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
theaudiotweak, "...for resonance to vacate the parts or the chassis. Ours do and furthermore they reject energy from below that attempts to re enter either by hard contact or by reflection onto the Audiopoint."Are we talking about "decreasing" and not "eliminating"? To someone not experienced with either of the approaches, it reads, probably wrong, as "eliminating" which seems fairly unbelievable. Maybe "decreased to a really low level"? |
This is really interesting stuff...." two ears and one mouth for a reason" .....I am not quite there, is there a connection with eating more fish? If God wanted us to eat more fish, wouldn’t he have given us two mouths and one ear....or does he want us to hear the fish too? Regarding springs, Geoff sells springs but so does MG...or Harold, or @jf47t . However, it seems Tom sells special springs that Geoff and MG do not understand. Robert doesn't sell springs....hmmm....There are springs on my SUV but I can still feel road vibration. If I use Tom’s springs will that make my SUV a hovercraft? This is all a bit confusing but I am paying attention so I am sure I will understand when we get to the punchline. |
Geoff, Why anyone would wish to drive the circuit boards and everything else with 60 Hz vibration is beyond me. If it doesn’t make sense it’s not true.
Our newfound technology is scalable, increases sonic in comparison to old school techniques and can adapt and serve multiple purposes in advancing the art of sound reproduction and also serves several purposes in other industry applications. The fact that you are unwilling to audition or believe something other than isolation exists because it violates the LIGO agenda, we cannot help you. Wait for reviews to come out on the new studio environment where there are no aftermarket acoustics required as you tend to ignore the existing reviewers’ true findings, customer’s truthful testimonials and refused free auditions over the past few years. In addition you cannot figure out, relate to or simply ignore our explanations so again we cannot help you. To use the LIGO analogy if you ground the surroundings to the mirrors you see the vibration not the gravity waves. Follow? We understand your point on LIGO however LIGO has no sound and nothing to do with our research, development and/or product functions. Stay locked in your way and forget about music and sound evolution because if you dare go there, you might “hear” what it is we are advancing - rapidly. Robert |
| Post removed |
audiopoint, In all fairness, it never says that the statement about Michael Green was made by Steinway & Co. or someone representing it in any way. True, most of us, me included, first thought of the piano makers, but it could have been anyone with last name Steinway. It may be misleading because of our views, but it may really be true. Regardless of what it is, it deserves benefit of the doubt that it was some Steinway man who said it. The part about Ray Charles, Beatles, etc. is mentioned often on this thread. Where exactly is it on the website? I tried to find it, but could not. What I learned about myself here is that I have a hard time finding things on Michael Green associated websites. Even when many others saw it, I cannot find it. That does not include tuning description/instructions from start to finish. I am starting to believe it is not me, but the website design. However, it would take only one project in one studio that is used for mixing/mastering/anything of recordings by said artists and a person could say that her/his work was used for recordings of those artists. Many, if not all, of those mentioned musicians have had their recordings worked on in some way relatively recently, including after their deaths. If Michael Green did contribute to such an establishment, he could truthfully say he was involved. Maybe not sitting there during recording sessions of Yesterday or Hey Jude, but there would be some involvement. Think about Bob Ludwig’s studio. Many well-known artists’ recordings have been worked on there. Whoever supplied monitors can say she/he was involved in the process and these are the names who used it. |
Glupson, Always in search of materials and shapes to speed the removal of unwanted resonance from a component, speaker or musical instrument. Also working with material shapes and concepts that act to limit energy from returning up and back into the exit point and shape. The understanding and limiting of how returning energy can corrupt the signal path is fascinating. I would expect this to always be a work in progress. Mitch 2, I dont make springs or use them. By nature they restrict resonant energy from leaving a component or speaker and may even increase interference under a device in motion..such as a turntable and speaker. Tom |
"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" http://tuneland.forumotion.com/t440-talk-but-not-walk-an-audiophile-forum-case-study |
