Michael Lavorgna strikes back.......

[realhifi]

58 minutes ago, botrytis said:

 

I am lucky, being in a town (100k or so) and have 2 decent audio stores, 6 new/used record shops, and 7 brew pubs and one artisan distillery. Also, in the USA.

I’ll be right over!  Seriously though, whereabouts are you?

[mansr]

10 minutes ago, Spacehound said:

I can if I walk a mile or so. Totton. Which isn't 'pretty' either.

I'm near the city centre. This means I don't need a car, so parking isn't an issue.

[semente]

On 07/02/2018 at 10:47 PM, The Computer Audiophile said:

I hope you're not equating quantity with quality.

It takes time to assess the performance of a hi-fi component.

And the rule is that one should only make a single change to the system if we're to achieve any meaningful results.

2+2=4

[botrytis]

6 hours ago, realhifi said:

I’ll be right over!  Seriously though, whereabouts are you?

SE Michigan.

[Don Hills]

13 hours ago, Spacehound said:

...The UK is a strange place. Why did they build the Queen's biggest castle so close to a noisy airport?)

 

I see what you did there.

[skikirkwood]

This is interesting.  Maybe Ten Networks should just buy ComputerAudiophile.com and put Audiostream.com out of its misery.

[The Computer Audiophile]

If only we didn’t switch software platforms in March 2017. That big dip is frustrating. Google penalized us heavily. 

 

Oh well. It will come back up. 

[skikirkwood]

8 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

If only we didn’t switch software platforms in March 2017. That big dip is frustrating. Google penalized us heavily. 

 

Oh well. It will come back up. 

3x the traffic of Audiostream with no support from cross-network traffic being part of Ten - that's pretty impressive!

[mansr]

9 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

If only we didn’t switch software platforms in March 2017. That big dip is frustrating. Google penalized us heavily. 

 

Oh well. It will come back up. 

The new interface is much better.

[maxijazz]

What I don’t understand about the GUI is why, on mobile, clicking on subject doesn’t transfer me to first unread post? Why I have to click on the circle? Every sane forum does it. 

[rando]

9 hours ago, semente said:

It takes time to assess the performance of a hi-fi component.

And the rule is that one should only make a single change to the system if we're to achieve any meaningful results.

2+2=4

 

2+2+2= 4.2  or 5.1  

 

@skikirkwood Could you throw Stereophile on that chart as well.  Those numbers might be more interesting.

 

 

[skikirkwood]

3 minutes ago, rando said:

 

2+2+2= 4.2  or 5.1  

 

@skikirkwood Could you throw Stereophile on that chart as well.  Those numbers might be more interesting.

 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

15 minutes ago, maxijazz said:

What I don’t understand about the GUI is why, on mobile, clicking on subject doesn’t transfer me to first unread post? Why I have to click on the circle? Every sane forum does it. 

 

I just made a change on the activity stream to do this. 

[rando]

1 hour ago, skikirkwood said:

 

 

Thanks for going even further than I asked.  As expected Stereophile, by nature of being predominantly a news site with a constantly changing front page, had more views than this forum.  The leap in late '16 is interesting though.  Almost as if tabulation changed or a bot army attacked.  

 

What I really wanted to draw attention to was how deeply related all of these sites are.  Which that graph bore out fairly well.  From Nov '16 onwards CA and Stereophile as well as TAS and Audiostream depicted very similar trends.  To my mind the addition of an additional two more sites brought the bigger picture into focus.

[Fluffytime]

Meh. The so called "audiophile media" is outdated.

 

You want real info, you go to forums such as this.

[labjr]

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

If only we didn’t switch software platforms in March 2017. That big dip is frustrating. Google penalized us heavily. 

 

Oh well. It will come back up. 

I'm not on these sites like i used to be. But when I am it's usually CA. 

[beetlemania]

Wow, I had no idea people actually go to TAS for content!

[Spacehound]

18 hours ago, OldBigEars said:

 

A market divided into small fragments where people speak different languages. So it's not really A Market - unlike the USA.  Which partly explains why it's hard for you find a hi-fi mag.

I didn't think of that. Let me try and come up with an answer......

 

....I was  more concerned with the broader picture.

Well, that doesn't really work either   

[Spacehound]

On ‎08‎/‎02‎/‎2018 at 7:21 PM, Mercman said:

I didn't say rude things about CA members. I did suggest that there was destructive behavior directed at me. Not all members; you guys know who I am referring to. I have been a member here long before some of you were. 

Ok Mercman,

As Mr Lavorgna is banned from this site and you say you have not been involved with MQA yourself, perhaps you could ask him what he says  to this, all of which has been demonstrated, thus proven,  by several sources, many not part of CA, and including several 'industry' sources (bear in mind they demonstrated it too, so it is not merely any 'anti-MQA bias' they might have),  and tell us what his answer is:

 

MQA demonstrably degrades the original by adding artefacts that were not in the  original, and reduces everything to 17 bits at most,  Also anything above 96 is totally fake, even the noise. So  the result  can't possibly sound  'better'.  Also, it doesn't save space/transmission  requirements   to  any worthwhile degree, often not at all, and is rarely 'authenticated'. So what's the point of MQA?.

[maxijazz]

7 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

I just made a change on the activity stream to do this. 

Can we have it enabled for topics on main forum pages? That would tremendously improve experience on phones. 

[firedog]

1 hour ago, Spacehound said:

Ok Mercman,

As Mr Lavorgna is banned from this site and you say you have not been involved with MQA yourself, perhaps you could ask him what he says  to this, all of which has been demonstrated, thus proven,  by several sources, many not part of CA, and including several 'industry' sources (bear in mind they demonstrated it too, so it is not merely any 'anti-MQA bias' they might have),  and tell us what his answer is:

 

MQA demonstrably degrades the original by adding artefacts that were not in the  original, and reduces everything to 17 bits at most,  Also anything above 96 is totally fake, even the noise. So  the result  can't possibly sound  'better'.  Also, it doesn't save space/transmission  requirements   to  any worthwhile degree, often not at all, and is rarely 'authenticated'. So what's the point of MQA?.

 

His answer (to me): 1) You don't understand the meaning of "authentication" as MQA defines it.

2) It doesn't matter if it is only 17 bits, as you can't hear it. In other words (my interpretation based on what he writes) MQA processing makes the music sound better - what it does to the file, therefore, doesn't matter.

 

 

[Spacehound]

14 minutes ago, firedog said:

His answer (to me): 1) You don't understand the meaning of "authentication" as MQA defines it.

2) It doesn't matter if it is only 17 bits, as you can't hear it. In other words (my interpretation based on what he writes) MQA processing makes the music sound better - what it does to the file, therefore, doesn't matter.

 

 

Quite. He's thoroughly programmed, it's part of MQA's free  'shill' course. 

[realhifi]

16 hours ago, botrytis said:

SE Michigan.

Must be Ann Arbor. Traverse City here!

[The Computer Audiophile]

I’ll be in Ann Arbor for an event on March 1st. 

[botrytis]

9 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I’ll be in Ann Arbor for an event on March 1st. 

I know. I will be there. I already gave the dcs gent hard questions about MQA. ParagonSNS is a great place. If you want, can meet after for a beer or what ever, let me know.

 

Dave