were not in the DPoLS. 8) The sensitively of loudspeakers from the minute arrangements made in playback system become very high. The loudspeakers begin to act as a very strong magnifying glass that highlights everything. However, this emphasize, if it emphasizes the negative properties do not necessary have a negative impact to the listening experience. I would say that that if you system slightly off the mark after the “highlight” then the subjective affect of this emphasize would be very different then if the loudspeakers would be not in the DPoLS. 9) When the loudspeakers are installed into the DPoLS (disregarding the cost and typology of the loudspeakers) then listener is far sooner get “hypnotized” by sound. The playback become to sound “significant”, “important”, demonstrating the “playback pomposity” and some pretentious. The process of listening perceived by a listener at the very different level and it is practically imposable to do the “casual listening”. The carelessness and the inattentiveness of listening become practically imposable. Sound become not juts a “Sound in the room” but an absolute dominating and demanding force in the room 10) The sensitively of the loudspeakers installed into the DPoLS to the effect of Absolute Phase become incredibly strong. Flipping the Absolute Phase in the DPoLS does not just change the structure of bass removes the fog from the lower midrange and settle down the HF but kind of turn the entire room upside down. To discover the DPoLS is imposable if the system is not set in the correct acoustical and electrical Absolute Phase. Upon the said it is possible to make following conclusion: a major obstacle in building a high performing playback installation is unawareness of audio people about the DPoLS. The audio and listening benefits that might be received from placing the acoustic systems in the DPoLS are huge, order of magnitude exceeding any changes of loudspeakers of components. A lack of any structured methodologies and guideness that would enable the audio people to discover the DPoLS is a very severe impediment in order the knowledge about the “dead points of live sound” became a common practice among the audiophiles |
You know what, I gave a descriptive answer about my time in Nashville and then said Nah! I deleted it. This is boring me to death so I’m going to leave you guys to your sitcom. Some of you guys are really cool, thanks for your contributions. Enjoy the heck out of your hobby, loved ones and life. Please come over and visit us on TuneLand anytime. glupson, I think you said it a while back and forgive me for not quoting this exactly "folks wasting time". Your a good man! grannyring, my apologies. I know how much you wanted this to be something productive, I'm sorry I didn't deliver. Geoff, keep them on their toes prof, get a hobby Robert...well....Nah, you’ll have to work out your life on your own Tunees, I love you guys! It’s my life’s honor and privilege to hang out with you and be a part of your music, see you on TuneLand. Mods, you were very impressive, good luck with your forum and I hope to visit you soon. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
prof, get a hobby Sorry, what were you saying? I was busy just listening to some Neil Young, followed by some Prog Rock by Goblin, some Electronic dance music on Tidal, and then some Bernard Herrmann symphonic music on vinyl. Each genre sounded wonderful on my sound system requiring no effort or desire to alter the sound for each one. Which means I have time for other hobbies. Whoops, sorry, I think you've copyrighted "The Hobby" so I'd best not use that word. I mean..not having to constantly fiddle with my system leaves time for other activities... I hope you manage to get there, some day....:-) Cheers. |
trelja Still, I want to stress the criticality of loudspeaker positioning, if nothing more than to provide a target, and keep in the back of the mind in case one someday has the opportunity to realize it. With that, below is what I consider one of the most important treatises I’ve encountered along my audio journey, a translation of the Dead Points of Live Sound, by A. Polakov. >>>>>>Fortunately for the sharp eared and earnest audiophile it’s not necessary to understand the logic of The Dead Points of Live Sound in order to determine the absolute best speaker locations for a given room with given acoustic treatments. And you don’t have to repeat the ubiquitous audiophile methodology of move a little, listen a little, which is guaranteed to fail as I will demonstrate. All other methodologies will fail to obtain the absolute best speaker locations. The only sure fire method guaranteed to determine the absolute best speaker locations is the out of phase track on the XLO Test CD or similar test CD with the out of phase track. The XLO track is self explanatory, I cannot vouch for other test CDs. The objective is to find the speaker locations where the out of pbase track is the MOST DIFFUSE - where the voice on the out of phase track “sounds like it’s coming at you from all around the room with no specific direction.” That is when the sound from the speakers will be the most coherent and have the largest soundstage when the recording is in correct phase. Of course, it should be mentioned that in rooms with minimum acoustic treatments the capability to achieve a VERY DIFFUSE sound might be constrained. As proper acoustic treatments and or devices are applied to the room the XLO Test CD will be more effective, and you will be more able to hear the completely diffuse voice. The standard audiophile method of moving one speaker at a time and listening or both speakers at a time and listening, then moving them again and listening cannot find the absolute best locations because it’s like trying to solve x simultaneous equations in x + n unknowns. Many folks believe speakers should be placed widely apart for better soundstage. Or that the speakers should form an equilateral triangle with the listener. Or that speaker locations must be symmetrical. They also often believe speakers must be toed in for better soundstage. Both of those beliefs are not true. The best soundstage and coherence, etc. might actually be where the speakers are relatively close to each other, well, closer than you would think. It all depends. That’s where the XLO Test CD comes in. You don’t have to guess any more. It’s a no brainer. 🧠 If room acoustics devices (e.g., panels, traps, resonators, what have you) are added later the whole process should be repeated since the room dynamics change. But the impression that the voice on the XLO track is coming at you from all around the room will get more and more definite. That corresponds to the absolute best speaker locations. Now, having said all that, we’re not out of the woods yet. Because as fate would have it many recordings are manufactured out of phase (Polarity). This seems to be especially true for CDs. There are no standards for Polarity. So, MANY IF NOT MOST CDs you play are out of phase (Polarity) and would sound better, all things being equal, if your SYSTEM was out of phase (Polarity). |
trelja, geoffkait, Those are some longer and more complicated reads than usual on this thread, but they seem interesting enough to take time to read them and maybe learn something. Thank you for that. That is, aside of Kim Jong Un, Planck, Einstein, a few Amish proverbs, and some incidental poetry what I find valuable in this confused thread. Every now and then, something shows up that brings something new, at least to me. Cows listening to accordion somewhere in the Alps? Check. At least they were not ski jumping there. Of course, not to forget cherry pies. They will enter the classic literature of Internet audio. Along with that, comes some more audio-thought-provoking material that broadens the horizon. Original intention of this thread, whatever that was, might have been completely missed, but as a wastebasket you can come to and pick your recyclables from, it is great. |
Right. Like moopman and gloopson and trollja aren’t trolls. Cut me some slack, Jack! All the lonely trolls and pseudo skeptics, where do they all come from? All the lonely anti audiophiles, where do they all belong? One suspects they just want to be part of something big. You were obviously glued to this thread. There is no joy in Mudville today. 😢 |
