If a reviewer is using equipment similar to mine, and if he writes intelligently, I will take more than usual notice of what he or she may say about the equipment under review. But "more than usual notice" is not a lot of notice, for me. I generally read the reviews only to find out what the gear looks like, what inputs and outputs it has, and what other features might be of interest to me, including features of the circuitry, where electronics are concerned, except most reviewers say nothing about circuit design other than to repeat the babble from the manufacturer's promotional literature, which is worthless crap.
What do you expect a reviewers system to be
There has been quite a bit of discussion on reviewers systems, long term loans, favored purchase price etc.
but what do you expect your favorite reviewers system to be if he or she is to be taken seriously about the component under review. does the reviewers system have to be the same as yours. does it have to sound good, or should it be so detailed and etched that its not great fun to listen to, but you can sure tell the difference when a new component is substituted. if not the latter, then how can you tell if the new component just makes the system sound better, but may have aberrations of its own. And, if you demand the review have that detailed system, does he have to pay for it at retail so he can avoid criticism and have to listen to it all the time, or can he have another system he may enjoy more, or for which he got discount pricing.
Myself, I doubt that there are many full time reviewers who are independently wealthy and could afford. I'm ok with a reviewer using whatever system he likes to review a product, so long as he is familiar with that system so he can readily recognize changes, for better or worse. If thats a bose table radio,so be it. but what do you all think?
but what do you expect your favorite reviewers system to be if he or she is to be taken seriously about the component under review. does the reviewers system have to be the same as yours. does it have to sound good, or should it be so detailed and etched that its not great fun to listen to, but you can sure tell the difference when a new component is substituted. if not the latter, then how can you tell if the new component just makes the system sound better, but may have aberrations of its own. And, if you demand the review have that detailed system, does he have to pay for it at retail so he can avoid criticism and have to listen to it all the time, or can he have another system he may enjoy more, or for which he got discount pricing.
Myself, I doubt that there are many full time reviewers who are independently wealthy and could afford. I'm ok with a reviewer using whatever system he likes to review a product, so long as he is familiar with that system so he can readily recognize changes, for better or worse. If thats a bose table radio,so be it. but what do you all think?