Good afternoon Agon Hope you folks got in some fun listening last night. The last couple of days I’ve been in Phil Keaggy land and love it. It’s exciting to hear an artist grow from their early message on through the years as they mature musically and their views. Phil is a rock and knows how to rock both. Visiting one of his guitar makers years ago was a joy for me, and being with Phil in person is a treat. After I got some work done today I came back to Prof’s posts and read through my OP again. I must admit I got no further along in answering Prof than I did before. The OP to me and others is crystal clear. Picking it apart and trying to read my attitude or hidden message to be decoded, simply would have to be in the hands of the individual interpreter. I don’t want to start trying to bend the post, or any of my posts, into meaning beyond what they are. I’m glad that TJ visited us again because he is a great example of what it is like beginning in the tune and working his way through becoming the master of his own system through using the tune. Following that up with Elizabeth’s post is perfect for this thread. Fact is, if you are sitting there with a stock system in a living room and nothing else, there is another level to your hobby if you wish to take a hold of it. Talking your way around why your not going to take a step is the opposite from ultimate listening practices. It’s not meant to be a slam on anyone, but an invitation into a more profound hobby. People are going to say "I'm happy where I am" and we say "good". We're not unhappy for you that you have found a great place in your hobby, that would silly. At the same time that's a choice. Can you go further if you choose" absolutely. There is a division in this hobby and it’s not one that is meant to be dividing with malice, condensation, discrediting or marginalizing of anyone. The division is made by all of us as individuals, it’s a choice. Do I take that next step in componentry or do I look for a method that pulls my whole hobby together? It’s not about WAF or any other reasons why not to, it’s about taking a look at what listening is beyond the articles, ads and peer pressure. The method of tuning is about first setting your system free and second tuning it back in to your level of listening. What I’m preaching about is a simple message, the entire recording is there available for us to discover. Our choice to go after it or not is that division and if you look at these pages you will see folks living out that division in real time. It’s not a division between one person and the next unless we make it one. Nope the division is within us, do I stay where I am at or do I go beyond flaceplates, money and my personal reasons why not to. The OP is no slam, it’s a door. Some have opened this door, some are standing at the door, and others refuse to believe there is even a door there. So it’s not about (and never was) one person claiming themselves better than anyone else. The Tune is about exploring what signal really is by doing and not talking about why we are not doing, or only doing in part. It’s not judging you as a person or your intelligence. It’s a step that you either want to explore or you don’t. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
One point for any listener is they have to know themselves.
They have to know what they really like and want.
Way to many folks really have no idea what they want. They just sort of make noises like 'good sound'. or 'like music should sound'.
Which really means they are just spouting what they read or were told to say.(only as an example I like HF clarity. a LOT. So much so I can give up other stuff for it. And I do not like too much bass, which some folks think is the be all end all.)
As for the theory folks vs the practical experience folks...
Different ways of seeing and interpreting the World.
The most obvious are cable threads. Particularly the theory arguments in power cord threads. Some folks do not care about any theory, they do the test and say it is better. Others cannot fathom bothering since THEORY says it cannot matter, and thus the person making the claims is just deluded...
And on it goes.
|
🐑
mapman
Prof very useful and well thought out post as usual.
Wow! Whaddaya know? The Euronator has the back of the pseudo skeptic. I hate to speak too quickly but it appears moopman is following the wrong sheep again. Bad, Moops! Bad!
🐑 🐑 🐑 🚶🏻♂️
|
Well first of all I can attest that the OP here is purely getting into an understanding that a bad recording heard is not as what it seems be. Others may find that its not sounding good in thier system because it was a bad or a poor recording, but instead it could also be because the system is not working hand in hand with your surroundings. I can tottaly understand others may find this awkward based on each and everyones listening experience as I was too. Only after I started toying around with what Michael was saying I began to understand deeper what was happening.
Now my previous setup was located in my living room and I was having mixed feelings with what I was listening. Some cds played sounded amazing but the rest just sounded bad and lifeless. As I have mentioned on my previous post listening in my car audio setup it was the other way round those same recordings that bad and lifeless now sounds great. This got me thinking about what is wrong with my home setup. Well going around and reading all over the net and audio forums also on acoustic books did gave me some improvments but never the kind of amazing sounding system that I wanted. It was only until I stumbled upon Michael's website which initially seemed to be confusing as I couldnt wrap my head around on what he and other tunes were saying. Well this got me more and more interested as some of the topics discussed was actually what i felt that was lacking in my system.
Long story short I registered in his forum and started posting up my questions to Michael who then began to lead me step by step on what to do first and the next step after. It was about voicing my listening area and mapping out on what he calls as pressure zones. Now based on his directions I followed with an open mind towards his methodes. As I started doing it, I was then only able to get a better picture on what he meant by pressure zones and laminar flows. To me it was one of those "aha" moments lol! Now there are no short cuts as this requires you to get up and start talking around the room while listening to how the tone of your voice changes and vibrations that resonates within you.
