Michael Lavorgna strikes back.......

[Mercman]

1 minute ago, Indydan said:

 

I have no problem with Plaskin's appreciation of so called snake oil devices. I don't believe everything he says (or anyone for that matter), but I don't assume he is lying. It is quite possible that he hears these improvements in his system, and he believes the devices are responsible for the improvements in sound quality. At least his opinion is based on actual experience with the devices. Even if I disagree, I don't feel comfortable refuting someone forcefully if I have not myself tried out the product. 

 

But, I am a bit disappointed with Plaskin's recent comments. He has stated rude things about CA and its members (he seems to lump all of us into a homogenous group of troublemakers); and stated it to sound more like fact than opinion. 

 

 

I didn't say rude things about CA and its members. I just quoted rude remarks made about me. Read again who is saying what.

[beetlemania]

9 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

I can tell from just looking at this that there's no way this setup sounds good

 Brick fireplace on the front wall is not ideal but, with the blinds down on the glass, it otherwise looks passable to me. Note the speakers are well out from that potentially problematic front wall.

[plissken]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I saw John Atkinson at the McIntosh event in NYC last week. He told me that it's a popular saying in Russia and isn't seen as something negative. 

 

I'm being 100% honest.

 

I must have missed his accent in his videos. 

[Indydan]

6 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I saw John Atkinson at the McIntosh event in NYC last week. He told me that it's a popular saying in Russia and isn't seen as something negative. 

 

I'm being 100% honest.

 

Oh geez. I like to think JA is better than that. That is such a pathetic justification! Especially since Lavorgna recently wrote on his site, that he was trying to be as offensive as possible, when he wrote that to a CA member. 

 

It doesn't seem like Lavorgna was employing a little known expression from Russian culture when he did that. 

 

Maybe we should all PM Atkinson and tell him to go eff his mother. He should be OK with it... (just joking). 

[Spacehound]

18 hours 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.

I suspect MQA will have died within a year.

 

It is noticeable that although some of the 'labels'  say they have 'converted' much of their catalogues (so have not fully, if at all,   performed  the MQA Ltd  claimed 'authentication')  they have actually released little  MQA material. 

[plissken]

5 minutes ago, Indydan said:

 

 but I don't assume he is lying.

 

I don't assume he's telling the truth either. What he could easily do is show everyone he can run a four second 40 yard dash instead of saying he can. I would tend to give him credence at that point. 

 

Fact is that neither Lavorgna or Plaskin have done anything to baseline their hearing acuity wrt to differences where none can exist. 

[Dr Tone]

2 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

It is noticeable that although some of the 'labels'  say they have 'converted' much of their catalogues (so have not fully, if at all,   performed  the MQA Ltd  claimed 'authentication')  they have actually released little  MQA material. 

 

Converting with a push of a button is probably easy, I would assume getting the licensing in place to put it up for streaming not as simple?

[Indydan]

Double post. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, Indydan said:

I don't mean to be picky, but I believe if you are truly Steven Plaskin, you must identify yourself and your industry affiliation on CA. 

I placed his name in his signature a few minutes ago.

[Indydan]

12 minutes ago, Mercman said:

I didn't say rude things about CA and its members. I just quoted rude remarks made about me. Read again who is saying what.

Steve, first of all, I should have stated that I do not condone name calling (jerk, lackey, etc) and outright personal attacks. I have no problem with you calling out people who call you names and attack your integrity. You are justified in doing this.

 

Now for the other things you wrote. I copy pasted some of what you wrote below:

 

"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."

 

You pretty much say posters here are angry destructive people who have serious issues. Is that not what you meant? 

 

I don't mean to be picky, but I believe if you are truly Steven Plaskin, you must identify yourself and your industry affiliation on CA. 

[Mercman]

1 minute ago, Indydan said:

 

Steve, first of all, I should have stated that I do not condone name calling (jerk, lackey, etc) and outright personal attacks. 

 

I copy pasted some of what you wrote below:

 

"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."

 

You pretty much say posters here are angry destructive people who have serious issues. Is that not what you meant? 

 

I don't mean to be picky, but I believe if you are truly Steven Plaskin, you must identify yourself and your industry affiliation on CA. 
 

 

 

I didn't say EVERYONE, just some people. Most of AudioStream's readers are CA readers. Our hobby is very small.

 

"You pretty much say posters here are angry destructive people who have serious issues. Is that not what you meant?"

