George Hincapie Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 On 28/09/2017 at 5:41 PM, NOMBEDES said: Just buy a used Tour de Whatever bike, they all have little motors in them so the cheating cheaters can ride up a hill without effort. Orly? Link to comment
wgscott Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 3 hours ago, mansr said: I wear a $1000 watch Link to comment
Michael Lavorgna Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 10 hours ago, esldude said: What is the difference between something written by Michael Lavorgna and Lewis Carroll? Lewis Carroll knew he was writing nonsense and fantasy. I didn't realize I was in the children's section. Link to comment
Popular Post esldude Posted October 1, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted October 1, 2017 6 minutes ago, Michael Lavorgna said: I didn't realize I was in the children's section. Where did you think your writing belonged? I suppose the other option would be sci-fi/fantasy. plissken, mansr and kumakuma 3 And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
wgscott Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 This is no way to have a decent and civil discussion about expensive bike parts. crenca 1 Link to comment
Milt99 Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 48 minutes ago, esldude said: Where did you think your writing belonged? I suppose the other option would be sci-fi/fantasy. C'mon, man. I was unaware Mike pee'd in your Coco Puffs. Totally unnecessary and out of left field. Teresa 1 Link to comment
mansr Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 1 hour ago, wgscott said: Too cheap? rando 1 Link to comment
wgscott Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 22 minutes ago, mansr said: Too cheap? You could get a nice set of wheels for that. I got a really expensive watch, too. It was $100 at Costcow. Photovoltaic Seiko. Plus, it is analogue, so it reports the time in a much richer and authentic manner. Link to comment
wdw Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 1 hour ago, Milt99 said: C'mon, man. I was unaware Mike pee'd in your Coco Puffs. Totally unnecessary and out of left field. Totally agree..stuff it, esldude! This site should welcome all comers excepting the unnecessarily rude...glad to see industry representation here. Link to comment
rando Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 1 hour ago, wgscott said: This is no way to have a decent and civil discussion about expensive bike parts. Kindly go pontificate upon your unique experiences where they deal with riders imbued with similar insights and expertise on BF. Link to comment
vmartell22 Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 12 hours ago, esldude said: What is the difference between something written by Michael Lavorgna and Lewis Carroll? Lewis Carroll knew he was writing nonsense and fantasy. oh snap! hehe - well - look at the Audiostream site (michael lavorna's site) - check the cable reviews; they always turn into a bloodbath - to be fair to michael he gets into the fray - unfortunately he doesn't add much - his responses are always a variation of "I hear what I hear".... I am fascinated by this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_of_Paris_(wine) I do believe that in a double blind volume matched, etc test some if not all of the experts will not be able to tell a Schiit stack from a million dollar setup... v Link to comment
The Computer Audiophile Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 6 hours ago, mansr said: I'd have no problem with bling if it were sold as bling rather than with sketchy claims of superior performance. Hell, I might even pay a little extra for better-looking amp, just as I wear a $1000 watch even though it tells time no better than a cheap Casio. That's a sensible way to approach this. Luxman has been sold as a brand that goes after a specific sound, not the best measurements nor the most accurate reproduction, but the Luxman sound, build quality, and appearance. That's very respectable. Founder of Audiophile Style | My Audio Systems Link to comment
vmartell22 Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 2 hours ago, Michael Lavorgna said: I didn't realize I was in the children's section. https://www.audiostream.com/content/werner-herzogs-documentary-about-hi-fi-forums even! v Link to comment
Michael Lavorgna Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 16 minutes ago, vmartell22 said: oh snap! hehe - well - look at the Audiostream site (michael lavorna's site) - check the cable reviews; they always turn into a bloodbath - to be fair to michael he gets into the fray - unfortunately he doesn't add much - his responses are always a variation of "I hear what I hear".... I am fascinated by this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_of_Paris_(wine) I do believe that in a double blind volume matched, etc test some if not all of the experts will not be able to tell a Schiit stack from a million dollar setup... v I've written 3 cable reviews in 6 years. Two of those were published in 2012/13 and the most recent was in 2015. Steve Plaskin has written a number of cable reviews. In terms of your Schiit test (wink), why does Schiit make different models at different price points of the same device? Link to comment
vmartell22 Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 11 minutes ago, Michael Lavorgna said: I've written 3 cable reviews in 6 years. Two of those were published in 2012/13 and the most recent was in 2015. Steve Plaskin has written a number of cable reviews. In terms of your Schiit test (wink), why does Schiit make different models at different price points of the same device? hehe pls to meet you, Michael ! well - because they are subjectivists! - Jason has stated that - the thing is that they are also REASONABLE - no $250,000 amps here! - hence the love from the objective side of the house. v Link to comment
