Talk but not walk?

To all of the contributors, I have only begun exploring this "hobby" since retiring and have had a few false starts trying to find out what it was I wanted to do in retirement. I spent 35 years with my nose in engineering, traffic engineering actually, making cars come into the city in the morning and getting them home at night. Do you realise how many billions it costs a cities industry to keep the roads moving per DAY? It was the most thankless job anyone could do because the only thing a driver sees is a red light or the bumper of the stopped car ahead, and don't they bitch about it! I would guess 99% of you have almost every day. Was there thanks? Only when there was a requirement the get the American President from AF1 to the Governor's House in a 30 car, 20 motorcycle precession, non stop, green all the way and no traffic ahead. Security took months of planning, my job took 30 minutes because I could do it so well. And I taught my 12 engineers and the traffic management 24/7 group to do it (sort of because they were primarily call/complaint takers). Every day I drive on the road I look at the traffic signals thinking how I could improve the flow. Every day I drive.

My body finally gave up and I have had a major joint replacement or back surgery every year since 2013. 5 back surgeries since 2000 and now have cancer.

Where am I going with this? This (and other forums) are my lifeline to my adopted hobby. I realised in the 60's how much I liked music. But family, job and dedication left no time. Now I have time, I have to recreate my life out of the engineering job I had. Even after 2 years out of it, I had a major manufacturer ring me yesterday to ask if I could fix a problem for them. A commercial company ring one person in the whole of Australia. I am still thinking whether I'll take them up on their cry for help. It's costing them millions from sales.

Where was I ? Yes, I look to this forum, each contributor to learn from. I hate the spite and sarcasm that appears, but we are all individuals with our own way of imparting experiences, or expression of ideas, pro or con.

Michael, I think this is a great way of passing and exchanging experience and knowledge to those who already know or those people who want to know more of the subject. There is so much to equipment, the way each individual component interconnects with the next, to finally come out as music. Then there is the way we want to hear it individually. How to set up a room. What cables work best, cleaning. There is so much, only restricted by budget, appreciation of what you are hearing and how to get the best out of it. Appreciate Picasso and Da Vinci. Two painters with different styles to be appreciated of their own. 

I always pointed my front speakers to focus together just beyond my wife's and my chairs. I took chance and pointed them about 6 degrees out to the side walls and opened up a whole new room of sound!

Learning, what we read, we learn, for good or bad, that's up to us, but this forum is for us to impart, exchange and learn.

(Sorry for the big diatribe...) Adrian

All this makes interesting, if not debatable reading. I have been to what is one of the acoustically greatest stages in the world, the Sydney Opera House. The magic that happens there is truly a wonder of the world. If I could get my music room to sound 10% of that I would be a happy man. If I could afford I could a worthy stereo, I'd be happy.

I read recently about the work Franck Tchang did with his static resonators with different metallic properties. Fascinating. Then there is the SOH with its phenomenal acoustic properties. I haven't travelled to the majestic concert hall of the world, but I will freely admit that acoustics can be changed using all sorts of materials and placement.

I would not think there is one spot where a stereo system is perfect in placement in a room. What does change though is the listeners perception of change. I can sit in one chair or another in my lounge and the same LP will sound perceptively different, or the hearing in my ears are way different. Probably the way the breeze passes from one and out the other... :)

@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.

@jf47t I am firmly the master of my own music, but spiritual? Lordy, lordy, what were you listening to? Or smoked during?

There is a thread on Cerebral or Visceral. You might do well to read it.

I am sorry Michael. There are elements in life and hardware that logic either accepts with blind faith or it questions and asks why?

Why was Jesus able to walk on water? People accept the fact that he did, yet logically its impossible (unless the water was ice).

Would a person walk off a cliff because someone simply said "don't worry, you won't fall"? Logic and every shrieking intuition would say NO!

Your argument still fails the logic test. I am not going into my system to modify it because someone told me just do it, it will be great afterwards. I would need to know why the change happens, how does it happen and by how much can a person expect the change to be? Can't you see that the logic test has not been proven with your post. You may tell me 100 people snipped their ties, but WHY does this benefit happen, what is the science behind it? If you cannot explain this, you have no right telling people to do it.

Michael, until you are able to explain this, you remain in snake oil territory and you are still expecting blind acceptance of your preaching.

You may be doing, but not explaining Michael. Why do, if you are not told why it happens. Again you fob off the explanation.

I am not worried if you love Jesus or not, that is not the issue. The issue is science against your explanation of faith in your solution, and faith is losing.

I don't care if you are "doing" but you are not explaining.

Explain how or why this works. Why is it so hard to get a straight answer?

Michael,

You still do not understand that I do not understand why or how your explanation works. I am NOT playing engineer here, hence my repeated request for further information. I WANT to understand but  you are reluctant to be forthcoming with information that can be useful to posters.

Do we need to attend your Temple to be enlightened? I would have thought that these forums, post topics are there to find out and share information on all subjects audio.

Why is it so hard to understand? It seems perfectly plain to me. Come to AudioGon, ask a question, search for an answer, if someone make a statement or something that seems out of normal or controversial, why is it so wrong to ask for the writer to seek explanation?

