Michael Lavorgna strikes back.......

[realhifi]

3 hours ago, Brinkman Ship said:

Pretty much an On The Money post...you nailed it.

Do you seriously believe that?  He auditions and reports on more product in a month than this site does in a year. If you don’t think that’s saying something about both his veracity as a reviewer and reporter you are sadly mistaken.  Pretty sure he does not need to gin up controversy to be relevant. 

[realhifi]

4 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

And you won't.  ML, JA, and others (Scoggins comes to mind) are repeating the mantra that the "armchair engineers" or "anonymous comments" (as ML now refers to them) can be safely ignored.  It's either veiled or overt ad hominem which is a really good indication to me that they know they can't win on science or technical fact.

 

Can’t win what?  

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, realhifi said:

Do you seriously believe that?  He auditions and reports on more product in a month than this site does in a year. If you don’t think that’s saying something about both his veracity as a reviewer and reporter you are sadly mistaken.  Pretty sure he does not need to gin up controversy to be relevant. 

I hope you're not equating quantity with quality.

[realhifi]

1 minute ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I hope you're not equating quantity with quality.

You know I’m not. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Just now, realhifi said:

You know I’m not. 

Just making sure. 

[realhifi]

Lol, what are you trying so very hard not to say?

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 minute ago, realhifi said:

Can’t win what?  

 

I thought about giving you an honest response, but it's clear from your other recent contributions to the thread that your mind is firmly made up and you're just trolling a little.

[realhifi]

Nope. You’re wrong. Hoping for actual back and forth. Do you seriously think I’m trolling?  Why?  

[realhifi]

I thought we were supposed to read the threads and comment if we felt we had something to say. 

[plissken]

8 minutes ago, realhifi said:

Do you seriously believe that?  He auditions and reports on more product in a month than this site does in a year. If you don’t think that’s saying something about both his veracity as a reviewer and reporter you are sadly mistaken.  Pretty sure he does not need to gin up controversy to be relevant. 

 

He also thinks there are 'readily apparent' and 'easy to discern' differences in data cabling.

 

So all he's managed to do is make up a larger volume of fabrications.

[realhifi]

My question was pretty clear. What do you think “they” are trying to win?  Specifically Mike Lavorgna. 

[plissken]

Just now, realhifi said:

My question was pretty clear. What do you think “they” are trying to win?  Specifically Mike Lavorgna. 

 

Ad Revenue! Jesus wept.

[mansr]

1 minute ago, plissken said:

Ad Revenue! Jesus wept.

And a steady stream of nice stuff to play with.

[plissken]

1 minute ago, mansr said:

And a steady stream of nice stuff to play with.

I lump that in with revenue 

[realhifi]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

And a steady stream of nice stuff to play with.

Well there certainly is a hell of a lot in the marketplace that is true. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

6 minutes ago, realhifi said:

Nope. You’re wrong. Hoping for actual back and forth. Do you seriously think I’m trolling?  Why?  

 

ML and JA resort to ad hominem by swatting away MQA dissenters with pejoratives like "armchair engineers", etc.  And my 10th grade English teacher taught us that, "when you resort to ad hominem, you're announcing that you've lost the debate".

 

ML trolling audiophile forums with his post today is, to me, a sign that MQA is feeling some of the heat from the legitimate questions about the objective merits of MQA and they're asking their "friends" in the Professional Audiophile Pundit Class to create doubt around the MQA doubt.

[Ralf11]

PAP...

[realhifi]

4 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

ML and JA resort to ad hominem by swatting away MQA dissenters with pejoratives like "armchair engineers", etc.  And my 10th grade English teacher taught us that, "when you resort to ad hominem, you're announcing that you've lost the debate".

 

ML trolling audiophile forums with his post today is, to me, a sign that MQA is feeling some of the heat from the legitimate questions about the objective merits of MQA and they're asking their "friends" in the Professional Audiophile Pundit Class to create doubt around the MQA doubt.

It’s a “sign” to you eh?  Kind of like speculation don’t you think?

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 minute ago, realhifi said:

It’s a “sign” to you eh?  Kind of like speculation don’t you think?

 

The ad hominem was overt.  MQA is losing the battle for the minds of audiophiles IMHO.  And the trends I'm seeing are that it's only going to get worse.  ML has been amping up the MQA drama on his side lately.  It seems too coincidental to me.  You may be willing to give the benefit of the doubt.  To me MQA is downright insidious and I expect its evangelists to do insidious things to keep it afloat.  YMMV, of course.

