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?
above is what is called a fake statement, as anyone can read on this thread
Infortunately for you, anyone on this thread can see how assiduously Michael avoided answering questions raised about measurements that would support his claim that tied and untied capacitors alter a signal audibly.
Can you point to where Michael replied with such measurements? A link perhaps?
What Michael said was "let’s set up a lab and test these claims together in real time for everyone to witness".
So Michael has set up a lab to test these claims? Good! Where are the measurements showing the signal of a capicitor is audibly altered when untied, or the measurable differences of an amp, preamp, CD player signal with a case on vs a case off? We can presume you are making claims within the same natural world science describes, right, and you are not claiming magic?
Remeber that Michael has already been making these claims as true. He didn’t need our help before doing so, hence if this is really empirical Lab Work, isn’t it reasonable to ask for both a coherent technical explanation of the “problem” AND measurements suggesting the technical parameters have been altered in a way that fixes the problem?
BTW, a link to a cover of widescreen review does not do anything to address the reticence MG has shown on his claims being discussed in this thread.
You say you and Robert both have worked in recording? Room conditioning is priority one so the instruments and equipment work consistently. Sorry but again it raises questions for me about your methods. Michael is meticulous about room conditioning, I'm surprised your not. Is there a reason why you choose not to condition your rooms?
Prof, check this out… the same grammatical mistake by jft as we previously noted earlier that is made all the time by mg in his writing.
MG is jf47t. One in the same - now it all makes sense!
By the way MG, the correct spelling is you’re and not your…
Ha Ha funny thing happened on the way to the forum!
The issue mentioned in your observation certainly has been an obvious one. I’ve been heavily involved in many forums and discussion groups since around ‘96 or so and I’ve never had a post removed. Yet in this thread “someone” has flagged and had 3 of my posts removed!
Could this be the same person who has continually yelled “troll” in this thread yet no one else has been thin skinned enough to have those posts removed? Could it be the same person who in the self-protection of his own forum liberally rags on people here as trolls and other disparaging comments, but where replies correcting his mischaracterization would surely be blocked?
I count 9 different studios in the picture Robert refers to. But people can scroll down and look for themselves. (MG confirms 9 different studios, 19 different home and test systems in that picture). Thanks for asking. MG says he's happy to show more it's a great promo opportunity.
No disrespect intended Robert but your not the kind of guy I would feel comfortable getting involved with. Anyone who worked for someone else for only nine months and was let go then 20 years later appears on their old bosses thread on an audio forum making the statements you have chills me to the bone.
An observation; and by not mentioning any names here so this post should be free from others clicking on the old report button.
Learned today the moderators first receive a complaint then the post disappears. No complaints - no removals. I am sure the moderators must keep a level on extreme posts however if summoned to a post by a complainer, they react accordingly.
GK is an excellent example of continuous bashing and demeaning the public yet all his posts appear to remain intact.
However when a topic is exposed containing information that already is public knowledge as displayed fully and taken from a manufacturer’s website, the post on this forum receives a complaint (from someone among us) and poof it’s gone.
Amazing how posts are always being removed on this thread yet rarely happens on others.
The balance of the readership here has thicker skins, nothing to hide and call manure the real thing. At least the majority does not prohibit anyone from saying what they want.
There is but one business on this forum that always hides from the exposing of falsehoods. Take a guess...
Why would prof think Michael becomes allergic when asked for something like measurements? Seems odd doesn't it, since MG has always been involved in the measurement side as seen in this review by Widescreen Review many years ago.
We already know that since wire is directional capacitors should sound better hooked up one way rather than the other direction. We also know capacitors vibrate during use so obviously you don’t want to couple them to each other or to the chassis. Damping them would be even better. Duh! You know, there is such a thing as being skeptical to a fault. Lead, follow or get out of the way.
"Why then does Michael immediately become allergic to evidence when asked for something like measured changes in a signal before and after such tweaks to capacitors? Or in this case, between an amplifiers with a case on or off?"
above is what is called a fake statement, as anyone can read on this thread
What Michael said was "let’s set up a lab and test these claims together in real time for everyone to witness".
What is a claimed result? It reads like you are saying that any time someone plays something and describes what they heard it is a claimed result.
Yes, that’s right. That’s what the word “claim” generally means. Are you unfamiliar with that word?
I’m on a long train ride in Europe (hence browsing on my phone for a bit).
Thats a claim. The claim itself doesnt establish it as fact. It may be true or false. And it can be discussed as to whether it’s a believable claim on various grounds.
glupson made a claim that he tried one of the MG tweaks. You have expressed skepticism about that claim. Interesting how easily skepticism comes to you for other people’s claims, and it’s reasonable to express that skepticism. But if anyone directs their own skepticism at your claims you start calling them “trolls.”