Isn't why AudioGon exists?

Michael, you are a chameleon.

I finished 4 years of engineering in 1977. You must be well older than me.

I don't see the need to exaggerate my credentials. Why do your posts of historical endeavours seem to be out of kilter with posted history? Were you really there at all?

@glupson I fully understand your point. Maybe an "empirical testing lab" is the wrong term, however because half of our system refers to the appreciation of music, and the other half refers to the physical means of imparting it, both can be better explained.

The ability of the physical to influence what we hear is intrinsic. The ability to appreciate this music is not esoteric. The knowledge of one can greatly help the other. And we can all benefit.

The desire to improve the physical by means of upgrades or tweaks is something we all desire. As posters and readers, we commune here to share what we know or have found out. This way we all benefit. No?

@glupson It comes back to a simple case of a person making an assertion of some kind, and providing the methodology by which this was found or measured and a kind to the point description.

There is nothing wrong with that. We do it every day we go to the shops, the HiFi store, car sales place etc. We ask a question, and we wouldn't expect an evasive answer, unless there is something doubtful about the subject being questioned.

Seems reasonable to me.

Sound engineers Ed Long and Ron Wickersham developed the concept of the PZM. "Pressure Zone Microphone"

“I was part of the class at Syn-Aud-Con that helped in the development of the PZM back in 1978. The technique was first shown to us by Ed Long and Ron Wickersham. We were all aware of the problems of reflected sound combining with direct sound to cause combing interference to the frequency response. Not only did PZMs eliminate that, it also gave any microphone 3dB more output. We were given tiny Knowles microphones and instructed to take them home and experiment with different configurations. Knowles made tiny omni, cardioid, and even bi-directional microphones.”

Any fib will eventually be caught out.

@audiopoint  Well explained and well written. Of course there will be further questions and enquiries regarding the behaviour of elements that make up HiFi systems in general, realising each system is unique, in environment, componentry, wiring and power. I realise there are a lot more factors to be discussed but for those who are of curious mind, its a good read.

@jf47t Thank you for your descriptions of what occurred to influence the change in sound/musical experience you had at MG's. It gives a better mind's eye picture of what may be available in our systems to change.

@geoffkait These are as many no proven to have effect as well. Empirical testing caters for both "judgement" testing and "conditional" testing. It is just what is agreed, UP FRONT, to test and how to test, the thing to be tested, or judged etc.

We all have agricultural shows where the jam testing is agreed upon by majority of tasters. They do have criteria by which they are looking for a flavour.

"Tweak" testing is if carried out by an individual, and found favourable, could rightly be shared to benefit all of us. HOWEVER, if "Tweaks" are of a commercial nature and some stands to gain financially from is, then it is quite reasonable for people to ask for greater criteria and repeatable results with explanation of how it works in principle, given that there may be IP or patents pending.

I am not sure that I understand you pill popping statement. Are these the result of empirical tests, your own experiences, and what your mother did to you?

All. I have no idea what happened to my first sentence. This (Microsoft surface keyboard) teleports the cursor all over the space. My apologies, but I didn't read what I had written in full until I hit POST.

I think I was responding to Geoff by saying (no spelling correction now), "there are as many tweaks not to have been PROVEN to have any effect as well".

It is only breakfast time here so the pills won't have started to work fully yet. ;0)

And one thing further, as per the OP's headline for this thread TALK BUT NOT WALK?, I find it particularly offensive to be targeted in a general accusational headline that I or others are Talking but not Walking? Most of us on these forum threads are walking.

If MG did do quite successfully, it has been to demean and offend us by insinuating that we are not active in our quest to improve our systems. It would seem that MG finds it demeaning to him that we do not follow his doctrine.

All, Whether or not Michael Green posts on this thread or not doesn't bother me. However if he does, it is my desire, and I expect it is the same for other readers of the many posts in AudioGon, that he participates in the manner that others expect and have posted.

Whether a post is a page or more long as prof's posts can be, I find him engaging and informal, while being easy to read. Other posts can be short and succinct but less informal, and that's ok too.

It's posts which are vague, uniforming, nor here nor there, without substance, while appealing to readers that the information contained within the post should be accepted without question.

And God help us if we do question the poster. We are called anti, naysayers, trolls etc., when all we are actually asking for is more information on which we can base our own understanding on how a SOMETHING works.

I fail to understand why this is so wrong? I agree 100% with Prof, who at least is informative, questioning (with the right questions), and appears to be reasonably well informed on most matters. Like myself, and other posters, we question for more information. I would expect that this would be a normal occurrence anywhere.

 @jf47t If you find the questions we ask so objectionable, or hard to answer, then just say so and leave it. You are not contributing this forum other than throwing out what can be described as misinformation as there IS no information you write that we can use or go away and try.

I could describe the mess my cables are in and rearrange them and post on it. That is useless information which is not what I would expect to be an informational post or experience.

If anyone is Trolling, it would appear to me that you are targeting Prof in particular, and others in general.

I do not apologise for the length of this post if it tells you, and other, something that annoys me. You and this whole MG thing annoy me. Go away.

