March 1999

Intro

by Michael Green

The audio industry has been the easiest way for me to demonstrate the science that I am developing/designing. However, there are a lot of emotions that get developed when I become involved in projects in the audio industry. I find that egos are perhaps more sensitive and harder with which to deal. The technology and the truths that I've been compiling, and have become my life's work, are most easily demonstrated in the audio realm. It's caused a problem for me because when scientific research and data are finally gathered on the theories that I am presently writing (and I have reserved/registered many phrases and words to be able to expound upon these and use when the time is right), they will change and, some say, even revolutionize conceptual ideas of design and of designing things in the future. And this leaves me in a very vulnerable position as far as documentation when it comes to audiophiles.

When you are an inventor or a creator of a new technology or a law or rule to a technology (ie, Newton or Einstein or anybody who has come up with a formula for a physical event), it is imperative that you must describe things succinctly and to the point when giving any formula before that formula becomes established data. The audiophile world does not take the time to establish proper foundations for statements that are made. This would not be accepted in true debates over other technologies. Audio has become too loose in its guidelines. Therefore, from that point of view, it is very hard to use audio as a catalyst. It's unfortunate for me because I've always been a part of the entertainment industry.

You have to excuse the passionate following that I have in this field. My followers are perhaps more passionately involved in their musical systems than the rest of the industry. Most of them who reach a certain level of musical satisfaction no longer take the time to be involved in the audiophile community. It's kind of like being able to hit a home run every time you step up to the plate and wondering why they don't make the stadiums bigger.

Other people who are trying to find out about or are researching my technologies, from an audiophile point of view, usually never really get to where this passionate following has arrived. Even though they may keep part of my method in their systems, they don't quite "get it" and certainly no reviewer or manufacturer has ever gone as far as this passionate following. It's not that I or any customer or any employee of mine wants to degrade or hurt people. They just want to share the wealth. The audiophile community has just not wanted to embrace music realistically. That may sound like a very bold statement and very unfair, you really have to see and experience, on a personal level, what we are doing to understand the joy that comes from these great discoveries.

I think another misconception is that people perhaps believe that Michael Green, as an audiophile designer, wishes to pound his chest as most audio designers would like to do. I'm really only a "messenger" of a truth that is no different from the Law of Relativity, Gravity, Pi, or any other truth or formula. In some ways, it's been very hard to find an audience. In other ways, audiences have been too easy to find. What I can't engage in, and I hope you read in my comments, are "supposed" scenarios and non-factual hypothetical situations because it will make it more difficult in the long run to reveal and explain the work that was placed before me.

There are many engineers that exist in the world today who, because they have bought into certain teachings and, by the way, have fallen into a "this can't be true" syndrome because "you're not willing to prove it according to my schooling or the way I'm used to proving things." This is easy to demonstrate within today's engineering community. That doesn't mean that we all of a sudden forget about new and exciting formulas of physics waiting to be discovered. Many times in history, books have had to be discarded in light of new truths that were being discovered. I am not the only one who has gone through this and do not ask for pity. Occasionally, it would be nice to have the hobby that I love be more supportive, but it's not necessary. I am hoping, to be honest, that some members of the press would be the ones who finally share the truth with the industry. It's really quite simple. I don't think, at least at this stage, that that's something that will happen. You can't fault me for trying. I have very high hopes and it's not the end of the world for me. It's just not a feather that high-end audio will necessarily be able to stick in its cap.

The audio magazines, someday, are going to miss out on a major-league scoop that will probably change the entire industry. You can tell that I'm dying to tell you more, but I have my own restrictions and it would be a shame to blow it after I've come so far. Allow me to ask you two questions before going and, of course, these are hypothetical (or maybe not). Would you drive your car if you had a transporter room and, if you were a journalist in the automotive industry and were given the scoop on the transporter room, would you want to take advantage of it?

Music has always been based on energy constantly in motion. The music world has embraced variable tuning as the key to uniformity. I don't understand why the obvious is so heavily resisted. With tunability at their fingertips, I'm afraid a huge opportunity is slipping through the audiophile reviewers' fingers. This is sad and it is not a plea to support a starving audiophile manufacturer. I wish you all the courage to be able to set aside the old and take on the eternal. Something that has always been here is being overlooked.

...end

• Audio Online Main Page