How about a level playing field where people can be honestly sceptical about your claims aren’t simply dismissed?
Notice Michael immedialy wanted more evidence for a claim - e.g. photos of glupson’s tweaking?
Why then does Michael immediately become allergic to evidence when asked for something like measured changes in a signal before and after such tweaks to capacitors? Or in this case, between an amplifiers with a case on or off?
Btw, what is being discussed here regarding the amplifier case isn’t “ the hobby of listening to music.” My son is currently listening to music on his iPhone, which doesn’t require taking apart the iPhone. What we are discussing are technical claims made on behalf of the type of tweaks MG suggests, in this case that removing cases produce audible signal changes.
MG wants to pick up one of these sometime to play with. He said I could borrow it. I've removed the tops off of several components myself now and every time it's done what you've described. I've also removed the feet and put those components up on the tuning blocks and it's surprising how tunable they become.
My Lyngdorf 2170 sounds better with the top off. I also noticed this years ago when removing the top off of my TRL Dude tube preamp. The builder suggested I try it. He was right as it simply sounded better. More open and relaxed. Sure, I know it sound nuts.
What is a claimed result? It reads like you are saying that any time someone plays something and describes what they heard it is a claimed result. That being the case the hobby's reviewing paradigm is not acceptable to you?
An interesting outlook about the hobby of listening to music.
I stopped by MG's yesterday he was playing Willie Nelson's "Milk Cow Blues". It sounded great but I asked if he could tighten up the bass line a tad and bring the volume of the bass up a hair. 45 seconds later it was great for my taste and got better as the recording played on. Michael told me "come back in a couple of hours and you'll really like it I think". I did and sounded perfect to me. The sound stage had grown and the bass line was super tight with more body to the percussion. The bottom end leaned toward plump which was in balance for that blues feeling.
I asked what he had change and MG showed me two screws on the Sub Platform he adjusted and a slight adjustment on the Sub Amp. The interesting part is the way MG knows his system. What he does when tuning is chooses a direction of the adjustment, listens and then goes further in that same direction or goes the opposite way exactly like what you would do tuning an acoustical instrument.
I don’t know if you read my post before certain persons-who-dish-it-out-on-their-own-website-but-flag-critical-posts-here got their way and had it removed but...
You are experiencing just what I wrote about. “Walking” is simply a term the OP applies as he wishes, arbitrarily. If you are at all critically minded you will never have that term used for whatever you try.
You are dealing with a religious type of behaviour. It’s like prayer: negative results will never be counted. If you don’t get the claimed results, it can only be you who is to blame. You are doing it wrong! Yay for unfalsifiable beliefs!
A gathering of trolls....once Moops makes an appearance you know someone must have called for a convening of the trolls. I can almost hear the telltale flapping of bat wings. 🦇 🦇 🦇 Moops and Gloops.
Gliddy glup gloopy nibby nabby nooby la la la lo lo Sabba sibby sabba nooby abba nabba le le lo lo Tooby ooby walla nooby abba nabba
One of the very few modders of high end CD and Blu Ray players, Ric Schultz at Electronic Visionary Systems (EVS), also recommends removing the cover of Oppo or any other player for SQ reasons.I had the World’s Most Modded Oppo 103 up until three years ago, most of the modifications of which were done by Ric. It was ripped, flipped, zipped and bipped. Everything was isolated, unbolted, unscrewed, unbound, unwrapped, and protected from vibration, RFI/EMI and magnetic fields. It had the Audio Magic thingamabob hooked up to the circuit, WA Quantum Chips up the wazoo, PWB foils and other dumaflochies galore, linear power supply with upgraded capacitors, my own constrained layer damper VibraBlock for the transport mechanism, bipassed fuse (oh, no!), superclock, my own Codename Turquoise tray masking, and other odds and ends. The whole thing was up on a heavy mass on spring iso stand using stacked ceramic tiles for the mass.
Pierre Spray of Mapleshade Recording Studio also played the system in his “lab” downtown DC with covers off.
Major inexplicably silly walk was a reference to something most of the people would find a waste of time, silly, and "walk" in what I thought may be the terms of original post. Not passing anything to anyone. Not even saying I invented something I did not.
You really should not care what I, or anyone else, thinks about your hobby. You should continue enjoying it. However, you should also continue doing so without belittling other people who may have a question or two or a thought and observation or two about it. Considering what others have to say may open new avenues to your enjoyment. Freeing them. Kind of like cutting plastic ties. All of a sudden, the world becomes a bigger stage. For now, you are enjoying like a little constrained NAD C-350. Great little amplifier that could...
