I agreed with the text of the review overall (though I don't think the dorado and solaris 2020 are as alike as they say in the comparison, but it's been a few months since I have had the solaris). But some of their scores seemed a bit wonky in my opinion, especially compared to their just published nio review.
Dorado 7/10 for sq and nio 10/10... I love the nio, but it's not a perfect score (as I dont think anything should be), unless you are talking about preference, in which case the score is totally subjective.
Build quality was another weird one.. 8/10 for dorado and vega, but 9/10 for the nio. I don't know where the discrepancy here is and they didn't really touch on it in the review itself, but campfire has always been top notch for build quality in my opinion, and these ceramic shells are I think up there with the best build quality I have seen on an iem, and certainly not worse than the nio (of which my nio actually has a few blemishes straight out of the box).
I'm not trying to defend one iem or the other, only that sites that have scores without any kind of justification for the score or hard explanation of how they came up with the score is something that should be taken with a big grain of salt. Especially because overall I thought the review was fine.