[JLM]

Of course testing firsthand is ideal, but with high end audio, it's practically impossible for most of us to test out equipment on our own systems. That usually requires buying it first. So we tend rely more heavily on reviews.

I know some of you guys have deep pockets, but many of us are typical lower or middle class workers. I gotta sell something before I can buy something else.

+1

[Eisener Bart]

Of course testing firsthand is ideal, but with high end audio, it's practically impossible for most of us to test out equipment on our own systems. That usually requires buying it first. So we tend rely more heavily on reviews.

I know some of you guys have deep pockets, but many of us are typical lower or middle class workers. I gotta sell something before I can buy something else.

I live in province.
Not so much opportunity for audition.
More than half of items on my Rack I bought without audition.
Internet + intuition = good result.

Only 1 non-expensive headphones (price tag 265 Euro) which I bought "in blind" dissapointed me.

May be it's question of luck.

[Randy Myers]

For many of us auditioning audio equipment if very difficult.  There are no stores that carry even a decent level or equipment in the area and therefore research and asking for others views is the only thing we have to rely on.  I know here in California unless you live in LA or SF bay area (San Jose) there are no stores with any real selection.

[Phil A]

For many of us auditioning audio equipment if very difficult.  There are no stores that carry even a decent level or equipment in the area and therefore research and asking for others views is the only thing we have to rely on.  I know here in California unless you live in LA or SF bay area (San Jose) there are no stores with any real selection.

Same here - we have one store within a 50 mile radius and just open 3 days/week, has very limited stuff and really just cares about customers buying the ultra high end.  Went 3 times earlier this year to audition a $2.7k music server.  First was spur of the moment just to listen.  I told him I'd come back in a few weeks with music.  Was totally unprepared.  Left the music (thumb drive) and asked if it as OK to bring my music server in a few weeks so we can sort of compare.  Came back with my music server and he was totally unprepared again and the driver for his DAC would not work from the company's website (Berkeley Reference so nothing cheap).  Told me he would lend it to me.  I sent him an email on the spot and verified he got it.  That was 5 months ago.  They have an event (manufacturers of the ultra high end) this Saturday and I will probably stop by but I don't plan on begging him about the music server.  If he wants to bring it up and make an effort that's fine and if not I don't plan on giving them an opportunity to sell me anything.  It is just the way it is and that is why there are so many more direct to consumer companies now.

[mresseguie]

Can it be that there are shills on AC? I've always wondered if vendors could just have their friends or fanboys post over-the-top reviews as a way of marketing a device. Another thing that I've noticed is that vendors value face time, in other words, time at the head of Latest Updates. Such extraneous posts as "What kind of music do you like on your xxx turntable, amp or whatever serve the function of keeping the item in the current discussion.

I've noticed both situations, too. It's difficult to determine if you haven't auditioned the piece, but hugely obvious if you have auditioned it. I sometimes wonder if a certain manufacturer got his start as a used car salesman who advertises on local TV.

Separately, in 2015, I posted a less than glowing comment about an audition I went to in another country and got blasted via email. [It was not the manufacturer who blasted me.]

[Early B.]

I've noticed both situations, too. It's difficult to determine if you haven't auditioned the piece, but hugely obvious if you have auditioned it. I sometimes wonder if a certain manufacturer got his start as a used car salesman who advertises on local TV.

There's so much overselling of just about any item nowadays that reviewers often have to "shout" about the item they auditioned just to capture your attention. What really gets my attention is when reviewers indicate that they bought the item personally. That speaks volumes.

I also prefer reviews where the manufacturer is interviewed to discuss his design philosophy, etc., and what trade-offs he made for the price point.   

[rustydoglim]

I am glad that this topic generated a number of good posts.

For me trade shows are for seeing the product in the flesh, vetoing poor products/vendors, and hopefully meeting "the man".  Too often the (high value) product I'm interested in is frustratingly on "permanent" static display.  And yes, hotel rooms aren't the best environments for listening, but I'm constantly amazed that vendors don't invest more effort/time into preparing for the shows, to make the best presentation possible.  Instead it appears that they come rushing in at the last minute with a hundred excuses.  Why would anyone want to buy from that kind of company?

The problem with trade show is that it has the worst bang for buck return of investment, especially for a company who has a good following and a number of dealers. For a brand new company, it is worth attending a show to get started.

I also prefer reviews where the manufacturer is interviewed to discuss his design philosophy, etc., and what trade-offs he made for the price point.

That's why I prominently featured two FAQs on the website About Us page to discuss how we priced our products. And we also prominently featured audiocircle.com (instead of creating our own forum that we can control) on the website.

Someone pointed out about selecting your reviewer...

I think the reviewers that we seek out are quite good (I know, easier for me to say since we got the awards) but I pay close attention to the "things to improve" comments typically sprinkled sparingly in the review.

[genjamon]

What really gets my attention is when reviewers indicate that they bought the item personally. That speaks volumes.

Not necessarily.  Keep in mind that there are reviewers that actively choose what to review based on what they are interested in adding to their system as long as they can get a price discount from the manufacturer - often around half of retail.  It's agreed upon before the review takes place.  So the review just functions as an in-home trial period for something a reviewer was wanting anyway.  The only reason to send a unit back would be if it really didn't meet expectations.  And many manufacturers are happy to oblige, because upon return of the unit, they'd have to sell it as a demo or B-stock at major discount anyway.  And they know what the impression of a reviewer purchasing the unit does to strengthen the appeal among prospective buyers, so there's marketing value in it for them as well.  They usually also include agreements that the reviewer won't sell the unit second-hand for some period of time like 6 months or a year, to avoid reviewers actually profiting on generating buzz with their commentaries.