The next step was to understand why those sounds change and how to use them to your advantage. Its hard for me to explain untill you start doing it and experience it yourself. But when I started doing it based on Michael's suggestions he started introducing me some basic tools that was readily available like cardbord and wooden planks. Initially I was skeptical as it was something that I never read nor heard off. So I did as what he asked for and started placing them around my listening space. What I experienced next was shocking, my soundstage grew bigger, holographic
and presence was amazing. It was literally like I was having a new life in my system. My next immediate responce was to try out those cds that sounded bad previously. Needless to say they sounded amazing, at last my faith in my system and this hobby was fully restored.
I know many of you guys here have amazing systems and have invested your hard earn money to push those boundries for a perfect sounding system. Im also sure many of you have also done a great deal of effort to maximize your acoustics too of course based on WAF if your system is based in a common room. But there's more that can be done before thinking of upgrading to gain a better sounding system or even resorting to other methods that may require bigger expenses. Im one for sure who will work on every inch of my room regardless how long or hard it takes as I have expereinced something that no equipments nor speakers could weigh in especially when it comes to price to performance ratio.
|
In my very amateur experience, that the room is the ultimate user soundboard is a fact; I believe that designers engineer with specific rooms in mind; a "soft or quiet system (QED, Creak, even Sugden) does better in a "hard room" e.g. full plaster, lots of wood, high ceilings, (older European-style buildings), whereas a "bright or aggressive system would need gyp rock walls and perhaps some rug; this is even before any tweaking that can be done by placing absorbent or reflective structures in the room to compensate and balance the room; even a terrible asymmetrical space can be balanced by structure placement. Another major determining factor is how well the components work together: not the money you spend but the complementarity of the units among themselves and then that whole with the room. |
🦆
mapman
One would hope nobody would be fool enough to go out woodpecking without proper protection.
Is that what happened? 👳♂️ Get well, soon!
|
One would hope nobody would be fool enough to go out woodpecking without proper protection.
|
Hi Prof Tonight I've had people come in and out dropping off music for me to reference and also equipment. My job requires me to be at the top of the listening ladder cause my clients depend on my absolute dedication and focus. Your post simply knocked me off my focusing. I didn't mean to be rude or have any intent to marginalize your comments. I was just being direct. Sometimes for me, getting into defending myself takes way too much time and again I can get out of focus. I literally don't have the brain power or time to get into things that cause me to drift. My world is literally jumping from one soundstage to the next with very few breaks. I ask myself if I should be on Agon at all, but when I have folks emailing and thanking me I feel good about what I'm doing here. Maybe sometime this weekend I can read back through your message to me and get my head around it, but right now all I saw was someone saying I was being disparaging, and didn't have the time to plug that into my vibe. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Hi Michael, I’m sorry you feel this way. Thanks. You got it wrong. I'd be very glad to understand how! I like knowing how I've got something wrong. it's how we learn. I'm very much in the camp that empirical understanding is really important, so I'm curious if we are exactly on the same page, or how we may differ. Everyone here is worthy. Happy to hear it. For a moment there I had the impression you didn't think that I was worthy of a real response. So, could you please clarify your point, given the questions I raised in my earlier response. Much appreciated! |
|
|
Prof very useful and well thought out post as usual. |
michaelgreenaudio,
I at least gave the respect of taking your OP seriously enough, trying to understand what you meant, and writing a detailed reply. I tried to distill what you were saying, and give my thoughts in reply, and if I got it wrong, you can simply clarify. Surely as someone who writes so much about his ideas, you would be capable of this.
I'm very honestly interested in the point you wished to make.
But apparently you have deemed me not worthy of this? Or worse, insinuated that I couldn’t understand even if you tried.
And so you have produced another post with no clarity, laced with vague, disparaging insinuations (e.g. "why should I bother with you, who can’t understand what I would say?").
It’s not actually a good model to produce a post so you can wink at some people who "got" your sage insight and insinuate others are too dense or biased to get your point...while not replying to requests for clarification.
That’s not the method of someone seeking dialogue; it’s method of someone who is fine to keep producing "us and them" divisions going.
I would have hoped for more from someone who runs his own forum.
|
Hi Prof To be honest you read so much more into the OP than what was there I don't think I could successfully explain myself to you. From the responses I saw, some people got it, others didn't, and some are sharing their "talking vs walking". Personally I think the posts spell out the OP perfectly, including yours, thanks. Ill will? Nah. I don't think folks need to go down that path. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
I agree with @prof's post above regarding the tone of the OP post. I also like prof's rationale. Thanks prof, I don't agree with everything in it, but I don't have to in order to appreciate it. Empirical evidence, defined as "observation/experience" is extremely important in a hobby based on one of the senses. But, if 10 people are in a room and 9 of them hear something that they independently describe in a similar way, while 1 hears no change at all, a dogmatic crowd clearly exists that discounts the 9 who report hearing the change because they insist that nothing audibly hearable actually occurred. They then roll out their resume, credentials etc to enlighten others that nothing truly happened in that room. According to them, "science says so." Frankly, I don't think the dogmatic crowd has reliable standing to weigh in on what happened in that room if they were not in that room. The scenario I just painted doesn't reach a 95% statistically significant threshold, but I want to know more about what happened in that room before I rush to judgment that the room is full of people easily deceived and imagining things. I leave open the possibility that something happened that warrants further investigation. I also leave open the possibility that the circumstances in that room aren't reproducible and are of little or no probative value.