Sorry Glupson but your last few posts haven't made much practical or common sense. It appears that you are trying to pass the buck, when no one is interested in "a major inexplicably silly "walk" that was more like a run". Listeners who are interested in tweaking (tuning) do so because they have graduated to the level of a discerning Tuner or Tweaker and they do their hobby successfully and consistently. You saying it didn't happen to you is a reflection on you not anyone else.
As for you trying say I'm not a walker, who cares. I don't enjoy my hobby based on someone who can't hear a tweak. Instead I base my hobby on the many tunes I have the pleasure of enjoying.
I did a major inexplicably silly "walk" that was more like a run. It may not seem to you, but you are hardly "walking" in my view, too. It is all just talk, and it is fine. I do not mind being "trolled" although the only definition of it I know is from people’s reactions on this thread. I learned than anything can be "trolling" to a sensitive soul.
EDIT: Line of "walking" seems to be a moving target. Bora Bora is the next frontier?
"Nice post, glupson, and eerily reminiscent of prof’s posts when he attempts to dismiss claims based on his results which so often are negative."
My post, in fact, was not overly focused on dismissing claims based on my results. At least it was not my intent. A sentence, or two, with my conclusion. I leave it open for anyone to do their part and come up with their conclusions.
My post was focused on dismissing the "trolling:" way my "walking" was described. Basically, if you say that everyone out there is a "troll", do not act like a "troll".
Maybe, some day someone will explain what it is about the orange electrical outlet.
"It’s because there are too many things that can go wrong with any test, many of which are behind the control of the intrepid tester."
Absolutely. 100 %. Beyond doubt.
That is why it is not wise to ask people to "walk". When they start "walking", who is to tell whose results are valid and whose invalid? As far as I am concerned, mine are. And I "walked". And was "trolled" for doing it.
I just noticed that you expressed interest in my whole system that was used for "walking" with NAD C-350 amplifier. I cannot provide pictures, mostly for practical Internet reasons and not for any secrecy. It consisted of...
SONY HAP-Z1ES, playing different kinds of music, including Hindu Love Gods. From Mahler to Kraftwerk and whatever else. Mostly at 16/44/1 AIFF and some DSD 2.8.
Interconnects, probably stock with some old equipment, but possibly also Radio Shack. Definitely nothing expensive.
NAD C-350 amplifier, bought maybe in 2001 or 2002, played a lot before, but not touched in 4 years.
Monster Cable speaker cable, about two meter each. Bought in 1994 for about $30 for a spool that supplied enough for a few people's systems and I still have a lot more. In short, cheap stuff. Finished with some cheap banana plugs, not soldered, from the Internet.
Revel Performa F208 speakers, brown, a few months old.
Screwdriver from the local hardware store, bought for ABS module change.
Salamander 5-shelf audio rack picked from the curbside garbage (furniture equivalent of a vintage Sherwood receiver). Tuned/tweaked with "Banner red" spray paint, different and inconsistent number of layers, some thinning now. Screws as tight as they could be by hand.
Red leather sofa as a sitting position.
Floor is bamboo and has a rug covering a large, maybe 80 percent, surface in between the rack and the sofa.
White piano to the side (keys moving as they always have). It says Steinway on it (mentioning as it seems to be one of the key words with your tuning). It does need tuning, the regular way.
Walls mostly uncovered, parallel, with many corners and openings, including the ceiling.
No ventilation opening of the Oneonta studio kind forcing air in the room.
Windows closed, at the time of "walking" covered with the soft (cloth) side of the blinds.
Picture would have been quicker, but would not tell the story.
Nice post, glupson, and eerily reminiscent of prof’s posts when he attempts to dismiss claims based on his results which so often are negative. This is kind of the same old story; it’s the same predicament we often find ourselves in with very earnest and determined naysayers and skeptics (similar to brothers Wolf and mapman and Ozzie to some extent who I put in category of determined naysayer who proudly announce getting negative results. And continue to repeat those claims ad infinitum.
Of course, the problem is - as I’ve been saying all along, he’ll-loo! - is there are many reasons why folks sometimes don’t get the results they were hoping for or were expecting. That’s why I have said a test, in and of itself, means little, especially if the results are negative. Even for carefully conceived and executed tests. It’s because there are too many things that can go wrong with any test, many of which are behind the control of the intrepid tester. I say that as having more testing experience than the average bear, including billion dollar electronic systems. Please, no angry emails about Appeal to Authority.
Psychologically, being a self anointed Doubting Thomas probably doesn’t help. Perhaps you could say it’s a self fulfilling prophecy. “How will I be able to face my fellow pseudo skeptics?” It’s like a lot of tunes and tweaks - it’s helpful to evaluate this thing or that thing in a system that has evolved to a point where there is more of a chance of being able to hear it. Many systems are simply too, uh, what’s the word? Oh, yeah, rudimentary.
