I learnt a lot more from some of these posts and there were some absolute garbage spat out, by some who pretend to be experts and qualified in the audio field (which I am NOT). These people need a bit of humility and grow up. There is more to this hobby (which I love and learning more or through these threads) than some simplistic one eyed BS put out there an I for one do not appreciate reading through pages of crap to find one gem. I am one for communicating maturely so I can learn and enjoy what I learn and to thank those who I learnt from. I don't suffer fools gladly! I do not have the time for malicious BS.
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
@kosst_amojan Finally someone got it. Sound wave move by air molecule compression. I held a commercial pilots license (and yes I can give my license number) and laminar flow is aerodynamics, acoustics is compressive "flow". Water ripples in a still pond do the same thing. Water ripples in a river, ie moving water, or as GK has a lot of, wind, disturb and nullify/change intrinsically the nature of the original compression. The nature of speaker design is very complex. The speaker injects a certain frequency in that compression that we hear by a vibration in our middle ear and sorted by our brain, but that's neurology and audiology. If someone blew in your ear you would not hear music. The ability of the various speaker drivers to impart the correct frequency vibration is (sometimes) what we hear as music, or nails down a blackboard etc. Well done Kosst_amojan. I have been patiently waiting and reading the absolute BS emanating from certain people. A. |
Grannyring. Yes for sure some of us are guilty for sidetracking somewhat although of late a bit of light humour was a relief. But maybe enough is enough and let us see what else there is to offer. I am a firm believer in tweaks and tuning to obtain the most from my equipment. However I stand by my previous statements that MG was the largest conspirator in the derailing of this thread by his attitude and even opening post. Maybe I read it wrong and took some of his subsequent posts the wrong way but that's my view. |
jf47t, I am truly glad for you, that you are having great experiences in this hobby! Sounds like a fun night! I really believe in "to each his own" and though I may not be doing what you guys are, specifically speaking in terms of tweaking, I do my own stuff. So I lift a glass of spirits to you. But I wonder if the sentiment is the same "from your side of the fence" because posts like you just made does continue to imply others are not "doing" this hobby, and if not by implication "doing it wrong." Like this: He said when people are not "doing" the hobby it turns into talking aimlessly. What do you think Michael meant by not "doing" the hobby? Because I’m not sure what that could even mean. As far as I can see, everyone here "does" the hobby. On their own terms. I may not, for instance, be "tuning" wood in my listening room, but I certainly fire up the system, sit back and enjoy music to no end! Isn’t that "doing" the hobby at all? Or do we have to be tweaking to do the hobby? Well, I certainly do that sometimes (though I try not to let it take precedence over mostly just listening to music). I like playing with speaker positioning, and acoustics in my room (I’ve made it really easy to do that). I enjoy changing up my amplification, or speakers (I own many speakers because I like how speakers sound different from one another). I spent a good two months setting up and testing all sorts of methods and materials to re-build my equipment rack and make an isolation base for my new turntable. And I’m just really learning more about VTA adjustment etc. So do I get to be included in the "doing the hobby" club? Or does "doing the hobby" mean doing it on MG’s terms, and using his tuning methods? And if what Michael meant to refer to was ending up posting and discussing the hobby on a forum like this, maybe "instead of" actively listening to our systems or something...then I’m unclear about that as well. After all, we can all walk and chew gum at the same time. I can post this...and soon after listen to a bunch of records, which I plan to do. Posting in this thread has never stopped me from my music listening time. Or from discussing with friends how to achieve something I want in my system. Or research other steps (for instance dialing in my new subwoofers...lots to be done). And certainly, MG himself spends a lot of time posting on forums, writing evangelically about his method. So there can’t be anything wrong with that. Just wondering if you can clear these questions up, because I truly am trying to make sense of such statements. Because I wouldn't go claiming you, or Michael, or anyone else on this thread "isn't doing the hobby" and I'm wondering on what grounds you feel you/Michael can claim that about other audio enthusiasts. Thanks! |
I find MG to be a breath of fresh air and a true innovator in a stale industry. I wish this thread did not get derailed. To bad for folks like me who are open to what he has to say. I like hearing views that stretch me. Really sad. Years ago this site was not like this, at least not to this extent. Such a shame. |