|
@michaelgreenaudio, I have to echo what someone else wrote: your OP left me wondering what you are actually talking about, and most subsequent posts weren’t too enlightening (aside from going into some detail about the nature of recordings...). If I may: I think your intent was good, but your OP falls into the trap of setting off some ill will, even if inadvertently. I get if you find you have a problem with some posters on the site. But imagine this scenario: You walk into a big party thrown by Stereophile, audiophiles left and right, and you get on the microphone and announce "Now, I don’t want to name names or anything, but I just want everyone to know: I think some of the people here really don’t know what they are talking about on the subject of audio. That said: Enjoy your drinks!" Well, is that being diplomatic? Or being a bit of a jerk? Because instead of actually giving examples of who, or what you are referring to, it’s just a sort of insult sprayed into the room, leaving people wondering "is he talking about me? And if so....WHAT is it that he claims I am so wrong about?" It sounds more like someone who has an issue with some people, will sort of mildly slander them in public, but in being general it means you get the benefit of "looking like you are right" and some nebulous tainted target is "wrong" but since we don’t know who...they don’t get to defend themselves and you don’t have to back up your disparaging remarks. Again...I’m not saying you are a jerk for making the OP or that you had any ill will. What I’m saying is that posts in the style you made, even though intending to be diplomatic, can have the opposite effect for the reasons I just outlined. So, on to whatever I can infer from your OP: why do so many HEA hobbyist talk theory without any, or very limited, empirical testing or experience?
What I’m asking is a very simple question in a hobby that is suppose to be based on "doing", why fake it? Notice the disparaging "why fake it?" I’m left wondering who is faking it? And about what. And on whose standards are they "faking it?" Isn’t anyone here who has set up and carefully put together his own high end audio system "doing it?" If not...what do you mean? Examples, please? The best I can infer from your OP - and again I have to infer from it’s vague character - is that you are making a "if you haven’t tried X for yourself, then you aren’t in a position to talk about, or cast doubts on X." Would that be what you are getting at? If so, surely you realize one can voice reasonable doubts about something one hasn’t tried? I don’t need to try astrology, or homeopathy, because there is every reason to conclude they are nonsense; cosmologists/physicists etc, the ones actually producing reliable knowledge of the universe, will point out there is no way the arrangements of distant stars or planets can affect you in the way astrology suggests. And anyone with a decent understanding of a responsible empirical method can see the methods used by people who claim astrology "works" is a fundamentally poor one - that it works on cherry picking hits, ignoring misses, and an endlessly malleable "theory." Same goes for homeopathy. So it’s entirely reasonable for someone who understand THOSE facts to voice reasonable doubt about those endeavors, even without "trying" them. Adherents will tell you to "try it for yourself and see" but if you understand faulty methods of inference, then it’s no surprise that if you adopt those faulty methods yourself you might get the same results. But that’s not what you do if you care about truth; about epistemic responsibility. So the same goes for many of the "tweaks" in high end audio. Many of them over the years have been based on very dubious technical stories for how they would work, combined with purely anecdotal "tests" which...what a surprise!...confirm their efficacy! Just as thousands and millions of people confirm the efficacy of any number of crack-pot nostrums, supernatural entities, etc. And this brings us to your use of the term "empirical" which traditionally means based on observation/experience vs pure theory/logic. I’m very big on empiricism so happy to see that word used. But simple appeal to "empirical testing" doesn’t tell us whether the form of testing is a well thought out or reliable one. Virtually every crackpot idea has "empirical testing" behind it in the form of people trying it out. But science arose as a way of discerning reliable forms of empiricism vs unreliable. So...when you talk of empirical testing, I’m not sure what you are referring about in particular. What are people supposed to be testing and how? For myself: I believe for instance in the benefits of blind testing in audio, and I’ve set up blind tests here and there to check out some issues in my own audio journey. And I bring some of that experience to inform my skepticism of some high end audio claims. Another thing to remember is: someone basing skepticism on empiricism doesn’t require he himself does the testing. I have never myself sent a probe to Mars. But people with the requisite knowledge have, and so if some character wants to claim that Mars is made of cheese, then I’ll point out "No, it’s not." If they say "Well, you can’t have a say on that since you’ve never been to Mars" that would be silly. I can simply appeal to the people who HAVE done so, and how being skeptical of Mars being made of cheese IS based on careful empiricism; the data produced by people who are being the most careful in their empiricism. So, again, I don’t know exactly what or who you would be aiming at, what practices or what specific type of skepticism that may have been voiced on the forum, and whether your targets actually deserve the disparagement you imply. |
Hi Geoff Thanks for the update. I know you were working with several different players, even cassettes. Are those still in use? I thought it very interesting when you went from the HEA setup to the low mass Walkmans. You know it's weird I think that so many folks pick on the portable units being sold, and when talking to them I discover they have never really listened to the modern portables. This whole low mass thing really throws HEA audiophiles off for some reason. Around show time CES here I try to make it to some portable demos. Technology is something else. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