All that it speaks to me is that the reviewer found the unit worth buying at around 50% of retail, and that they expect they'll be able to recoup that cost easily selling used after a year or so, allowing them to invest in another review unit at that point.

[Randy Myers]

Let me just say that I disagree.  I believe there may be some who are motivated by getting themselves equipment on the cheap, but honestly I believe those are more the exception than the rule.  I would also believe that it would become obvious fairly quickly and people would tend to not trust their reviews.  Personally if I felt that a reviewer had this type of motivation I would not bother reading their reviews any more.  I may actually go as far as calling them out or at least writing complaints to the publisher of that person reviews.

[genjamon]

Well it may be impossible to say what percentage of reviewers are motivated in this way. But motivations aside, I guarantee that nearly every review piece purchased by a reviewer is done at major discount off retail. The net effect is pretty much the same whether a reviewer is actively exploiting their position or just passively benefiting. My point is they're not necessarily as invested in the product as it might superficially seem.

[JerryM]

Unspoken? Really? 

[sbrtoy]

Some "journalists" just ask for the product essentially free or don't return it for a VERY long time holding the manufacturer hostage. Some of the well known reviewers are great people I have enjoyed talking to, some are real low-lifes despite their high profiles. As always best to balance what other users share and see if they are in sync before taking too much stock.

Shows can be rough and even equipment I really like can sound bad if the pairing or room is wrong. It's like buying a car from an auto show based on the sticker and the visuals but no test drive. I'd rather have the in-home trial option which also allows you to experiment with any variables in your system while you have it. 

[martinr]

On the other hand there are a few (not many)  manufacturers who take the time to tune their equipment and the hotel room to as high a level of fidelity as they can when they set their up equipment at a show. I personally don't listen at near field but have purchased gear auditioned at a show after listening at near field in the hotel room.  Although the characteristics of the equipment was the same when I set it up in my room at home, because of furniture and room issues in my non-dedicated listening room I of course was not able to replicate the sound at far-field that was presented at near field in the hotel room.  Auditioning at shows is tricky for sure.   

[stanleysg]

Just happen to come across the below reviews about Pioneer XDP which I think the brand would have preferred that it was not done.
http://headfonics.com/2016/09/the-xdp-100r-dap-by-pioneer/
I think this prove the point that you can persuade a reviewer to do a product review of your product but the end result can go either way.

[rustydoglim]

headfonics.com is one of the online reviewing site that I respect a lot because of honest review.

[Wind Chaser]

Reviews are like news media. You pick and choose who you put your confidence in because you agree with their POV... Having said that, some outlets are less biased and more objective than others.

Earlier this year I bought an amplifier on the strength of five *very strong* reviews. I did not have the opportunity to audition the amp prior to purchase, so making that decision still required something of a leap of faith. However I have to say, after it broke in and settled down, wow! Everything down to the last detail written in those five reviews was correct. 

[JLM]

Allow me the opportunity to rant about reviews:

They ("professional" and non) are vital for most of us in the age of internet and the dearth of bricks and mortar sales.  And shows, if you can go, are only good to veto equipment or a given company.  Granted, it's hard to put sound into words, but most are poorly written.  IMO reviews are technical papers and should be written as such, starting with an executive summary then substantiated in some sort of logical and concise pattern.  But too many appear to be written as a mystery novel (eventually hoping you'll reach the same conclusion) by a lonely soul suffering from diarrhea of the keyboard.  Some leave you wondering what they really thought of the piece.  And most reviews don't provide context (room, ancillary gear, comparisons to similar/familiar equipment, impressions using known pieces of music).

Rant off and thank you.

[Guy 13]

Allow me the opportunity to rant about reviews:

They ("professional" and non) are vital for most of us in the age of internet and the dearth of bricks and mortar sales.  And shows, if you can go, are only good to veto equipment or a given company.  Granted, it's hard to put sound into words, but most are poorly written.  IMO reviews are technical papers and should be written as such, starting with an executive summary then substantiated in some sort of logical and concise pattern.  But too many appear to be written as a mystery novel (eventually hoping you'll reach the same conclusion) by a lonely soul suffering from diarrhea of the keyboard.  Some leave you wondering what they really thought of the piece.  And most reviews don't provide context (room, ancillary gear, comparisons to similar/familiar equipment, impressions using known pieces of music).

Rant off and thank you.

Well JLM, I will not rant, because you did it for me,
I am using your post to rant, because I think exactly the same thing.
Technical specs are better than evaluation based on the reviewer's ears.

Guy 13
on planet Vietnam.

[Randy Myers]

Technical specs can be gotten from the manuals.  Why would we need reviewers to cover the specifications?

And yes, reviewers are giving their opinions (hopefully).  This is where we need to find reviewers we trust.  I want to hear their opinions, I want to read their views on both fit and finish, and look and feel.  I want their views on how features actually work, not necessarily how the manufactures say they work.

I want their impressions on what they hear.  Granted many reviewers try to see how "fancy" they can describe their listening views.  By reading several opinions I believe I can deduce some very useful information and be able to come up with an overall impression.

Since being able to actually go out and listen to most every piece of gear I might be interested in is next to impossible, this is the only method that I can come up with to help decide which piece has the best chance of fulfilling my needs.  This is especially true now when there are virtually no stores for me to actually go and put my hands on any of this equipment (unless you live in a large metro area such as LA, which I do not).

[OzarkTom]

in the age of internet and the dearth of bricks and mortar sales.

I hate to say it, but talking to a dealer last week, said there are a lot of the stores left that he knows are really struggling.  The baby boomers are dying off and the younger generation is too much into headfi. Those two factors are not paying their bills.

The internet sales are probably also a factor.