Had dinner with MG last night and asked him about this thread. He gave that MG smile and said pull it up and read the OP again. "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" Then he said read the last 4 pages. The word that came to my mind was "prophecy". Everything and character Michael said was happening IS happening on this thread. He said when people are not "doing" the hobby it turns into talking aimlessly. After dinner he took me to his place where I saw another component on the tuning platform. He had me listen for a while. After that while he had me close my eyes. He replayed the music. The soundstage grew to almost double the size both side to side and front to back and height. "Lets go shoot a game of pool and come back". He didn't want me to tell him what I experienced but instead put this post up and he'll read it with the rest of the readers following this thread. When I came back from pool you wouldn't know it was the same system. He said after I post this he will tell me what he did to the system. I am certain that he snipped the ties from the capacitors. I go back to listen tonight. I will give a report. |
| Post removed |
| Post removed |
Hi Jafant, good to see you. Every time you say the website hasn't been updated for years I wonder if your looking at an archived site :) Both TuneLand and the website got a major facelift last year. Anyway thanks, it's always good to see you. We should become facebook friends where I do several posts during the week. https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1764861045 take care Michael |
tubegruber Are you trying to educate or pacify your obvious boredom? No need to mention names you know who you are. Your barrage of supercillious commentary on this and a multitude of threads is benign enough except when you attack people in a needless way other than a subtle "humorous" voice of your hostility or is it that even? You are a very strange individual but a part of what makes the world go around I suppose. I just never get the point of your nonsense but try I have, maybe a bit too obtuse for your intellect? >>>>Yes, maybe a bit too obtuse for my intellect. 🤓 Let’s just leave it at that. Subtle “humorous” voice of my hostility? I don’t think there’s anything subtle about it. More like on the open side. 😛 |
Are you trying to educate or pacify your obvious boredom? No need to mention names you know who you are. Your barrage of supercillious commentary on this and a multitude of threads is benign enough except when you attack people in a needless way other than a subtle "humorous" voice of your hostility or is it that even? You are a very strange individual but a part of what makes the world go around I suppose. I just never get the point of your nonsense but try I have, maybe a bit too obtuse for your intellect? |
geoffkait, In and On are different words with different meaning. Just as Michael Green made me think about what he wrote, albeit his topics were worth considering if not completely agreeable upon, you made me think, too, and I think I am slowly realizing where you are coming from. Glancing over the references you post, words you repeat, forum you decided to express your opinion on (or in, if you prefer that option), mysterious quizzes full of unanswerable questions, and passion you have for a few of these, there is only one place you may be coming from. This last Zen copy you provided us has many features of a check-out counter literature. Words chosen to leave the reader breathless, some romantic hints, wisdom for everyday life, fight for the truth against "the cruel world that does not understand us" and, above it all, passion. Such literature deserves Fabio on the cover and that is what gave it away. It all came together. The answer to your well-crafted and unannounced quiz is..... Target (store). You did good this time. You gave us all those subtle hints and we did not even notice. We thought you were not making sense, but you outdid yourself this time. Congratulations. Say hello to Fabio from the rest of the Audiogon bunch. Is he really as friendly as his interviews make him appear to be? |
geoffkait, I wonder what a dog-in-a-bone is, too. Where did you find it? If you misread it and you are referring to prof’s "I have indeed been a dog-on-a-bone in this thread, I certainly admit that.", he may be willing to explain when he finds time. I can only speak for myself, but it seemed like a very clear metaphor with more than a bit of self-inflicting humor attached to it. |
Hi, all. Here’s the cut and paste of the intro to Zen and the Art of Debunkery. Enjoy. “What is “debunkery?” Essentially it is the attempt to debunk (invalidate) new fields of discovery by substituting scientistic rhetoric for scientific inquiry. While informed skepticism is an integral part of the scientific method, professional debunkers — often called “kneejerk skeptics” — tend to be skeptics in name only, and to speak with little or no authority on the subject matter of which they are so passionately skeptical. At best, debunkers will occasionally expose other people’s errors; but for the most part they purvey their own brand of pseudoscience, fall prey to their own superstition and gullibility, and contribute little to the actual advancement of knowledge. As such, they well and truly represent the Right Wing of science. To throw this reprobate behavior into bold — if somewhat comic — relief, I have composed a useful “how-to” guide for aspiring debunkers. This manual includes special sections devoted to debunking extraterrestrial intelligence, alternative healing methods, astrology and “free energy.” I spotlight these fields not because I necessarily support all related claims, but because they are among the most aggressively and thoughtlessly debunked subjects in the whole of modern history. Many of the debunking strategies laid bare here have been adapted nearly verbatim from the classic works of history’s most remarkable debunkers. Though they often cross the threshold of absurdity under their own steam, I confess I have nudged a few across it myself for the sake of making a point. As for the rest, their fallacious reasoning, fanatical bigotry, twisted logic and sheer goofiness will sound frustratingly familiar to those who have dared explore beneath oceans of denial and disingenuousness, and have attempted in good faith to report their observations.” |