aalenik Again it's a matter of doing. It's not really a point for debate but actually experiencing it. On this thread I would be wasting my time and yours if I were to pitch you on something that isn't the case. But, I understand that unless a person actually does something it can seem ify. Since Tj is on this thread I'll ask him if he would like to comment. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Hi bdp24 "My point was, that to say a drum can go out-of-tune when moved from one room to another in nonsense" Next time I talk to the school or personally give one of these demos I will give them your comments. It will be interesting to hear their take. I already have mine after giving this demo scores of times. here's another one you might find interesting If you check out Positive Feedback's article on me "Recording the Michael Green way" you will see one of my studios that we did the demo in. Also while doing the recording the article talks about an interesting thing happened. The pianist was playing while I made an adjustment to one of my mechanical/acoustical devices. He shouted out "wait what did you just do" I told him that I changed the tension (there I used your word) on the PZC. He asked me to go back to the setting I had before and I did of course. He then asked another player to sit down and play while I did it again (Robert Barstow). They were amazed that when I adjusted the tension on the PZC that it changed the tension on the keys. Like I said this thread is about actually doing. thanks again for your point Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Michael, I know that your intent is virtuous. But some recordings simply ARE better-sounding than others. It's true that a well-tuned system will present MORE recordings well, but never ALL of them. And tuning a system to optimize a poor recording will very likely compromise its presentation of better ones... and that's simply crazy. OTOH, if you tune your system to optimize the very best recordings, many of the poorer ones will sound better. Yes, a more revealing presentation may reveal flaws as well. But do you want to tune to mask those flaws. What else may you be masking? BTW, a poor recording is one that doesn't sound as well as others on my system, your system, and most every system we play it on. |
Update on my low mass Sony Walkman CD player. I’m now using “modded” Grado SR-60 headphones, which are stripped of their god awful sounding foam pads. The Walkman itself is isolated on a one off version of my Woody the Woodpecker isolation stand, which simulates the physical characteristics of a woodpecker’s head and tissue surrounding the brain, all of which is carefully constructed to prevent injury to the woodpecker’s brain when subjected to high frequency high negative g forces whilst pecking wood. The isolation stand incorporates springs, a glass bowl filled with glass micro beads, a large number of glass crystal weights that provide high mass for the springs and such niceties as Moingo disc and a bunch of the NASA grade ceramic cones from Golden Sound that act as node dampers, exit points. There are some other things I can’t really discuss as they draw too much heat. Maybe later.
|
|
Hi jpsreno Thanks for visiting the thread! Your comments are right on target with the OP. I started this thread so people can talk about "doing" audio and music. On Agon there are all of us who love music and look at it from unique points of view based on our experiences, and that's where I wanted to see this thread go. For myself it kind of drifted over into the thread I'm doing on the method of tuning, but I'm glad to see it staying somewhat on point. When listeners see other listeners' experiences it builds the community (family). I for one enjoy hearing the experiences of others, from Geoff's low mass Walkman to Tj's all out tunable room. Also we should enjoy input from the musicians. It's all good, if we keep it all good. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
You must feel pretty inadequate with a smaller piece of stick.
|
Give Geoff a break. He is on a mission to get to 10,000 Audiogon Forum posts by the end of August....and even posts that are hard to decipher count,
Pffftttt, pffftttt !! |
Excellent post shadorne. Yup, I neglected to cover the matter of pitch bend---the phenomenon where the tone of the drum (generally) drops as it’s sustain subsides, a sound I love. I too use Evans, their kick heads exclusively. I for years taped feminine minipads on my drumheads to damp the high ring, but that’s no longer necessary---self damped heads are now plentiful. I play vintage---Ludwig’s brass-shell snare drums from the 1920’s (I have four), and the Black Beauty from the 70’s (in both 5" and 6-1/2" depths) being my favorites. I have just about all American-made sets from the 40’s through the early 70’s---Camco, Gretsch, Leedy, Ludwig, Radio King, Rogers, and Slingerland.. Did I leave any out? ;-). They all have 24" kicks, and I collect the Black Diamond Pearl finish, hence my AudiogoN moniker. My use of the term tensioned in place of tuned was done, yes, to make a point. Tuned is of course the term commonly used, but it is used loosely, not literally. My point was, that to say a drum can go out-of-tune when moved from one room to another in nonsense, for the reasons I stated. Unless, that is, one is speaking of something other than pitch. It’s timbre (the relative strengths of it’s fundamentals, overtones/harmonics, and partials) can change, as can it’s sustain, but not it’s pitch. And that is not a matter of semantics. Drum "tuning" is a talent not all drummers possess. The studio guys are the best---Hal Blaine, Jim Gordon, Keltner, Roger Hawkins (he’s on all the Jerry Wexler-produced Muscle Shoals recordings), Kenny Buttrey (Neil Young’s Harvest album), all masters. And then there is Levon Helm; listen to the sound of his drums on The Band’s "The Weight". As good as it gets!