jf47t, Good one. PS. Why are you wasting electricity? Think about trees, birds, and blue skies. http://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/casestudy https://awc.ashford.edu/tocw-guidelines-for-writing-a-case-study.html |
@theaudiotweak GeoffI misunderstood your statement about "ours do," I guess I thought you were some sort of springsmith or coil Captain. Maybe you ought to try a set of Geoff's springs...he swears by them, but MG swears at them, and @jf47t (and/or Harold) swears that MG's springs are better. I have trouble keeping tabs on the Green Team and who plays which position. |
theaudiotweak I dont make springs or use them. By nature they restrict resonant energy from leaving a component or speaker and may even increase interference under a device in motion..such as a turntable and speaker. Tom What Robert and Co. doesn’t make is anything to prevent very low frequency seismic energy from coming up from the floor and entering the component. Which is really the primary problem. Since he cannot do it he and Tom have adopted the rather lame tactic of claiming isolation is impossible. Give me a break! Anybody can reduce induced energy. It‘s not rocket science. 🚀 The difficulty arises in reducing extremely low frequency seismic energy. Like LIGO demonstrated. What is happening here is a failure to understand - or pretending to misunderstand - what isolation even is or the function of springs. Or a willingness to learn. Those who don’t learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them. |
If I could explain it to the average person I would not have said it was difficult. Besides I already described why very low frequency seismic vibration is generally more deleterious to the sound than induced vibration. Try to keep up. Additionally, I'm not really in the mood to get into one of your patented what about this, what about that discussions. Get thee to Wikipedia! |
| Post removed |
"MG has no clue how these devices work." Good luck with that one LOL. Hey did you happen to see MG's thread http://tuneland.forumotion.com/t440-talk-but-not-walk-an-audiophile-forum-case-study#8674 I see you guys are trying to prove your case by "Talking" on someone else's forum but see MG and Geoff learn by actually doing and then discussing what they have done. MG and Geoff disagree on some of the absolutes but have found a way to allow isolation and mechanical transfer to live under the same roof. As you can see on Michael's thread he and others have done empirical testing to all 3 Springs, Cones and Tuning Blocks. And not just one size fits all but perhaps a wider range of testing ever done before in HEA. Like with MG and Geoff we on this thread haven't seen StarSound take components down to the basic signal passing bones. Robert saying he likes big transformers obviously tells us on this thread you have not tested the placement of transformers in relationship to other parts hosting the audio signal. If this is indeed the case there are literally thousands of empirical listeners who have gone further than you. The proof is something you do gentlemen, not something you talk about as if you have done. Walking guys, we're talking about walking. |
Robert and Tom Might I make a suggestion. Instead of posting posts that cross the line of attacking MG you construct posts that engage the topics or if you choose to talk about your designs do so in a way that invites good karma and civil discussions. We all have two ears you know and some will have less experience and some more depending on the testing we choose to do. In my case I look forward to talking about audio as a variable. When "doing" the variables there are no rights and wrongs as Geoff has tried to tell you (am I correct Geoff, I don’t want to speak for you). Robert and Tom saying your company has an absolute is the same as marginalizing your contributions to a variable subject. Or do you not think audio "is" a variable science? |
jf47t When "doing" the variables there are no rights and wrongs as Geoff has tried to tell you (am I correct Geoff, I don’t want to speak for you). >>>>Actually, now that I think about it, no, I would not say that at all. There’s a right way and a wrong way to do everything. Otherwise we’re just shooting blanks in the dark. But obviously none of this matters since all the naysayers are either not audiophiles, anti audiophiles, pseudo intellectuals, or pseudo skeptics who made their minds up a long time ago. I will write a book sometime, The Trouble with Trolls. Dealing with sound requires a large measure of ESP. You have to know what the problem is, how to solve it, and where to go next, where the next problems are. Most people including audiophiles don’t really know what they are hearing, what’s wrong with it or how to fix it. And they generally don’t think about it too much, from what I can tell. Shut the cave door and back to pigmy country! - Mo Gambo |