geoffkait, I have to thank you. Even you can make me learn about new things and I honestly appreciate it. Not making it up at all. I looked up Wikipedia page for Marcello Truzzi who you quoted at some length about his views on skepticism or, what you seem to have a perservating interest in, pseudoskepticism. The part about that skepticism topic was nicely written in an attempt to impress but otherwise boring and, in my view, sufficiently meaningless so I will not recommend it to others nor will I quote it in the future. The part I would like to thank you for is that I learned the following: "Truzzi was Keynote Speaker at the 1st annual National Roller Coaster Conference, "CoasterMania", held at Cedar Point Amusement Park, Sandusky, Ohio - 1978. On the subject of riding in the front vs riding in the back of a roller coaster, he said:..."The very existence of a National Roller Coaster Conference "CoasterMania" is what I find interesting. I will surely mention it and quote above sentence in the future. Thank you, I could not have made that without you. Do you happen to know how they found him? It was a pre-Google time. How could you find a guy to speak at your roller coaster conference? However, as I mentioned to you before, your references are often revealing. |
jf47t, (written to prof)Not to go into validity and meaning of such questions and this whole thread, but I think that this thread had already developed by the time Michael Green asked prof this question. I am not taking sides, but it would not be fair to claim that whatever prof's answer to this question was (I do not remember it) was a major turn in this thread that brought it from meaningful discussion towards frustrated arguing. |
Anyway... I have indeed been a dog-on-a-bone in this thread, I certainly admit that. However, the whole thing really touches issues I find of interest and importance - the role of empiricism, science and skepticism in high end audio, and the approach to discussing differences of opinion or debating the issues. Like I’ve said, it does no one any good to be dismissive of someone’s skepticism, to imply it is only a form of defective negativity, to ignore good questions and arguments, and only embrace those who believe exactly as we do. That’s why I bristled at the lack of honest interaction in the thread and have felt it important to identify and critique. But I don’t plan on adding any more. Unless...of course...other people show up and continue to insist on mischaracterizing my posts and arguments. ;-) . (Though actually, even then, whatever. People will mischaracterize them if that's what they are after, no matter what I do. That's obvious at this point. But my views, arguments and clarifications are all there for anyone to make an honest assessment). |
Why don’t you talk to Michael about music or his product or tuning. I did. Remember? I asked honest questions that he refused to answer. As I said: I’m not trying to get you to change your opinion of the Michael you know. He may be a great fellow. But I certainly am trying to get across why this thread went to crap, and it started with the character of Michael’s original post. I know Michael’s followers think he can do no wrong...so yes, it’s a bit quixotic to think you will recognize this thread didn’t have the best efforts of MG. Or better yet why don’t you post your thoughts on TuneLand. Because I have seen that this would be useless - both Michael and his followers here have all shown that skeptical questions are not welcome, that they are seen as bad vibes and trolling. I’ve also seen someone else dismissed before from the Tuneland forum simply for asking skeptical questions, daring to bring up measurements, blind testing etc, so it doesn’t seem worth the time to go there unless I’m just going to embrace anything Michael presents with "geeze, thanks!." Your posts are repeated ramblings at this point. They are "repeated" because no Tuner answers them. I’m hardly following him around the forum - this is the only MG thread I’ve ever entered. But MG tuners keep showing up to defend him and while doing so, cast me and others as the bad guys. And since you came in and called out my (among others) posts as off-the-mark, even trolling, of course I’m going to respond and explain where you are wrong. |
| Post removed |