|
I'll probably get chased off this tread but I listen to music, I'm not an engineer, nor am I someone tring to sell anything (as so many seem to be). I listen to music and want to get as close as I can afford, without being overly obtrusive to my living space, to the sound I hear sitting anywhere in the acustically perfect (thank you Louis Sullivan) Auditorium Theartre in Chicago. If I put Muddy Waters on I want to be taken back to the Fathers and Sons concert, if it's Layla, i want to be transported to hearing Eric and Dwayne's interplay. I want "Tommy" to have impact. Same goes for MIles or Trane or Solti, or Callas, Yo Yo Ma etc. Do certain elements make a technical difference, I can't tell from these forums because they argue from all sides with no closure. But when I listento my system I feel some do some don't. But if I like the sound and it transports me, I'll figure out a way to incorporate it. |
Hi mapman I’d have to leave that one up to the listeners themselves. Of course most of the folks who come to me are looking for that next step or even their ultimate setup including the room built variable. This is just me as an onlooker, but most of the threads I see there are folks looking for change. Or at least the guys who have emailed me from here are looking to take a step. Not even necessarily a purchase, but a further step in their method. Also guys keep in mind I'm not here to dictate, but instead to share the options when tuning in a system. Some of you have no desire to change anything and that's way cool, but there are many more looking toward the variables. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
"The biggest choice in HEA of course is whether to select a guru or be your own." My experience has been all the above. Attitudes and egos aside, there's that musical uniqueness to everyone. Some you have to look harder (that's a drag) but most have their values because of what they have either experienced or what they have read. Both have a value and there are all levels of knowledge. for example, reading a reviewer from a magazine For some this gives a certain level of info, measurements and comfort. For myself it's a door opener only, an infomercial. First thing I do, since I have learned about mass is look at the chassis, next I look inside to see how cramped the parts are. Next thing I do is look at the different sizes of parts and wire. Next are the parts bolted down. Then I look for dampeners and things like how the power wires go from the outlet to the board and transformer. Once I get the lay of the land I begin to set the component free so I can hear what is going on. Now not thinking of price and marketing, if I get two components in and one is built to allow the signal flow without blockage and the other is a tank, I can make a fairly reasonable guess that the simple unit (tuned) is going to beatup on the over built one. This has proven to be the case I would wager 98% of the time. I say this because for me personally a guru looks deeper than the cover. That being the case empirically exploring units using this paradigm it puts a certain shortcut into play. Gurus know the shortcuts and gurus also don't waste time exploring the same thing over and over trying to get to the sound. I see this again and again with expensive products. Having heavy chassis and over built parts and crossovers takes points away from the status of guru-ism. For me, speakers that need complicated crossovers are speakers (cabinet and drivers) that needed to be fixed. The perfect speaker is one that can work in many rooms and with many components. That to me means a speaker that is tunable, built like a musical instrument, and one that has one or two parts to the crossover. For components, light weight, parts that are relatively similar in size (also low mass), an easy to tune chassis and a nice layout of space on the board. Also a resonant board so the parts can gel. Hardly ever with a top cover. And limited to no shielding. Shielding is a choice to be made by the listener after the unit is setup and has a chance to interact with the environment. Pretty much good products are ones that can be made to produce the sound desired after they have been acclimated to a listeners space. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
The chances of a one sound HEA system reproducing the actual sound (sounds) of a recording is far fetched at best. Semantics perhaps but its not far fetched at all if the goal us to produce the sound of a recording. Some of course will do it better than others. Some others still might better please particular individuals. That's kinda what makes the home audio world go round. If you mean reproducing the original performed sounds that were captured in say a mixed studio recording recording, that would be a neat trick in many cases akin to seeing the real life detail of water lilies when viewing a Monet abstraction. Some good quality simple miked, mixed, and mastered live recordings (very rare), not so seemingly impossible. |
Hi jssmith When it comes to listening I have learned to let the individual artist do the magic while I watch and learn. Going back to drummers for a second, as a kid I have had my hands slapped so many times when I went to tune in their room and set for him. If I knew I was doing some drums I made sure the rug closet was ready to be gone through. Many times they brought their own towels and wouldn’t let you get near the set. Love those guys! Anyway, we did a setup at a guitar shop some years ago where we brought in our PZC’s to surround the players while we handed them different guitars that they asked for (actually took two days). I wish HEA audiophiles could go through this. It was a lesson too be learned for the ages. I wish I would have kept those series of recordings. I’m so glad that musicians have joined this thread!! Having experience in the studio "live room" and playback both is totally different from being in the audience or going to an audio trade show. There’s a completely different set of values. For one, you learn to throw out the $$$$$ myths and are able to focus on what is actually taking place musically. There are so many variables!!! Some engineers still went by the book, but it was the experienced guys who would come in and just know everything the minute they came in the space and their ears made contact with the room. Absolute geniuses. A couple of guys trained me early on with guitars, two were my cousins Doc & Merle Watson, the other was Mick Ronson. Lots of other guys added to my learning but they were the ones (oh and Phil Keaggy) who got me into those instruments. And while I’m handing out credits, the guys at Guitar Works down in Atlanta, they were great and talented. guys This is also why I build Tunable products. A listener might be sitting there content, and that’s cool, but think of how many people want (need) to hear the actual event in order to be satisfied? The chances of a one sound HEA system reproducing the actual sound (sounds) of a recording is far fetched at best. When I have an artist sitting in my room with my system I tune in the music to his original recollection. This is just me personally, but I can’t even imagine how HEA has survived with only a volume control and no tunable system. My clients always tell me how they can’t see how tuning has been overlooked in this hobby. And honestly I believe the future for HEA has to include tuning, if it plans on being around much longer, but that’s me. please read this again from Mr. Smith "Another test I found interesting was a $2,000 Mesa amp against a tiny $170 amp voiced specifically to mimic the Mesa. They sounded slightly different, but the $170 amp sounded BETTER!" Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
"Drum set are tuned in a different way to every other instrument. It is extremely complex. Being able to get the right sound for the room or venue is an art.
