The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
https://youtu.be/p5Ed_vCOKY4
https://youtu.be/p5Ed_vCOKY4
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
| Post removed |
mitch2 @geoffkait "you should probably get your ears candled pronto." Thanks for the concern but my ears are fine. Get some rest, clean the heads on that Walkman, and don’t go on any river boat trips with your buddy Martin. >>>>Huh? My buddy Martin? Are you referring to Martin Short? Martin Scorsese? Marty McFly? Or did you mean my Martian buddy? Oh, I get it. Martin Sheen. OK, that’s not too bad. |
Michael Green, I was thinking about your sitcom deal.Maybe you should ask your agent to change it in promotional materials into a "walkcom" or "talkcom". It would be more aligned with the original name and would add the cache of something new. Sitcom just does not cut it. I would agree with you that, at times, the topic of this thread becomes more of an argument about someone’s (not only yours although you are the frontrunner) personality which, I think, it should not be. It is understandable that, at times, people confuse it when not keeping focus only on words written. Along the way, we all got some impression about other posters’ personalities, but they should not be the topic. At least I think so or at least until someone directly starts insulting us. Benign joking comment could be fine, but not full-blown attack. As for the original post, I think it could have been phrased differently and still promote discussion, but it was not me who wrote it so it really does not matter. That is the personal style, in this case yours, and it is what it is. I think that people got offended by being called "fakers" or something like that while they are trying their best to the extent of their abilities, circumstances, and beliefs. That is quite understandable and then they said "Look who is talking". So you were on the spot. |
12 Angry Men quotes Juror #2: It’s hard to put into words. I just think he’s guilty. I thought it was obvious from the word, ’Go’. Nobody proved otherwise. Juror #8: Nobody has to prove otherwise. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. The defendant doesn’t even have to open his mouth. That’s in the Constitution. Juror #8: It’s always difficult to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this. And wherever you run into it, prejudice always obscures the truth. Juror #3: That business before when that tall guy, what’s-his-name, was trying to bait me? That doesn’t prove anything. I’m a pretty excitable person. I mean, where does he come off calling me a public avenger, sadist and everything? Anyone in his right mind would blow his stack. He was just trying to bait me. Juror #4: He did an excellent job. Juror #8: I just want to talk. Juror #7: What’s there to talk about? |
@geoffkait "you should probably get your ears candled pronto."Thanks for the concern but my ears are fine. However, I am concerned that you seem to be a bit "candled" at times; https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=candled Get some rest, clean the heads on that Walkman, and don't go on any river boat trips with your buddy Martin. |
^^^^^^^ "And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? 11He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. 12For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. 13Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.." The messianic complex is complete ;-) |
Oh brother, let’s not stretch this that far LOL. This is nothing more than a guy who worked for someone for 9 months. That’s it, that’s as far as the story goes. If Robert wants to build it into more than that, that’s up to him. As long as he doesn’t attempt to be "abusive toward another member" his story is as good as anyone’s. Glupson, everyone sees life through their own lenses. I happen to see it as a pretty cool experience. The guy next to me may see it completely different. The OP is about talking without walking as a question. I, you, Robert, prof, jf47t or anyone else sees life through our own set of values. Prof for example sees through his lenses that I’m here to instigate a fight, even though I say I’m not here to start any fights. Prof thinks because I said things a certain way that it means something based on his perception. It wasn’t what I said, but it was his perception on what I said. If you look at the OP you will see words. Those words only take on meaning as we apply our own set of values to them. I crafted the OP this way on purpose. Does the OP have meaning to me? Only to the extent that I wished to trigger others reactions to the way they (and I) view words. Some viewed the OP as just what it said, others thought it was provoking, others it gave them a chance to vent, others to bring up feelings about the person behind the OP (that was a little scary to be honest), and as we can read, a whole bunch of sidetracks and additives that had nothing to do with the OP at all. I wanted to show in real time the motives and intent that we create in our own minds when we see words, topics or discussions. For example one thing that stuck out to me is that so many viewed discussions as "arguments". Those same people viewed the OP as something to start or plant that arguing mindset in to the thread. If you go back and read through the thread again you will see all sorts of motives in the posts