@jf47t or Michael or who ever you are pretending to be. Your answers are becoming more like a personality change. Quite erratic.

I didn't contribute to this post to be told the OP didn't want to talk, and we were not walking as he expected us to viz the title "Talk but not walk?"

If you/he can't deal with a push back, asking questions of your/his "technique" then perhaps the provocative opening to this thread, telling readers that they are "Faking" ""IT"", should not have been made. Is it any wonder why quite intelligent people here are asking for an expansion of ways we can "UN-FAKE IT"?

It was you who said

"Prof amg or whoever your getting angry at a guy who is doing nothing more than tuning a guitar. Michael might as well be tuning a piano, guitar or any other instrument or a stereo."

I simply asked in the same analogy, show us. To which you flippantly told me to find out my self. Are you running out of ways you can answer an honest question with out being evasive?

Enjoy your tune life. I'll enjoy mine hugely. At least I will be able to commune with people who wish to partake with intelligent responses.

@jf47t "Michael might as well be tuning a piano, guitar or any other instrument or a stereo. He's not asking how good your hearing is or if you are ever going to tune. He's simply saying if you do this it will mean more than talking about the possibility, you'll actually be "tuning".

And what we are asking Michael is "How do YOU tune a Guitar?". An unassuming question that he has been reluctant to answer. It may be that MY way may be lacking or at worst incorrect. We have only asked for Michael to offer his knowledge on the subject, as he brought the subject up on this forum. If he is reluctant to do so for commercial or IP reasons then he just needs to say so.

@glupson Nice

@geoffkait may your path towards your Audio Nirvana be as smooth as mine. Ringo - "PEACE"

@geoffkait 

A presumption not necessarily true.

I may be in front of your 18 wheeler. Don't presume that there are people on this thread that are not way ahead, but on their own path.

The mistake on this thread was exactly your presumption made by MG the OP. There are plenty of Audiophiles well ahead on the "road". MG's opinion of what path may lead he and followers to his Audio Nirvana may not suit other Audiophile's for whatever reason and that is just fine.

The most important thing is to ENJOY your path....

@geoffkait I stated I studied Civil Engineering which branched off into road design and traffic engineering. i studies materials, structures (stress/shear/cantilever/moments/compression), geology, fluids, economics, business, etc, etc. i also stated I held a commercial pilots licence, through which aerodynamics is taught.

Please do not show your ignorance of engineering, and of Traffic Engineering. If you look at sonics and acoustic engineering, traffic flow is much the same, and fluid dynamics. Flow, compression, density and dispersion.

Not as simple as people may think. Then add to this driver behaviour which involves psychology and other factors. Then factor in a vehicle break down which complexes the flow dynamics further.

So, in essence my studies and work in Engineering is another form of what the OP is doing and what @audiopoint has written as explanation to my questions. I have a good idea of what is the theory, but the practical is a question I have been seeking answers for.

Thank you @audiopoint and @theaudiotweak for your candid explanations, the subject and answers of which I am finding on various forums and websites.

Michael,

Your last post shows how arrogant and conceited you are. To assume that it's 'Michael's way or no way' shows your contempt for the other very knowledgeable Audiophile or enthusiast people in this world.

That is what was exhibited in your very first post as OP and that is why people other than my self questioned you. You have a very poor attitude towards those who just enjoy music for what it is, Your glib posts screak of sarcasm and know it all behaviour.

I for one will not be engaging you or your like any more. I would suggest you take a lesson in tuning up your smarmy attitude.

Goodbye Michael.

@jf47t Jay, Without being in the least bit rude, may I say to you, "Grow Up and Smell the Roses". There is a world out there, out from the shadow of Michael, no matter what he says.

That world, is full of well meaning people of all Nationalities, backgrounds, ages, ethnicity, beliefs and worth who have "FUN" experimenting with their Stereo equipment to the point where they are happy and satisfied with results.

There are thousands of topics on the wwweb that cover all aspects of HiFi manipulation. people, like me, prof, glupson, mapman, geoffkait, all commune on these forums to learn and to communally partake in information sharing. (We might exclude Geoff then....). ;0

What is not in keeping with the above is posts that call to task people's belief that they are walking and talking, being called fakes. is it any wonder there was a small but vocal uprising by people who DO walk and talk. Jay, there are as many ways to talk as there are languages, each have their own way of walking. I for one would never call them to task and call anyone of them fakes.

I am sorry for you Jay. You need to learn to think for yourself, come out of the shadow you seem to be under.

@geoffkait How dare you! You miserable excuse for a person. Do you want a copy of my diagnosis? You smart mouthed little person. Do you think cancer is funny? Do you think it does cause pain?

One person asks how I am feeling and you pull this stunt. are you showing off, because you have nothing else to contribute?

Oh, you are a shallow, callous narrow minded disgrace. You are certainly not humble and no scribe. You are a grub.

And finally...

You are happy with your system, when you are happy with it. There is no need or compulsion to make it studio like, or above and beyond what is acceptable to you, the owner and listener.

Then forget the walking, sit and enjoy what you have.