Absolutely not!!! My writing is very clear and doesn't need embellishment.

I will change my listing of Mercman. I have been coming here for years long before I was a reviewer.

[mansr]

21 minutes ago, Mercman said:

If you are referring to the Synergistic Research Atmosphere, there is no snake-oil here. Many products have been sold employing the Schumann Resonance to enhance audio systems.

That doesn't mean they're not snake oil. Why would Schumann resonances have anything whatsoever to do with audio?

[Indydan]

2 minutes ago, Mercman said:

I didn't say EVERYONE, just some people. Most of AudioStream's readers are CA readers. Our hobby is very small.

 

"You pretty much say posters here are angry destructive people who have serious issues. Is that not what you meant?"

Absolutely not!!! My writing is very clear and doesn't need embellishment.

I will change my listing of Mercman. I have been coming here for years long before I was a reviewer.

 

You didn't write everyone, nor did you write SOME or a FEW. To me, it was vague and open to interpretation. 

 

We can agree to disagree on the clarity of what you wrote. I do accept your explanation that you did not mean everyone, and I thank you for clarifying. 

[Brinkman Ship]

3 minutes ago, Mercman said:

I didn't say EVERYONE, just some people. Most of AudioStream's readers are CA readers. Our hobby is very small.

 

"You pretty much say posters here are angry destructive people who have serious issues. Is that not what you meant?"

Absolutely not!!! My writing is very clear and doesn't need embellishment.

I will change my listing of Mercman. I have been coming here for years long before I was a reviewer.

Mr. Plaskin, first let me say you have been unfairly attacked as ML's "lackey".  That was uncalled for.

 

But if indeed most audiophiles could not give a damn about MQA, why does ML continue to cover it with a zeal

rarely seen in this hobby, as if it is the cure for cancer? I would appreciate an answer, because if most really don't

give a crap about it, clearly ML is out of touch. Tough to square away, eh?

[crenca]

1 minute ago, Mercman said:

I didn't say EVERYONE, just some people. Most of AudioStream's readers are CA readers. Our hobby is very small.

 

"You pretty much say posters here are angry destructive people who have serious issues. Is that not what you meant?"

Absolutely not!!! My writing is very clear and doesn't need embellishment.

I will change my listing of Mercman. I have been coming here for years long before I was a reviewer.

 

Mr. Plaskin,

 

The forums (in audio or any other context) are consumer driven, cloud sourced, and democratic.  This is a "free speech zone" and that means that some of the signal is going to be loony, absurd, self absorbed, and even "nasty".  However, overall it is a good way for consumers to investigate and get at the truth of all sorts of things

 

This is a serious question:  Why would you want to control it, or even think it is a good idea?  When you disagree with an editorial or a "letter to the editor" of your local paper, do you call for its censor?  Who do you think has the moral high ground from which they can enforce your vision of speech?

 

You appear to be simply doing what the writers of the trade publications have been doing for a while now - shooting the messenger (i.e. the forums) when they reveal things that don't support the narrative of your sales pitch...

 

 

 

[Indydan]

30 minutes ago, mansr said:

I suggest not visiting his site. If you must, be sure to use an ad/tracking blocker.

 

His 3 recent pro MQA articles, were deliberately done to stir things up here on CA; and to get people to visit his site. 

 

I have noticed that his site is less consistent in putting out a review every week. Also, I find some of the articles posted have nothing to do with music or audiophile matters. I used to really enjoy reading Audiostream. Now, no.

 

Could it be he has to resort to trickery and provocation to jack up his site's number of visits? I am confident he does it because he enjoys kicking a hornet's nest. But, there may be financial reasons for it as well. 

[Spacehound]

30 minutes ago, Dr Tone said:

 

Converting with a push of a button is probably easy, I would assume getting the licensing in place to put it up for streaming not as simple?

It leads me to suspect that the MQA licences are paid  for  'pro rata' on release of  MQA tracks and a 'pay per play' basis when streaming rather than an all encompassing fee in advance.

 

And the labels must be fully aware that 'young people'  using it on a mobile are not greatly interested in high quality.

 

And in Europe most  broadband services can  transmit about 20 simultaneous 192/24 streams  to the user so MQA is not needed at home. And presumably the USA will soon catch up.

 

So they  may be just   'testing the  waters' with MQA.  Would YOU as an individual buy shares in the MQA company?  Or if a 'label'  take out a possibly expensive licence in advance? 