The variable is the weather and how it changes by the hour and the day. Wood is affected by the weather, and like the weather wood of any type changes in composition and content. Springs are not linear in their reaction to compressive waves nor shear waves that only travel in solids. They provide no clear direct path for shear energy to exit. Othèr than those 2 things I suppose their okay. Tom |
jf47t, "I see you guys are trying to prove your case by "Talking" on someone else’s forum" I have not been to Tuneland in a couple of days so situation there might have changed, but at that time I could not recognize anyone from here there while I could recognize those from there here. It seemed that guy(s) from Tuneland were trying to prove their case by "Talking" on someone else’s forum first. Participants from Audiogon were invited, multiple times and in not-so-subtle ways, to check out Tuneland. Belittling them for eventually doing it would be a move not worth discussing further. Discussion here about springs, isolation, energy of any kind is interesting. Unfortunately, it too often gets cut short in mad insults to the other party and focus shifts to the personalities instead of matter discussed. Forums are, by their nature, talking. They are inevitably a written form of communication which is also "talking". Making fun of people "talking" on the forum is puzzling. At the same time, it is understandable if you are not familiar with accepted ways international scientific conferences are conducted. There is a lots of talking, but not too many experiments performed in the auditorium. I have not met anyone who claimed that such meetings have no merit. At least not anyone worth listening to. |
| Post removed |
@jf47t
"MG and Geoff learn by actually doing," "MG and Geoff disagree on some of the absolutes but have found a way to allow isolation and mechanical transfer to live under the same roof," " Like with MG and Geoff we on this thread..."and further, " We all have two ears you know (quoting Geoff from the fish post)...." there are no rights and wrongs as Geoff has tried to tell you,"ah, but wait... "Geoff, I don’t want to speak for you (after several posts speaking for Geoff)"and then, just when I thought I understood, @geoffkait "Robert and Tom," " Tommy and Bobby..."I always thought Geoff was an independent but it seems he has joined a team, or acquired a fan club. I apparently have not been keeping up, are Robert and Tom an item, or are we picking sides for dodge ball? Now that would be fun! |
"The variable is the weather and how it changes by the hour and the day. Wood is affected by the weather, and like the weather wood of any type changes in composition and content." Tom, you don't listen in a controlled environment? Again I'm a bit surprised. Most listeners I know, and I know Michael deals with, the first thing they do is control the listening environment. It's very strange to me that you think letting the room run wild without controlling it's condition is acceptable. 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? |
Glupson "Forums are, by their nature, talking. They are inevitably a written form of communication which is also "talking"." This is actually incorrect. Forums usually use words, drawings and pictures to illustrate points. Since you and others asked to be shown answers from Michael he was courteous enough to start a thread dedicated to this topic. You can see Michael is happy to communicate in the manor you and the others requested. Michael uses TuneLand, Skype, Periscope live streaming and YouTube (more videos coming this fall supposedly) as well the Get Tuned Gain visits audio shows to meet and greet with folks in person. Glupson this is the topic of audio. Using only words as you can see and have participated in is limiting at best. The very OP has been twisted and turned by words, but now this topic has an opportunity to become more useful. As Michael has pointed out from the very beginning this thread will prove the OP to be on target. And it certainly has. You yourself being one of the main characters. This thread serves as a good example for others as they converse with you in the future just as it will with all of us. |
jf47t, "Forums usually use words, drawings and pictures to illustrate points."I tried to find anything but words on Audiogon forum, but no success. I am hardly a character here, but I will take a credit. Even a negative one. You can take fame, though. Original post failed to recognize one simple thing. There are different ways to approach most of the things. Many have pointed it out in different ways, but essence has been the same. It is unrelated to tuning, but is related to music reproduction and even recording, yesterday, or the day before, I ran into a youtube video. It is quite clearly a promotional stuff, but also gives an insight in how people work. The man talks a lot, but does not seem to be faking too much. His approach to the room he is recording other musicians in is more of a "well, I got used to it" and the room is, even