Great list...
One thing I noticed as I've reviewed things is the amount of pressure I put on myself to hear things objectively. I try not to get emotionally attached and just decide whether the instruments and voices sound like they would in real life.... and then break it down from there... hot or low quality mic's, poor (often overcompressed) recording quality, general sound-processing degradations... etc. and then... given all of those issues, start breaking apart the soundstage and timbral character I'm getting.
My definitions differ from many of the above but are spot-on for others. 'Detailed' being one of my favorites... it didn't take long to figure out what that meant in a review.
One of my older reviews of a pair of Onix Ref-1's I thought were ear-splittingly bright, 'tipped-up' or whatever and I was very frank about it. Then others started PM'ing me saying, oh, now you've gone and done it... 'they' will have something to say to you on that... From then on, I hedged a little bit more and was more polite in my assessments.
There are a lot of things at play when listening to a pair of speakers or a new piece of gear. Generally with speakers, I'm completely open and do my best at setting them up within 1/8th to 1/16th of an inch of tolerance with each other and to a point within the listening spot. I generally let them break-in for a while but I haven't heard a pair yet that transformed completely before and after. I've heard them change and improve, that's for sure... but their personality stayed the same.
I've noticed electronics transform a bit more... to where the personality 'can' change. So, I let them burn in 100-200 hours before doing any real evaluations anymore.
In any case, doing a review puts you in a tricky spot. If I get some gear to review/audition/demo and I think it's sub-standard, I generally contact the owner and tell them about it in a nice way. I like keeping the peace and I have an open mind. So, if something doesn't sound right, I ask for a remedy. Sometimes the owner has an ego trip and thinks I've done something wrong, the other half they try to work with me and appreciate the honest feedback. I'm not saying I'm always right but I never know what I'm going to get when I call someone to tell them their gear isn't that great to me. There's nothing worse than reporting what you hear and having the manufacturer tell me my ears are wrong.
I think there is an imbalance of positive to negative feedback on gear. I think a lot of stuff is over-hyped. There are a lot of 'darlings' out there... Some well-deserved, some I simply do not understand. If you look at the number of positive reviews to negative, I'd bet it's 20 to 1 or more... Is it all really that good? If you ask a non-audiophile, yes... it's all going to be at least 'acceptable' all the way to 'even better'.
If I post what I REALLY thought, it would sometimes seem harsh to read. If you pick something apart too much, people won't know if you enjoyed it or not... and that's what a lot of people really want to know.... 'Did you like it?' As much as we audiophiles ask for objectivity and statements of 'how it sounds'... I've noticed many people ask whether the reviewer liked it.... And I really don't care whether they did or not... All I care is whether I will like it and I need a review that explains how it sounds without too much flowery language to make that judgement. So, that's how I try to review... based on what I heard after some ear-time.
So, to satisfy all the complexity of the ego's, various sensitivities, and possible system-setup anomolies involved, I try not to ream anything that doesn't truly deserve it and at the same time 'gush' a bit if it's really good. (Read my latest on the EE Phonostage) Other reviews lack the praise and positive comments that don't 'wow' me.
So, you can be objective but learning the style (or reviewing/analyzing the reviewer) is as important... If you know the tastes of the reviewer, you're in as good a position as can be.
Well, that's all I've got to say on that.. ha!
