Jump to content
IGNORED

Is Audiophiledom a confidence game?


crenca

Recommended Posts

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
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! :D

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
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 AudiophileStyleStickerWhite2.0.png AudiophileStyleStickerWhite7.1.4.png

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, vmartell22 said:

oh snap! :D

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
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
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
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... :D

 

 

v

Link to comment
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
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
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

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...