[Mercman]

Just now, Brinkman Ship said:

Mr. Plaskin, first let me say you have been unfairly attacked as ML's "lackey".  That was uncalled for.

 

But if indeed most audiophiles could not give a damn about MQA, why does ML continue to cover it with a zeal

rarely seen in this hobby, as if it is the cure for cancer? I would appreciate an answer, because if most really don't

give a crap about it, clearly ML is out of touch. Tough to square away, eh?

Michael decides what to write about and post at AS. I honestly don't see what the issue is if he wants to discuss MQA. There are plenty of other things at AudioStream to read about.

 

As for me, I take Charley Hansen's view on this subject. But remember, I have never heard an MQA file or been to any MQA demo.

 

[mansr]

1 minute ago, Spacehound said:

It leads me to suspect that the MQA licences are paid  for  'pro rata' on release of  MQA tracks and a 'pay per play' basis when streamingrather than an all encompassing fee in advance.

I've been told MQA has been giving steep discounts to early adopters on the hardware side. Perhaps they have/had an introductory pricing for labels too.

[Mercman]

9 minutes ago, crenca said:

 

Mr. Plaskin,

 

The forums (in audio or any other context) are consumer driven, cloud sourced, and democratic.  This is a "free speech zone" and that means that some of the signal is going to be loony, absurd, self absorbed, and even "nasty".  However, overall it is a good way for consumers to investigate and get at the truth of all sorts of things

 

This is a serious question:  Why would you want to control it, or even think it is a good idea?  When you disagree with an editorial or a "letter to the editor" of your local paper, do you call for its censor?  Who do you think has the moral high ground from which they can enforce your vision of speech?

 

You appear to be simply doing what the writers of the trade publications have been doing for a while now - shooting the messenger (i.e. the forums) when they reveal things that don't support the narrative of your sales pitch...

 

 

 

First off, I can't exclude anyone from posting at AS. The few that were banned, went far beyond what I would call just posting an opinion.

[Spacehound]

My main question is why are they 'pushing' MQA anyway?  The MQA company is not a significant advertiser,  assuming it advertise at all, and the  rest will continue to advertise, MQA or not.

 

It's not as if MQA is  'news' any longer.

[Samuel T Cogley]

11 minutes ago, mansr said:

I've been told MQA has been giving steep discounts to early adopters on the hardware side. Perhaps they have/had an introductory pricing for labels too.

 

Don't they pretty much have to give it to the labels for free to get started?

[The Computer Audiophile]

1 minute ago, Spacehound said:

My main question is why are they 'pushing' MQA anyway?  The MQA company is not a significant advertiser,  assuming it advertise at all, and the  rest will continue to advertise, MQA or not.

 

It's not as if MQA is  'news' any longer.

 

If MQA becomes a new standard that is used everywhere, and people believe it's fantastic, there is big money in it for all publications, manufacturers, dealers, distributors, and everyone in the industry. MQA as a company may not advertise, but everyone with a new MQA version of a product now has something new to advertise and sell. 

 

Think about when the CD came out. Sony didn't need to advertise in the HiFi publications for it to be a boon for business. 

 

I include myself in the publisher category. I would likely benefit monetarily from MQA.

[plissken]

20 minutes ago, Mercman said:

First off, I can't exclude anyone from posting at AS. The few that were banned, went far beyond what I would call just posting an opinion.

 

Really? 

 

I would be interested in what John Scully said to get banned. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

13 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

My main question is why are they 'pushing' MQA anyway?  The MQA company is not a significant advertiser,  assuming it advertise at all, and the  rest will continue to advertise, MQA or not.

 

It's not as if MQA is  'news' any longer.

 

Yeah but HiFi is not getting traction with millennials.  The MQA charm offensive is ultimately about bringing HiFi to smartphones.

 

Scoggins himself alludes to this:

 

Quote

Yes, for better or worse streaming is the future.  It’s just too little money for a huge library of songs delivered conveniently.  And really by that, I mean on your mobile phone.  Or as Forsyth puts it, “the future is my 18-year-old son finding the music on his phone and being able to carry it anywhere.”

 

MQA is seen by the faithful as nothing less than the hope for HiFi in the future.  In all the audio shows I've been to in the last few years, the white, male 50+ demographic is way overrepresented.  When those guys (myself among them) perish, who will be left to carry the torch?  Who will be left to purchase or stream the next awesome remaster of Kind Of Blue?