written. I’m also interested in the posts that follow this one. With the intent of the OP layout out, will posters be able to curve their own belief system and accept the OP for what it is and was or will they not be able to put the brakes on because of their own agendas that they created? Which brings us back to the OP and how it relates to the way we view audio. Do we create our own spins on audio to fit our beliefs? Are we able to stretch our views on what audio is and how far are we willing to take it? Do we as listeners see playback as a means to an end or a means to an active beginning? In this OP I was surprised on how I was personalized instead of the OP as words. I’ll be honest that got a little creepy to me. I was surprised to see others use this thread as an attack platform against me personally, the 20 year old employee thing got really weird. I knew when that started that I was going to give this thread a couple of more days and then reveal the thought behind this OP. As for myself, the motive and meaning behind the OP was crystal clear, but that again shows how I was viewing the OP as a tool. I tried to give hints to the OP but I was again surprised at how dug in folks thinking was and how forcefully they were sticking to their (our) own beliefs systems. I remember prof saying "a dog at the end of a bone" (sorry that’s probably not an exact quote. So anyway I’m very interested to see the next few posts and the agendas of the posters now that I have given the why of the OP. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
MG...the rest of the story....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U18VkI0uDxE |
Who would know who is right in this employment saga, but maybe there should be some peace treaty on that one. Let’s pretend that it was so long ago that everyone already forgot details that make the story. "Who cares how much stock Michael owned in RoomTune?"Robert does, apparently. Was it really listed on stock exchange? Just curious and, guys, this is not meant to start a fight. |
Robert, is the story now that you didn’t work for RoomTune? I’m confused. So Michael introduced you to Brent’s audiopoint in your store, you moved to Ohio and worked at the RoomTune factory. And now your saying you weren’t there? Second why are you obsessing over a brief period of employment in the 90’s? Who cares how much stock Michael owned in RoomTune? Michael is RoomTune. It reads like your trying to make a story line that changes as facts come out or even that you are trying to change the facts themselves. Robert no offence but why would I or anyone else wish to call you about your again brief stay at RoomTune for 9 months back in the 90’s? I’m sure MG has had lots of employees during the original RoomTune years when there were many mom and pop stereo stores who carried the product. It’s my understanding that MG was either developing or traveling tuning up people during the 90’s. That’s what the magazines were indicating. I’m not trying to be disrespectful Robert but hasn’t it already been shared that you were an employee of MG’s or RoomTune or whatever the company was for 9 months? My question is who cares? |
That is probably true. Thread has developed in so many directions that anything that was planned could be found here. You could say it would have geography in it and you would be right. Philosophy, poetry, mathematics, even some history of audio that I just learned, it is all here. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
glupson geoffkait "...how can you guys sit there and honestly say you’re content with CDs that sound..." Some people will and do agree with you on description of the CD sound. Maybe not all CDs and not all the words you used, but in that direction. At least part of the answer is that, despite admitting all those annoying shortcomings, they have no other option but to enjoy the way it is or stop enjoying altogether. They are content because improvement is not feasible under reasonable terms for them. The more I read about descriptions of tuning and tweaking, the more I am sure it, at this stage, cannot be something too many people would or could go for. It is time and effort expenditure that may outweigh potential benefit in the sound improvement. Many CDs really sound crappy, we all have a bunch of them, I am sure, but most people have no interest in playing with equipment on an hourly basis just to extract one more Hertz from it. It detracts from other things, including actually listening to that same CD. And that is even without opening the topic if all those tweaks. tunings really make a difference for which everyone has her/his own ideas. Gee, you don’t say? 🙄 I’m pretty sure that’s the talkers’ position. Excellent summary! Enjoy the music |
geoffkait,
Some people will and do agree with you on description of the CD sound. Maybe not all CDs and not all the words you used, but in that direction. At least part of the answer is that, despite admitting all those annoying shortcomings, they have no other option but to enjoy the way it is or stop enjoying altogether. They are content because improvement is not feasible under reasonable terms for them. The more I read about descriptions of tuning and tweaking, the more I am sure it, at this stage, cannot be something too many people would or could go for. It is time and effort expenditure that may outweigh potential benefit in the sound improvement. Many CDs really sound crappy, we all have a bunch of them, I am sure, but most people have no interest in playing with equipment on an hourly basis just to extract one more Hertz from it. It detracts from other things, including actually listening to that same CD. And that is even without opening the topic if all those tweaks. tunings really make a difference for which everyone has her/his own ideas. |