NOMBEDES Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 Listen with your eyes! In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake ~ Sayre's Law Link to comment
Michael Lavorgna Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 Just now, vmartell22 said: hehe pls to meet you, Michael ! well - because they are subjectivists! - Jason has stated that - the thing is that they are also REASONABLE - no $250,000 amps here! - hence the love from the objective side of the house. v Nice to meet you. "Reasonable" is, like, totally subjective. ;-) Link to comment
mansr Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 58 minutes ago, wdw said: excepting the unnecessarily rude Like Michael Lavorgna. esldude 1 Link to comment
Michael Lavorgna Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, mansr said: Like Michael Lavorgna. I love the sentiment, mansr! Link to comment
vmartell22 Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 38 minutes ago, Michael Lavorgna said: Nice to meet you. "Reasonable" is, like, totally subjective. ;-) haha - well we could go on - imho no - a $250,000 amp is unreasonable and objectively wrong given that the $600 Vidar gives you the same performance (remember you cannot also tell them apart- remember, as Peter Aczel said, all properly designed amps sound the same! ;-) - it doesn't matter if you can afford to be unreasonable for non-logical reasons... I am afraid this could go on forever... v Link to comment
Popular Post Michael Lavorgna Posted October 1, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted October 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, vmartell22 said: haha - well we could go on - imho no - a $250,000 amp is unreasonable and objectively wrong given that the $600 Vidar gives you the same service (remember you cannot also tell them apart) - doesn't matter if you can afford to be unreasonable for non-logical reasons... I am afraid this could go on forever... v We could go on forever but we don't have to. First off, I do not hold to the notion that "you cannot tell them apart" for many reasons. Mainly no one gets to dictate how people choose to appreciate a hobby. Of course you can think and say what you like, but when you take the step of saying something is "unreasonable" you become unreasonable. Hi-Fi is not a commodity item for some people so performance is not the entire story. If someone chooses a component for other reasons in addition to performance, or pays for an upgrade that is 100% cosmetic, they are not being unreasonable. They are *enjoying the hobby*. Then again, I know plenty of people who would never spend $600 on a piece of hi-fi gear. They think it's nuts. Back on topic, I posted a response to the OP which is what I was interested in discussing. daverich4, mourip, Teresa and 2 others 3 2 Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 14 hours ago, esldude said: What is the difference between something written by Michael Lavorgna and Lewis Carroll? Lewis Carroll knew he was writing nonsense and fantasy. why not just chant his name 3 times into a mirror? Link to comment
crenca Posted October 1, 2017 Author Share Posted October 1, 2017 3 minutes ago, Ralf11 said: why not just chant his name 3 times into a mirror? Is that not what Michael does just before he writes a review? ba-da-ta-ta Seriously though, is the fact that Michael has become a subject of discussion (putting aside his mostly acerbic postings on this site..or his own for that matter) not simply symptomatic of the confidence game that he and his compatriots play? Many folks believe that the subjectivist "sounds like" audio trade press does not earn respect - it simply asserts and demands it. Understandable in an "all is fair in war and business" sort of way, but where is proof in the puddin so to speak? Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
Michael Lavorgna Posted October 1, 2017 Share Posted October 1, 2017 2 minutes ago, crenca said: Is that not what Michael does just before he writes a review? ba-da-ta-ta Seriously though, is the fact that Michael has become a subject of discussion (putting aside his mostly acerbic postings on this site..or his own for that matter) not simply symptomatic of the confidence game that he and his compatriots play? Many folks believe that the subjectivist "sounds like" audio trade press does not earn respect - it simply asserts and demands it. Understandable in an "all is fair in war and business" sort of way, but where is proof in the puddin so to speak? You know I'm not dead, right? ;-) I am the subject of discussion because I posted a response to you, which on one has addressed. That is why I'm here - to discuss your notion of a "confidence game" which I see you've taken from theory to reality in no time flat. Link to comment
crenca Posted October 1, 2017 Author Share Posted October 1, 2017 1 minute ago, Michael Lavorgna said: You know I'm not dead, right? ;-) I am the subject of discussion because I posted a response to you, which on one has addressed. That is why I'm here - to discuss your notion of a "confidence game" which I see you've taken from theory to reality in no time flat. I would apologize for you being the only person on my ignore list (besides some leftover accounts from some guy Chris banned) but as most would recognize no apology is necessary Give me a minute to look for your original response... Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now