Please Read and express your feelings and opinions....


I noticed  that lately or maybe for the last five yrs, there is so much arguments,name calling, attacking cables , speakers , components makers and more, more of disagreement with members, even Audio dealers are being attack here...Very few know how to apologize when they are wrong.What can we do as Audiogon members to improve our communication to each other? How to give the informations, recommendation to members who need it? This is without involving Audiogon, any opinion or ideas ,  For me this is fun and place to learn in audio...thank you all
jayctoy
kosst_amojan
Clearthink, there is NO argument in opposition to what I’m saying except from those who’re simply uninformed. The post by mmeysarosh two posts prior to your last further makes my point. Maybe I didn’t iterate it eloquently enough to start or something. I don’t see Michael really disagreeing. A few others clearly see my point.

>>>>Actually, mmeysarosh wasn’t making your point at all. What he said, among other things, is you have to deal with the acoustics of a room - one room at a time. As I have oft said with respect to speaker set up, trial and error by listening a little, moving a little does not work the best. The best way to optimize the sound - especially SOUNDSTAGE - is by obtaining correct speaker placement with a Test CD that has a speaker set-up track, like the XLO Test CD. This method ensures ideal speaker placement for *the given room* - at that point in time - and will ensure the best soundstage for that particular room for however it’s configured AT THAT TIME. NOTE - This method requires using your ears. You don’t measure anything.

But whatever soundstage is achievable at that point in time CAN BE IMPROVED by further improvements to room acoustics, using better electronics, better cables, better topology, contact enhancers, fuses, the whole nine yards. There is NO END to how good the soundstage (relative to the original recording venue space) can get it requires a lot of effort. I never promised you a rose garden. 🌹 🌹 🌹Having heard a great many advanced systems I think I can say without fear of contradiction many people believe they have conquered Everest or almost conquered it but in reality they have not yet reached Base Camp, which is only half way up the mountain. 🏔

soundermn115 posts04-13-2018 11:29amI think to answer your question... we can improve the communication by keeping the discussion on the point. Stick to the OP question, rather than starting your own thread
in someone else’s thread. As A’Goners, we can point others back to the original question.
Looks like I nailed it. After the first page, this thread isn’t related to the OP question at all! How does "soundstage" and all this studio discussion relate to the question?

The actual question was...
What can we do as Audiogon members to improve our communication to each other? How to give the informations, recommendation to members who need it? 

Hi Kosst

It's not really my place to agree or disagree, I deal with the physical audio variables. I don't look at recording or playback as a "Fixed" entity. I see testing and measuring technologies as an advancing science, even though this science (as with any) is constantly learning and implementing. 10 years ago seems like a lifetime away by todays latest R&D. For example what JA did 10 years ago is somewhat obsolete now. I'm sure he would say the same thing. Bob Hodas would no doubt agree as all the up to date measuring gurus would have to. Testing is always advancing and I would guess by the time your debate is over with Geoff and others we will be looking and listening to hologram sight & sound reproductions. I mean they're really just around the corner, and then all of HEA will be an archive of listening only. So measuring to me is like a building block. Is it human yet? No of course not, and it's not, because of the points Geoff and others are making. Is it going to be? Of course it will, we see this in moving making now.

However here's where the issue comes down for me.

Lets say I make a recording of a hall, or am previewing someone else's. I go into the tunable room and tune it in for me to look at the height and mate it up to the actual recording. After I'm done another listener goes in and says my call is inaccurate for him. He then tunes up the same recording to his ears so he is now hearing the hall as he remembers, or wants to. I do this level of listening on an ongoing basis and have since around 1989. From time to time, since then till now, measuring folks are welcome to come do their thing and see if they can capture what is taking place for each person as an individual and a more in general sense. Where this stands now would more than likely need to be in a tunable room that is both flexible and environmentally adaptable. That's a tall order for this thread to engage in, let alone some of the folks I have worked with or studied their approach.

To test an measure this accurately I can help from a variable physical structure, but I would think that the testing itself would need some pretty special equipment to be able to make a more than snap shot polaroid type of result. It's possible that my room is the most advanced to date in regards to the variables, but that's again at best only half of the equation. I think the two worlds (human & tools) can meet, I just haven't seen it yet. I'm sure though getting closer every day.

Michael Green

www.michaelgreenaudio.net