to me, suspicious at best when it comes to acoustics. It was surprising, but he does have some credentials when it comes to music reproduction so be it. I have a hard time believing that none of the Michael Green suggested ideas work, but I feel the way they are presented, and attitude that comes with it, is not doing them a favor. I think that asking for real scientific (formulae, graphs, etc.) explanations will not be useful in this particular case. It will just expose that Michael Green has no answer of that kind which, I think, is just fine. Forcing him to do it, and him trying to come up with something resembling explanation using "scientific" terms is neither fair nor useful. He freely admitted he has no PhD in physics and that he is not wired that way, if I can use that term. At the same time, just dismissing anyone who asks more exact questions is not valuable, either. Neither approach brings anything that can be used for conclusion in this case. |
Glupson Your assuming MG has no PhD in physics. Just because someone chooses a more organic approach to life doesn’t mean they haven’t the formal training as well. My friend you are way off when it comes to Michael. You have no idea what kinds of testing MG does or has been a part of. MG does not dismiss anything. He does however discern when someone is being real with him or faking it. Your wanting to call that no answer I’m sure is fine by him. If you say you haven't visited where MG is supplying the answers, with pictures, words and proof there would be a question of hypocrisy cast on you. There's a big difference between not giving answers and someone refusing to look at them. Glupson at least for me you have painted your character in this thread quite well. As we all have. http://tuneland.forumotion.com/t440-talk-but-not-walk-an-audiophile-forum-case-study |
jf47t, I am not assuming Michael Green does not have a PhD in physics. I concluded that from his mini-biographies that I did find interesting indeed. If I am mistaken, I will take the blame although partial fault may be on him for presenting himself incorrectly. However, you are in Las Vegas after all, I would gamble that his thesis was not on the dynamics of fluids, air included. I am not sure what "more organic approach to life" really means. It surely appears like a sweet choice of meaningless words. Asking people to fish for explanations, that seem fishy to many in the first place, may not be the best approach to explaining. My personality is whatever it is and, if you are correct about him, Michael Green and I share one same trait. Give me a point in your wide-open admiring eyes for that. We both are not disturbed by some unknown person behind the computer screen throwing insults at us. It seems that both of us are confident in ourselves and what we do. Also remember, you have no idea what other people on this thread have done in their lives. Do not make Michael Green seem ridiculous by repeating that he makes so many decisions every day that others would not believe it (not exact words, but in that sense). As much as you may see it that way, refrain from presenting him as an incapable man in need of a legal guardian. He has not made it to 58 with not having any idea what he was talking about a minute ago. In fact, do not write about Michael Green at all. Better for both of you, if it is really two. Bring us Michael Green from before you appeared back. That one was annoying to many, but reasonable in his own way. Admitting that one is afraid to climb the ladder brings much more honest face to someone you describe as a faking semi-god. Having said that, is it really true that those pictures are from 25 years ago? Hard to believe. |
I’m not trying to start a fight but I have always maintained isolation and coupling can live under the same roof. In fact that’s not just talk, I actually walk the walk as I’ve always used coupling with my isolation stands ever since the beginning more than twenty years ago when I debuted with Pierre Sprey of Mapleshade at CES. I have also always supported the concept of damping for the top plate of the iso stand. I have always recommended extremely hard, ballistic cones under the component on the top plate AND underneath the iso stand itself. So, yes, isolation and coupling live under one roof. The roof of Machina Dynamica. I suppose if someone seriously believes isolation is impossible or doesn’t understand the first thing about it it’s not surprising he would say isolation and coupling cannot live under one roof. Machina Dynamica. We do artificial atoms right. Electrons zooming around a hole where the nucleus is supposed to be. |
| Post removed |
theaudiotweak I have a healthy respect for carved and shaped tonewood some in shapes that are valued in the millions. As I wrote earlier the instrument in hand can easily be brought back into tune unlike wood blocks on the floor under speakers and components. Tom >>>>Well, to be blunt, more like an unhealthy obsession. |