Prof Why don't you talk to Michael about music or his product or tuning. Or better yet why don't you post your thoughts on TuneLand. On this thread it looks like you are obsessing over Mr. Green even stalking him. The Michael I know is someone different than you have painted a picture of. You've even been trying to convince me of changing my mind about him but sir that would be "fake". If you would have stated your case and moved on that would have been something to add to the mix of opinion. But you are being passive aggressive in trying to paint that someone else is. Your posts are repeated ramblings at this point. My opinion is you've barked up the wrong tree on a public forum. |
Prof, when Michael is up on a forum somewhere in the home hobby or professional a post is made on TuneLand and his facebook page. No sirens needed. Well, that is essentially a siren of the type I was thinking - it seemed that somehow Tuneland people are getting alerted elsewhere about this thread, as opposed to just "stumbling upon it" while perusing audiogon. And that is what you’ve just described: when Michael posts here he alerts his followers. This serves as a good example of trolling by you. And that serves as a good example of your misapplication of that term. My comment was not trolling: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Trolling It was an honest impression that Michael’s followers and friends were being alerted about this thread from outside this forum. Nothing - as per the definition of trolling - was meant to deceive, and my general impression was essentially vindicated by the information you just posted. And MG most certainly did engage in your question. If you read MG’s response to you he asked a very straight forward question. He asked a question to AVOID ANSWERING my question. I was asking the question first, remember? Here was my question (which I had to ask twice because he kept avoiding it): PROF WROTE: "Can you tell us exactly what measurable performance parameters change when a cap is tied down with a tie wrap? And explain why one would expect those measurable changes would be audible, especially with the character you describe? Do you actually think those are unreasonable questions to ask, if someone is claiming there is an audible performance difference between a tied and an untied capacitor? I’d hope not! Yet, instead of answering the question, Green wanted to turn the tables and ask me about the difference between two specific capacitors. That is NOT answering my questions and I’m sure you know it. He only sought a way to try and show me as inexperienced, and use that as an excuse to not answer those completely reasonable questions. But be my guest - show me how the above questions were, in fact, answered by Michael. Your answer set the stage for where you wanted to go with this thread. Yes...I tried to keep Michael actually focused on giving some answers to explain the evidence for his claims, instead of his ignoring them and finding new ways to imply I’m a fake. How impertinent of me! Michael was talking about people who want to try things instead of talking about them. And do you think it is unreasonable to first ask the basis on why one would try something in the first place? Do you just try anything anyone ever suggests? Or, if their suggestion doesn’t seem to make immediate sense to you, would you not ask follow up questions, asking for a better explanation and evidence? Tell me: what exactly is wrong with that? Because that’s what I was doing with Michael’s claims about crowding components, tied capacitors etc, but he wouldn’t answer. But Michael and his acolytes tend to imply that if you question the claims before running out and trying them, well, that’s just not right, it’s like a bad character trait and you aren’t playing by the rules they want people to play. "If you haven’t tried it; you are in no position to question it.’ And that is a type of b.s. that deserves to be called what it is. Another thing I can tell you about Michael is he doesn’t like to do anger. Yes I did notice he tended toward the passive-aggressive - sprinkling assertions and implied insults (e.g. implying questions like mine made me part of the problem, implying people who were skeptical are trolls oe negative nellies, etc), and doing the passive-aggressive "Oh, if you took THAT from what I said, that’s on you!" Once again, as I’ve said many times: I am not arguing at all that Michael Green has nothing to offer. Far from it, his tunable speakers and some of his room tuning implementations are intriguing even to me. And I am not declaring that all his tweaks are fake and don’t work. All I’m doing is, when a claim seems ever more outside anything I’ve seen good evidence or explanation for - to ask questions about what type of evidence and methods of testing are being used to vet the ideas. And I’ve also been pointing out that starting a thread implying people are being fakes who don’t go along with Green’s claims and run out to try them, is not a good way to start a civil discussion with people who may not simply accept your claims on face value, and want some reasonable questions answered first. |
Prof, when Michael is up on a forum somewhere in the home hobby or professional a post is made on TuneLand and his facebook page. No sirens needed. This serves as a good example of trolling by you. You've done nothing here but try to paint a false narrative of a man who has dedicated his life to helping others. And MG most certainly did engage in your question. If you read MG's response to you he asked a very straight forward question. He asked if you knew the sonic difference between two capacitors. Your answer set the stage for where you wanted to go with this thread. Michael was talking about people who want to try things instead of talking about them. You have been pressing to talk instead of walk. That's fairly clear to me. Plus your temper gets the best of you and others have asked you to not take things so personally. Another thing I can tell you about Michael is he doesn't like to do anger. |
