totem arro

Dwhitt,

Well put, thanks. :-)

02-20-09: Dwhitt
...we very seldom read the paperwork and give any thing a real chance.

I cannot agree with this.

If you read the threads carefully, I believe you will find the vast majority of contributors follow break-in procedures and do careful listening during the process before they make subjective comments.

What's the value of opinion based on listening to something that hasn't been given the full break-in recommended by the manufacturer?

If a reviewer did this, would you give any credence to his comments?

Rebbi, my comments on the Ohm speakers I purchased were limited to build quality, which in the case of my pair was fair at best, and one of the Walsh drivers blowing within the first 15 minutes of being powered up and playing at levels in the low 90 dBs.

I never made any subjective commentary about the sound, precisely because I never heard them at their best.

Tvad,

I understand your point about reviewers, especially professional reviewers who are paid to do a job.

But that's not what we are here so why judge by those standards? We are just people with a common interest sharing insights and observations, right or wrong.

Of course others will form their opinions based on what one says, so caution is warranted for that reason.

But I believe people should not be discouraged from sharing their experiences, even partial ones, as long as they are honest in disclosing the information that they have to share and are not intentionally obfuscating otherwise useful information on purpose in order to help their particular argument.

No problem as long as one discloses that the opinion expressed is based on insufficient time with the product.

However, such an opinion should be given little credence by someone who is trying to research user experiences.

IMO.