2. tech-talk
  3. 135904-110926

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


128x128michaelgreenaudio
michaelgreenaudio's avatar
michaelgreenaudio OP
643 posts
 

I don’t want to leave out Maggies and the others either. When I read people trying to criticize the sound of these great speaker designs I shake my head, because for those of us in the know, we have actually lived with the exchange and interaction these have with the room. Once you have not only learned but have created the interaction yourself there’s a knowledge (wisdom) that puts you in a club that goes way beyond "talk". Listening to a Maggie setup incomplete for the skilled Maggie listener is like ringing the dinner bell for us. Why is simple, we’ve been there. Those triggers go off in our heads and our mind’s eye is redesigning the room cause we know "that" sound is there and it’s just a matter of unleashing it on the room’s acoustics.

This is the one place I say to Hombre "be careful". If you are just going to throw your speaker into the room you may not get that magic you mentioned earlier. You could very well place a speaker in the room and get that magic or you could just as easily open a can of worms that might take you out of the fun listening game for months or even years. That’s why I asked, if you’ve got perfect consider the risk of moving away from perfect to something that might require some serious adjusting. Again it may not, but I’m glad to see real (active) users jumping in. They could very well save the day for you, as well as talking to the designer themselves.

man, what a sport!

MG

kosst_amojan
2,095 posts
 
Hi Mikey!

What an irrelevant set of questions! This kind of questioning gives great insight into your complete lack of technical knowledge. Highly reactive speakers are tough loads to drive. That's just a fact. Lots of reactive speakers sound good with the right amp. 

I don't personally like planar speakers. They don't sound realistic and they have serious dispersion and room interaction issues. Many are also unreliable and require somewhat frequent and expensive rebuilds. I almost bought a pair of Maggie's a few years back just because they were very cheap, but opted not to. None of that has anything to do with their electrical behavior though. 
sbank's avatar
sbank
2,038 posts
 
@kosst_amojan Your last post says more about you than the person you are aiming your flamethrower at, in this case MG. His questions get right to the heart of the matter at hand, and you failed to answer. To generalize about the sound of all planars is pretty worthless. To say you don't like them and mention that you almost bought a pair is pretty worthless. 

To say, "They don't sound realistic and they have serious dispersion and room interaction issues." is worse than worthless, it's just plain wrong and does a disservice to the OP. My Sound Labs sound more realistic to me than dozens of other speakers I've owned(e.g. Nolas, Silverlines, Vandersteens, Thiels, Von Schweikerts, Avalons, Quads, Alons, Merlins to name a few) and hundreds more I've demoed.

When it comes to serious room dispersion and interaction issues, that varies widely by brand/model. Sure some are "head in a vice", like the old InnerSounds. But the Sound Labs have some of the best measured in room off-axis response you will find. Just a few days ago, a friend who does room acoustical analysis and treatment professionally was here measuring performance of the Sound Labs with his testing gear. He measured on and off-axis at 15, 30 & 45 degrees at 3ft, 5ft and listening position(12ft.) using his omni-mic and pc software. He told me that the off axis performance in room was better than most dynamic speakers and far superior to a pair of planar Apogee Stages + sub that he recently measured. Granted, this is in a treated room with a combo of bass traps, absorptive panels and diffusion set up in Live End/Dead End fashion as recommended by Dr. West at Sound Lab. Some of the results are attributable to the benefit of working on the room, but much of it is because Sound Labs and many other dipoles are less affected by side wall, floor and ceiling reflections than most other speakers. Granted, impact of the wall behind the speakers is great and the wall behind the listener does somewhat come into play. So you've got to attack the wall behind the planars with great amounts of absorption and ideally a bit of diffusion. That's a bit of my experience measuring and listening to planars. 
So instead of throwing shade at everyone, why don't you share what you've measured, what you actually listened to and what you learned from putting 2 + 2 together? That might actually help someone, including the OP. What I anticipate is a snarky reply belittling me or pretty much everyone. Please prove that assumption wrong. Cheers,
Spencer  
michaelgreenaudio's avatar
michaelgreenaudio OP
643 posts
 

Might have been easier for kosst to say "I've never used, tested or owned them" instead of telling a bunch of folks who have what he thinks on a thread that is called "Talk but not Walk", but it does serve as a great example for the OP.

Thank you kosst for keeping this OP alive and well!

mg

elizabeth
6,726 posts
 
At least it is true Magnepan are a 'love them or hate them' sort of speaker... I am glad I upgraded from 3.6 Maggies to the 20.7s last year. The best upgrade to the sound is midrange clarity. (I was worried the bass would be too much, but I have been able to generally keep it tamed, (some Rock is earphones only though. I live in a 'over 55' complex.) Upgrading the AC duplex to Furutech GTX added a lot to the sound quality.
More to discover