jf47t, It’s odd to read this thread that is mostly about Michael’s character instead of the OP. You seem to have missed that Michael’s OP was an attack on the character of others - calling them out as "fakes." (And he continued to imply people on this thread - e.g. me - are faking it). Why is your tolerance so high when Michael does this, and so low if anyone challenges Michael to back up his arguments, I wonder? No one is chasing MG around on the forum attacking his character (I notice he managed to recently turn a speaker thread into yet another bunch of self-promotion...) But since THIS thread is one started by MG, and he did not behave very well to people who didn’t just accept his claims, then it’s not a surprise that his posts have been scrutinized for their character. I don’t doubt at all that any number of people can report wonderful interactions with MG. I’m sure - if you he sees you as open to conversion - he can be a great guy. But of course it’s easy to be nice to people who are thanking you for your help and pearl’s of wisdom. It’s another test of character, for anyone not just MG, to be able to discuss differences of opinion in an intellectually honest manner and not dismiss anyone voicing disagreement or skepticism as "negative" people or trolls. Which Michael continually implied (and sometime explicitly). I see and listen with Michael almost every day. We live 5 doors away from each other. And I’m sure you get along great. But none of that speaks to MG’s actual posts in this thread, which were evasive, dismissive if not outright insulting. (written to uberwaltz) There aren’t any questions here Mr. Green avoided. He didn’t give the answers Prof or whomever wanted Holy cow. I asked for clarifications, and asked specific questions. Michael Green admitted he wasn’t even answering them, didn’t even feel it incumbent on him to do so at all. If you asked me specific questions and I respond with the equivalent of "I'm not going to answer your questions, you don’t get it, and btw you exemplify the problem" you wouldn’t accept my characterization "well, I just didn’t give the answers you wanted." No, that’s disingenuous - as if to put the onus on you, like YOU are in the wrong to not accept those as answers. The fact is I just wouldn’t be answering the questions AT ALL. Michael was not answering my questions AT ALL. Either early on, or when I asked about capacitors. Everyone noticed. Why don’t you? You are taking pages right out of Michael’s playbook here. Spin something in a disingenuous manner - always imply blame to the respondent. Prof I have indeed read this whole thread and you and kosst ARE trolling MG. You can twist and turn as much as you wish but you ARE INDEED TROLLING Mr. Green. Here is what your post shares in common with Mr. Green’s posts: You can cast such aspersions, but you can’t - don’t even bother - to back it up. Calling people names like "troll" without actually showing how their arguments - what they have actually written - deserves that name, is rather undignified. (Whereas I only applied that term to Michael’s post insofar as I showed exactly why the *content* of his post justified that term). Do you care to back up your name-calling and actually show how my questions to Michael was "trolling?" Point to any argument I’ve made here to be unreasonable? It would only be intellectually honest to do so, don’t you think? Or are you set in following MG’s example of just brushing people off with disparaging comments, rather than engaging their questions and arguments? |
uberwaltz You said that you believe MG failed in every aspect of managing this thread. Michael's not an audiogon mod and btw the Mods have done great on this thread. There aren't any questions here Mr. Green avoided. He didn't give the answers Prof or whomever wanted so some of you decided to judge MG based on this. That's not being objective. |
| Post removed |
I've been wanting to post but there was a glitch in the system that Audiogon promptly fixed. It's odd to read this thread that is mostly about Michael's character instead of the OP. I'll give my take about Michael's character that I have seen first hand. When he moved from the outer part of Vegas to the heart of the strip it was easy to pick up on what Michael Green is about. When leaving the old neighborhood MG made sure those who had an interest in Michael's sound he gave a home system to, free. The movers also got systems, free. This was on top of his generous pay. Even while Michael was moving into our community, he was asking other tenants if they had systems. He gave his neighbors systems, free. Michael Green is about sharing music and making life enjoyable for the people he comes in contact with. Painting MG in any other light is false. I see and listen with Michael almost every day. We live 5 doors away from each other. Prof and kosst you are so far off base with your posts I'm surprised you are even on this thread. Prof I have indeed read this whole thread and you and kosst ARE trolling MG. You can twist and turn as much as you wish but you ARE INDEED TROLLING Mr. Green. |