The only way to learn to “tune” a drum set is to tune a drum set so many times that you train your ears to know what to adjust." BINGO! |
|
uberwaltz said "MG
Yes tbh I am just about in heaven with my system for sure
I can and do sit and listen for 5, 5 or more hours at a time with no fatigue or desire to stop the music flowing.
Twas not always that way of course, I have had the same room for 11 years and when I think back to what I started with in their and where I am now.
The biggest mover was the Lyngdorf 2170
that basically did all the room tuning I need for me.
Not much more I need to achieve and changes I make now are just because I feel like it or the desire to "upgrade" like new cartridges.
So yes ring that bell!" _________________________________ This for sure is one of the options for the now and for the future as innovations keep moving forward. I have been talking with designers who are working on the audio hologram. One of them is using my Tunable Room as the physical adjustment space. It’s pretty fascinating to see into the future of the hobby. It’s going to be so cool when the AV holograms come out and as I have been pushing for, I would like to see the licensing able to be marketed. I don’t want to get ahead of myself or the industry, but someday you will be able (hopefully) to download the original master yourself and plug it into your hologram device. At that time you will see and hear the recorded code. Unfortunately the visual will not be going back to recordings that haven’t had the AV codes applied, but I bet even those will be somehow simulated with new visual formats remade for that particular piece of music to new visuals. But recordings being done now in the hologram version are crazy cool. This is one of the reasons I tell folks, don’t down play the stereo soundstage, because the future of audio and visual is all about the soundstage. Now that we have files the innovative part of this industry is moving at lightening speed. Those debates on real soundstages probably won’t even be around a few short years from now. I’ll let you know if I get time to pickup a Lyngdorf 2170. I've had my eye on a potential prototype unit but maybe I should play with the Lyngdorf too. I'm more into the physical tuning but, playing is the name of the game. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
@bdp24
+1 Drum set are tuned in a different way to every other instrument. It is extremely complex. Being able to get the right sound for the room or venue is an art.
The only way to learn to “tune” a drum set is to tune a drum set so many times that you train your ears to know what to adjust.
I have a Pearl reference kit and it is amazing for large venues but too resonant for a practice room. I have found Evans controlled resonance heads along with Evans ringed batters to work best for this kit in a small room. I find Evans dry heads with perforations work for the snare is a small room.
I have a drum drum tuner also but frankly by ear is the best and fastest.
Trick is
1) Choice of heads (the sound of the stick hitting the head is very important as well as longevity of the skin) Drum heads have an incredible range of sounds.
2) tuning to the drum shell
3) relative tension between the heads - create down pitch or up pitch and decay rate ( tuning both heads to each other and to the shell results in longest sustain)
4) Generally Major thirds or descending fourths works as a starting point.
Snare tuning is a dark magic art that requires a decade or more of training.
Finally - what the drummer hears from the throne is very different from what is projected to a listener.
Drum set tuning is the most difficult instrument to “tune”.
Cymbals are just as complex - choosing those is also an art.
The complex harmonics of drums mean that drums are the most important instrument to get right in order for a band to sound good.
It gets much worse for the drummer....how you hit the heads and how much rebound you allow the stick can change the tonal character of the sound too - not only loudness.
|
|
Hi Geoff "Michael, The “fundamental forces” and the interaction of the Earth’s forces sound like interesting topics. Can you expound on what you mean? What are we talking about here?" Yep, I think this deserves it's own thread. I also think this is an area of audio in which you shine. here's the wiki "Fundamental interactions, also known as fundamental forces, are the interactions in physical systems that do not appear to be reducible to more basic interactions. There are four conventionally accepted fundamental interactions—gravitational, electromagnetic, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear. Each one is understood as the dynamics of a field." Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Hi bdp24 Thanks for jumping in. What setup do you have? We have several drum kits at the shop. Maybe some time you can hook up with one of the musicians here and talk tuning vs tension in real time. One thing cool about my stereo stores is that we had studios setup at the locations so local musicians and recording artist could hang out with us. nothing like having discussions while actually doing what you are talking about. One thing though just as a point of reference. When I was on tour I never had a musician or road tech tell me to "tension" up the drum kit. They told me to "tune" up the kit. Also the same was true when working with orchestras and drum lines. So, I know your trying to make a point but maybe you should take that up with drummers! My instrument is African drums btw so the tuning on them is a stretching and curing process. thanks for you view point, I'll actually be meeting with some folks this weekend and will ask them about the terms they use and get back to you if you would like Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
An audiophile who has himself for a guru has a fool for a client. - Old audio axiom |
Mapman
I am sure Kirks choice would be illogical.