I return you now to your regularly scheduled program, As the Troll Turns.
Regarding your post on Tuneland that jf47t mentioned above.
First, the pictures you are referring to and that I was supposed to follow appear to be posted hours after I had posted my findings. Of course, I did not expect you would have guessed what amplifier I had available and then prepare me in advance. Nice try, but not quite aligned with clock and logic.
Second, if taking the cover off is important, as it seems to be in almost all of your pictures and has been discussed even on this thread ad nauseam, the effect on the sound should exist. Smaller than if everything you recommended was done, but it should be there. It is not there. Loud and clear, it does not exist.
Now if Glupson (the poster) was doing this for real he would post pictures of his whole system so we could "see" him doing instead of just giving this brief "I tried it troll".
It may come as a surprise to you and jf47t, who ridiculed my statement that Internet forums are words and therefore "talking", but I am not aware of any pictures posted on this or any other thread on Audiogon. From what I know, you and I have posted same number of pictures here. Besides, anyone can post a picture of anything and be done with it. It really does not prove much. Assuming that pictures of that NAD C-350 you posted are taken by you, you certainly know that taking the cover off is not a complicated achievement, That is why I did it. In reality, it could have taken me more time to register for any forum than what it took to "disassemble" the amplifier. It was really easy and pictures still would have not shown you what I heard.
Except for having an excuse to call me a "troll", I am not sure why you would doubt I tried to do it. Most of the people here have done a number of things in their lives and lying to an unknown person in a faraway location about taking a few screws off of some old amplifier does not seem like something they would be desperate to do. Remember, for most of us here this is not a promotional vehicle. We have different careers and no biased investment in tuning/tweaking/music reproduction. I would go as far as to claim that almost all of us would wake up with no fear about our future if tuning/tweaking somehow got banned overnight. I hope it will not, but you surely understand the point.
As you mentioned in one of your recent posts on Tuneland, in fact you whined, you found yourself wondering why people were questioning if you did something in your past. They ended up being "trolls" or whatever word(s) you chose at that moment for questioning that. Well, you just questioned if I had done even simpler and much more believable and achievable thing. I will not call you a "troll" but just so you know.
You asked people to walk the walk, whatever that vague statement means, and I did the best anyone with leftover common sense and a few spare minutes could. Given your approach to demeaning people and defending your, so far, irreproducible results, I am afraid that after I did everything like in the pictures you showed, you could say that I am a "troll" because I did not go to Bora Bora as it works the best there.
"More like a very tiny baby step and obviously the hints of trolling to the sarcastic side, but that’s ok."
More like "walking", small step or not, with plain and simple report of the result.
If anyone is still reading this thread, you may notice that I have adopted Michael Green’s way of thinking to some important extent. That is why I recommend that anyone does some of the cheap things from the tuning repertoire. Most of you may have some equivalent of my NAD C-350 laying around. Take the cover off, do not cut the plug (it is ridiculous idea, no matter how well it would sound), and let us know what you heard. Only then you could say you "walked" for the purpose of this thread. And "troll"? Not you anymore. Someone else.
One more step in this famous "walking" business. NAD C-350 amplifier in a like-new condition (at least visually and, from what I can remember, acoustically). Screwdriver. A few screws. Magical "freeing of the signal" by taking the cover off. Stayed the same except for the questionable looks of otherwise also not the prettiest industrial design piece. True, I skipped cutting the plug off and sticking wires in the outlet, but I did "walk", maybe "crawled". Try it yourself. It was easy. Make sure you keep the screws. You will need them.
"I might have missed it in the article, but was that set-up and your involvement just for that particular recording or was that studio arranged by you for the longer run?"
The studio that Michael designed and built is still in use today at SUNY. A few years later Michael designed the new music wing there as well.
Pictures are really interesting for someone with no previous exposure to such things."
Your welcome Glupson. Of course it's important to keep these pictures in context to MG showing that he is indeed involved in the "walk" right down to the bare bones of the audio signal all the way through the audio chain. There are many more of these pictures and Michael will be showing systems with a lot of tuning going on and also more stock.
"He could actually feel the keys get lighter or heavier to strike as I was tuning."
Whoa! What?! Hey, it’s the same thing with cryogenically treated musical instruments like flutes and trumpets 🎺 and saxophones 🎷 The musicians report that keys of the cryo’d instrument are much easier and smoother to press and release. Maybe cryogenics should be called a tune instead of a tweak. Hmmmmm...🙄
He’s back. He’s tan and rested. But he’s still a pseudo skeptic with all thumbs. And glupson is still the poster boy for a blank slate. You can paint a donkey different colors but it’s still a donkey.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