Yes I think Geoffkait is officially disqualified at this point from offering any valid insights about good sound until he gets his uber Walkman fixed. Get busy! You are obviously tweaking the wrong tweaks pseudo-NASA guy. Of course not that much of what he says ever seems valid in the first place. Always good for a laugh though just like his website and the junk he offers for sale here. |
There does seem to be a pretty big disconnect between the Happy Campers and the Tweakers and Tuners. But one has to ask, how can you guys sit there and honestly say you’re content with CDs that sound thin, wiry, bloated, generic, two dimensional, metallic, like Muzak, synthetic, ugly, screechy, congealed, wooden, electronic, digital, boring, anemic, compressed, airless, discombobulated, sour, amusical, pedestrian and like papier-mâché? Enjoy the music! |
My gosh guys. We need to keep track of all this LOL. I see cows, dogs, cats, cherry pie (that was mine), ex employees showing up, Geoff has had some entertaining stuff, your usual mad men, folks who can’t read an OP and understand it or insist that it has a secret meaning, trolls post getting deleted right and left (some of them the ex employee). A weird inquiry about my stay in Nashville (that might be good). The MG cult of happy listeners, people in a hobby that does plug & play or tweaking or tuning (not knowing it’s all the same hobby), listeners saying their systems can play everything wonderfully without tweaking (that’s a good trick). Oh a clip we all love from "A-now", a guess into each ones education (knowing the average todays 6 year old knows more than all of us), my age (no I wasn’t offended glupson, I love my nice long gray beard) oh (so do the ladies). jf47t becomes famous off of one thread, other posters trying to get famous after thousands of posts, some needing to check in with the counter for their nitey nite meds, some I think might be selling meds. The OP totally playing itself out in real time, other forums now picking up on the thread and talking about it, someone some where sold a used amplifier, an audio show just happened somewhere. Friends of MG’s reading this thread rolling on the ground laughing (did I mention madmen here). And me, well I’m now talking to my agent to see what kind of % I can get for the sitcom. And most of all it’s just a bunch of guys wasting time, oh average age 72. I wish I could have been here more now...well....maybe not but it’s still good! Michael (thinking about changing my identity) Green lol PS I think after all this I might just be a genius after all, who do I call to find out? peace my Brothers be happy |
| Post removed |
glupson geoffkait, I agree with your view of Wikipedia usefulness on technical subjects. I may not use it for copy/paste as much to post in threads, but I agree a person can learn a lot there. I should check it again, I have not in months. >>>>Let’s not get too carried away, glupson. I was being a little bit sarcastic although I realize it’s hard to tell sometimes. |
| Post removed |
glupson Yes your points are well taken. I did find the mini-biography MG gave us certainly did go quite a way to explaining the character of his posts and belief system. It’s weird interacting with the Tuners here; no alternative views seem to get "in" from the outside, it’s mostly blithely ignored, we only see things coming outward. Especially from you know who ^^^^^. If you aren’t going to just take what they are out to evangelize, well skeptics aren’t much good to them because they aren’t interested in defending their claims so much as gaining converts. So skepticism is cast as negativity, and off they go looking for whoever will eat the stuff up and say "more." I’ve had a long fascination with cults, fringe belief systems etc, and the similarities are quite remarkable to some of the behaviour I’ve seen in this thread. That of course is *not* to say Tuneland is a cult, but rather that some Tuners here seem to give off a similar vibe because there seem to be some shared characteristics. It’s sort of like the Jehovah’s Witnesses who come to your door to proselytize. They will happily engage you for hours if you seem open to their evangelizing. But if challenged, they will quickly say: "We see your viewpoint, thank you for taking the time to speak with us" and on to the next house. They are taught to not engage other critical views at length - both because it cuts down on proselytizing time, and because it can lead to doubts. People who operate in these protective bubbles tend to come off as a bit odd when they leave the bubble and try to interact with alternative viewpoints. BTW, I’ve said numerous times before I don’t go around "being scientific" in everything I do. Far from it. I buy things that tickle my fancy - which no doubt involves a healthy dose of my own biases - like anyone else. (I just try to be cautious in what conclusions I reach and what claims I’d make to other people). |