I would have to go for Geordi choice pre funky vision enhancers. Surely he would have the best as only blind tests to compare with. |
Uber so that brings up the next logical question:
If Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock both offered you to hear their systems, which would you expect to sound better? I’d probably end up choosing Captain Picard’s. But I would probably first want to hear Spock’s just to have technical perfection as a reference point at least. To the best of my knowledge Kirk has no interest in music unless some green alien space babe is playing it so that could well be a total mess. |
david_ten,
Sure. There are lots of audio "gurus" out there that bring unique things to the table from various perspectives, but in the end everyone makes their own decisions based on their own unique goals and perspective that may be impossible for others to ever fully understand. |
Mapman
Agree totally on the music being an emotional journey and as such has a tendency to let the users become overly emotional about subjects connected to this journey.
As we see all to often here and tensions run high!
Above all people need to remember why we are here...its all about the music!
|
|
@mapman Can you elaborate further? Thank you. The biggest choice in HEA of course is whether to select a guru or be your own. |
Listening to music is mostly an emotional experience. That explains a lot. |
Because this "hobby" (that's laughable in itself) is about buying things and then self-justifying the reason for the purchase. It includes pontificating about unmeasurable attributes to validate using music to listen to equipment. |
The biggest choice in HEA of course is whether to select a guru or be your own. |
I don't participate much here because as an objectivist I am clearly in the minority. Early in my audiophile hobby I participated in two blind amplifier tests, from Hafler and Adcom to Levinson, McIntosh and Conrad Johnson. I'm sure you can guess the outcome. That led me to read more blind tests and about why a component should or shouldn't make an audible difference. That knowledge let me kill off many more myths. Since then I pay no attention to people's opinion ... unless it regularly matches my own. My outlook is that if you didn't hear it blind, you didn't hear it. I don't care what you think you heard. That's not to say you shouldn't be happy with your confirmation-biased system. Because happiness is the ultimate goal of our lives ... or should be. But it's going to have no effect on what I think or buy.
Now when I purchase a system my first filter is speaker measurements, and then I break out REW to tune the room or the system (EQ). I don't care about amps, wires, DACs or anything above 320kbps (another blind test conclusion).
Michael, I'm sure you know this is a phenomenon in likely every hobby.
I've run into and debunked golf and bowling myths.
But my current main hobby is guitar and the myths are just as bad, although blind tests are not quite as ostracized ... yet, but you can tell that's starting to take hold in the tube amp and "tonewood" communities. One of the funniest blind results was regarding tonewood when the same electronics were transferred from one guitar to the other ... that other guitar being made of Lucite. I'm sure you can guess the results of that test too. Another test I found interesting was a $2,000 Mesa amp against a tiny $170 amp voiced specifically to mimic the Mesa. They sounded slightly different, but the $170 amp sounded BETTER!
|
MG
Yes tbh I am just about in heaven with my system for sure
I can and do sit and listen for 5, 5 or more hours at a time with no fatigue or desire to stop the music flowing.
Twas not always that way of course, I have had the same room for 11 years and when I think back to what I started with in their and where I am now.
The biggest mover was the Lyngdorf 2170 that basically did all the room tuning I need for me.
Not much more I need to achieve and changes I make now are just because I feel like it or the desire to "upgrade" like new cartridges.
So yes ring that bell! |
Michael Green
“Quantum, discrete, isolation, dampening, compression, NASA, EE, inert, first reflection point, transparency, revealing and many more that are a part of the selling of HEA aren’t necessarily being used in the truest sense but have been turned into tools of convincing a certain part of the public of HEA to defend the market. You take a forum like this and throw in a little internet trolling and limited experience and you can see why the transition is taking so long. But the more you have folks like Tjbhuler speaking out, the easier the pill is to swallow.
>>>>Of course words are just words and they have different meanings for different people. No surprise there.
also I want to throw this in from Geoff
"There is much confusion over what quantum physics is, what audio devices employ quantum physics or operate via quantum mechanics or quantum physics. However, it might be a little bit of an overreaction to condemn all audiophile devices marketed as quantum devices as hoaxes or suggest deception or lack or integrity. For example, the CD laser itself operates quantum mechanically, or any laser; they are “two dimensional quantum wells.”
And one more thing that you guys should think about studying are the "fundamental forces". A lot of audio is easy to figure out if you have taken a course in, or even study on the internet, the interaction of the Earth’s forces.”
>>>>>Michael, The “fundamental forces” and the interaction of the Earth’s forces sound like interesting topics. Can you expound on what you mean? What are we talking about here?
|
Verbose technical debates...aren’t we talking about listening to music? Measurements and theories are essential to providers in this field, true. They need such things for development and deployment ..when done for other listeners.
But for the end user, the entire experience is by nature subjective. The questions are ‘what do you like?’ What fulfills your musical needs? By definition, subjective evaluation is never wrong.
Unless of course, hardware is your primary interest.