[realhifi]

1 minute ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

The ad hominem was overt.  MQA is losing the battle for the minds of audiophiles IMHO.  And the trends I'm seeing are that it's only going to get worse.  ML has been amping up the MQA drama on his side lately.  It seems too coincidental to me.  You may be willing to give the benefit of the doubt.  To me MQA is downright insidious and I expect its evangelists to do insidious things to keep it afloat.  YMMV, of course.

Of course. 

[Brinkman Ship]

1 hour ago, realhifi said:

Do you seriously believe that?  He auditions and reports on more product in a month than this site does in a year. If you don’t think that’s saying something about both his veracity as a reviewer and reporter you are sadly mistaken.  Pretty sure he does not need to gin up controversy to be relevant. 

Yes. I believe it. I find Audiostream to be passe', and of no real value to me. i also don't need musical

recommendations from them, which seems to be half the content. I have a 1000 other better sources.

[MikeyFresh]

4 hours ago, realhifi said:

It’s a “sign” to you eh?  Kind of like speculation don’t you think?

 

Yes, a strong sign (to me too), @Samuel T Cogley's "speculation" is certainly not unfounded, quite the opposite.

[Spacehound]

9 hours ago, realhifi said:

Do you seriously believe that?  He auditions and reports on more product in a month than this site does in a year. If you don’t think that’s saying something about both his veracity as a reviewer and reporter you are sadly mistaken.  Pretty sure he does not need to gin up controversy to be relevant. 

Lavorgna is a jerk

 

Make an 'objective' comment you are sneered at as a "mere cloth-eared engineer".

Make two and you're off.

 

And his lackey, the  snake-oil freak Steve Plaskin,  is even worse, though at least he is reasonably polite about it.

[Spacehound]

10 hours ago, realhifi said:

It’s a “sign” to you eh?  Kind of like speculation don’t you think?

That's what they do. They don't have the knowledge to answer the many solidly based technical criticisms.

 

90% of audio 'experts', including many DAC manufactures, are totally out of their depth with 'digital' stuff. It's why they buy a ten dollar 'off the shelf' DAC  chip  implement the free data sheet (somebody else's ideas, not theirs)  as best they can, and put it in a fancy box.

[christopher3393]

Some recent comments from Steven Plaskin from the Audiostream "Is MQA DRM" post (with responses from "DH"):

 

Steven Plaskin: I am deeply disturbed by the destructive anger that is being encouraged at another site dedicated to our hobby. Most audiophiles I know couldn’t give two shits about MQA. But the vitriol and devise behavior being propagated displays to me some serious issues that need to be addressed - and they are not audio issues.

Here is a direct quote about what I am referring to:

Lavorgna is a jerk

Make an 'objective' comment you are sneered at as a "mere cloth-eared engineer".
Make two and you're off.

And his lackey, the snake-oil freak Steve Plaskin, is even worse, though at least he is reasonably polite about it.

What normal thinking adult would want to be part of this?

When it was brought up that AudioStream turns out more equipment reviews, the owner of the site questioned AudioStream’s quality of writing. Just compare Chris Connaker’s review of the SOtM sMS-200 with mine. Reach your own conclusions.

There is a true disconnect from reality occurring that in the end, will only hurt our hobby.

 

DH: You are correct. But the context is that ML was banned from CA because of HIS language and behavior there, including the use of profanity related to someone's mother.

 

Steven Plaskin: And this language was sent in a private message. If Chris did not want Michael to post on his site, he could have told Michael in a private message. Chris decided that punishing Michael would further his economic goals. Naturally, I cannot know what Chris is thinking, but his behavior and tolerance of abusive posts suggests what I am referring to.

DH: I'm not defending some of the language used at CA. But some of MLs public posts were also not what I'd expect of a professional.

Chris doesn't allow the private messaging function at his site to be exploited for abuse.

I think that's exactly how it should be. I'm not really sure why you are excusing that kind of behavior.
ML isn't the first to be banned from the site for that type of stuff.

 

Steven Plaskin: This isn’t really about Michael’s “street language”. I think you know what I’m referring to.

 

edit: Michael Lavorgna has just added this: Chris allows abusive, offensive, and ...insulting language directed at people who do this for a living on his site - every day. To my mind, this is not the way a professional moderates a forum.