2. analog
  3. 1364382162

When a Reviewer "likes" something

... what does that mean in your opinion. I read in one of the last Stereophile mags a comment from Mr. Atkinson where he wrote about the differences in "opinions" in forums or in printed mags. After all he ended with the argument, a component is good when a reviewer likes it.
Isn't is more helpful, when a reviewer knows something about a real tone reproduction? Or is it ok, when he used every month another CD or LP he got for free, a kind of music nearly no one wants to listen to?
Harry Pearson used in the 90's always the same records for his reviews but that was an exception I think.
What is it worth for you when - for example - Mr. Dudley/Fremer/Valin/HP .... "likes" something? Do you have the same "taste" they have?
I know it is possible to like a Turntable even when that unit can't hold the proper speed, or is extremely sensitive to any influences, there are endless recommendations written about such units...what is it worth for you?
Atkinson for example measures units, some have top datas but they can sound very boring, far away from the real thing, some have no top datas, some "tests" are shortened because a unit can reach a area which can be pretty dangerous (see one of the latest Agostino units, just as an example) but they are rated Class A in recommendations anyway....
When someone "knows" what is right or not, then his "liking" is only a personal opinion which is more or less uninteresting or?
Most customers (not all of course) would prefer to know what a unit is really able to do sonically, or not? Would knowledge destroy the joy of Hardware rolling? Or is there a reason why reviewers use low efficiency speakers when they have a tube amp for review (for example Lamm ML2.1/ML2.2 with Magico Speakers)? Is the matching "expensive + expensive" the proper way to show competence?
syntax
elizabeth
6,726 posts
 
At this point it really does not matter. With the large number of internet magazines, the stranglehold TAS and Stereophile had, are gone.
Reviews are NOOT to go run out and orderthe product. Reviews are to make a list of stuff which has some promise, which, hopefully you can go find a place to listen to it for yourself!

I happen to have only one item (of all my stuff) which is rated in the current Stereophile recommended components.
I think this is a good sign for my own choices.. that I picked them for what "I" found to be what I wanted. Instead of what somebody else wanted.
That is a big deal.
(and one item I tried which was raved about, was no beter than my ten year old DAC, so I returned it. again points to actually LISTENING..for oneself)
audiolui
280 posts
 
Magazine reviews to me is a starting point. It is extremely rare that a reviewer has most of my gears in his system to review a component. Let alone personal taste. However, magazine reviews help narrow down the components I am interested in. Regardless how good the reviewers say about a component, I still try to audition it (preferrably at home) before purchase. Or buy used and sell it if I don't like it.
danielk141
488 posts
 
Over time I have found reviewers I almost always agree with.
Like Dick Olsher & Tom Norton.
There are others I don't agree with or pay much attention to:
- Anybody who constantly reviews Musical Fidelity.
- Anybody who says any Krell amp sounds like tubes.

Call these my biases or educated observations.
Everyone who is into audio develops them over time.
don_c55
823 posts
 
Ha Ha! Best thread in a long time. The reviewing "Emperors" have no clothes!

They are almost all "un-trusworthy shills" and "marketers ".

Most reviews are a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and furry, signifying nothing !
tdaudio
201 posts
 
Zenblaster makes a very important point. Audio mags are a business model. Reviews are there to get you to see advertising and ultimately buy stuff. At lest it works that way for U.S. pubs.

Gave up TAS ten years ago after 16 or 17 years reading it and gave up S-phile before that.

Take reviews with a grain of salt for many reasons. Like the OP said, reviewers can have odd system matches depending on "Loaner" equipment. They can also go through so much equipment that I wonder if they have a basic sound identified all that well. Another gem is when an expensive unit is reviewed and they have nothing comparable on hand. And if you have decent level of room treatment, how much detail do you want to believe from a reviewer that has not addressed that basic issue. One could go on...

And that says nothing about if you have tubes but the reviewer has all/mostly soliid state or the other way around. If the readers speaker are vastly different that the reviewers, e.g. horn vs panel, its hard to interprate.

Jmcgrogan2 had a point as well, are some of these reviewers flat out dishonest?

Maybe I am being too harsh, I have picked up usefull info from reviews but you have to be aware of the caveats imo.
More to discover