In that case, enjoy..but recognize you probably shouldn’t press your opinions on those who relying on their ears and own interpretation of what they hear. |
Speaking of tuning, and that of a drum in particular: To proport that a drum that has been "tuned" (the reason for the use of the quotation marks to follow) in one room, and then moved to another where it is now "out of tune", is to unwittingly reveal something about oneself. Except for "tuned percussion" (tympani, vibes, etc.), drums are not tuned, they are tensioned. The threaded rods which pass through the holes in the hoop that holds a drum head in place on a drum shell are called tension rods, not tuners (as on guitars and basses). A drum is not tuned to a note, so can not be out of tune. A drum produces many fundamental tones, with many, many harmonics and overtones---some related to the fundamentals, some not. Those that are not are referred to as "partials"---tones in between the dominant fundamentals and their harmonics. A drummers adjusts the tension rods until the drum produces the mix of fundamentals/harmonics/partials he prefers (as well as the tightness of the head, which affects drumstick rebound). A drum does NOT produce one, single, dominant note, it produces a vast mix of related and unrelated tones. If that were not true, a snare drum would need to be tensioned so as to match the key each song is played in. What DOES happen when a drum is moved between rooms, is the balance between all the tones the drum produces is affected by the acoustic properties of the two rooms---the decay times of the rooms at various frequencies, the tones reinforced or diminished according to the resonant characteristics of the room, a result of it’s dimensions. And by the absorptive and reflective nature of the material used to construct the room, which varies at different frequencies, of course. The rooms affect the timbre of the drum(s), not their pitch. The most extreme change occurs when a drum is played outside; their IS no room, so no room-related decay times or resonances. I hate to play outside---drums always sound thin and flat there. |
gulpson said "Ok, I get some of the thinking behind these pressures, rooms, etc. I am not sure I am fully sold on it, but have never tried anything but a plain system made up of a few not-too-fancy components. I did notice that room made a major difference. I will leave it at that, being a bit suspicious and, at the same time, leaving door open that room pressure 360 and the rest is all really true.
However, I am wondering how, for the purpose of this thread, we define poor recordings. Not "poor", but "recordings". Maybe the word "recordings" is used incorrectly." _______________________________________________________ This is a biggie and HEA should have early on made things more clear. Introducing the term "recorded code" or equivalent should have been in play a long time ago when describing the actual recording. Here’s why. All recordings are different from each other and all playback systems are also different in the source/pre/recording interaction. There’s a couple of things that never really got passed on to the next generation (digital music) like what was tried to be done between the Eqing of tape and vinyl when the attempt was made to go from single source systems to multiple source. Adding a source selector into the mix created an un-equaling of performance that even till now has never been adequately implemented. HEA in particular moved way too fast into "discrete" componentry, not thinking about what they were doing. If you go back to the generation before HEA discrete you will see that components had a volume control, balance, tone controls and inputs. The reason this was done is because it gave you an opportunity to find the center position of each recording, adjust the EQ differences between recordings, and so you would have separate inputs to add your effects to. In other words the pre-amp stage was so you could play several sources through one unit, kind of like an in home mixer. When HEA got rid of all those choices, they also were only able to give you a "one sound" choice at a time. No longer were you able to do the things mentioned above. That was the beginning of discrete listening. But here’s the problem, recording playback doesn’t work that way. Not only is every recorded code different, but so is the same with your playback input and output selectors. Let’s say you’ve hooked up your Tape deck, TT, CD’s, FM and Files to your one system. When you selected and dialed that system in to your preferred source, all the other sources are then not dialed in as well. If you’ve dialed in your setup to play a particular vinyl well, it will not sound the same with any other of your sources. There’s nothing in your system that automatically switches the sound of the audio chain (after changing sources), and HEA got rid of all the adjustments you use to have. That’s a big problem and unfortunately HEA was not knowledgeable enough to take you into that next chapter needed. For the last twenty to thirty years you have been sold systems that are incomplete and the answer the market has thrown at you is upgrade your system to another discrete system, instead of giving you real solutions. And even worse, they have turned you into skeptical hobbyist. Everyone has an opinion that only leads you back to the same place "audio is variable". You can spend 100years in this hobby listing our favorite components that had a particular sound when playing a particular recording on a particular source in a particular room, and that’s all good, but that’s a different hobby from playing back recordings correctly and with consistency. the solutions are A different type of play back system electronically, a different system for every source and recording, a method of tuning or bring back the options that were taken away. To get to the answers it brings us back to the OP "Talk but not walk?" If you guys did a simple exploration of the hobby you would find out, that you didn’t need these over built components. You would discover your hearing your room and if your speakers were more like musical instruments you could tune them to the room/system/ears/recordings. Some of you have already made the switch to electronic room correction. And some of you that are more purist you are going to have one source systems that are mechanically, electrically and acoustically tunable. It also brings us back to the question of HEA itself and why it is on the decline. No matter my opinion or anyone else’s HEA of the past is on the decline. It’s not going to have a sustainable future without correcting some of the missteps. They’re not hard to identify missteps and any one of you can challenge the facts by doing yourself. It was asked earlier how do I know these things? Because I have done them, and so have others. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
