[eric the red]

Are audio component reviews worthless? How can anyone read a review of a piece of audio gear and expect/think/hope that the same component will sound the same in their own rig? Everyone's room is different and we all know how much even small changes in a room can make a dramatic difference in the sound of our systems. Nobody has the exact same room set-up. Everyone's ears and hearing are different, as are as musical tastes and what we enjoy listening to and what makes us feel good while listening. Cables are different, cdps etc etc etc. Aren't audio reviews pretty worthless all in all, as in something that sounds great in a reviewer's rig may sound like crap in your own room? Isn't the only way to get to know what a component sounds like is by auditioning it in our own rooms with our own rigs? Don't all audio reviews (OK 95% of them) all pretty much sound the same in their praises of what is being reviewed? What about reviewers whose employer may have a vested interest in the component being reviewed? Aren't alot of audio reviews just some kind of quasi-golden-eared-pseudo-intellectual-audio-expert writer-show-off jacking off? What good is an audio review except cheap entertainment

[bubba966]

The only thing I'd find useful is if they tell you about any problems they had with it or other such mechanical info.

But you're right about how things sound. I don't think you can go very far with someone just telling you how something sounds.

But if they say it's like so & so product and at least give you something to reference from then it'd be a bit more helpful.

Though honestly I rarely ever read reviews about anything. Gear, movies, etc. as I find that reviews tend to miss the point of things. Like them saying that a particular movie is terrible for lack of acting, story, script, you name it. But they miss the fact that the movie was terribly enjoyable even with all of it's "faults". So I don't ever bother with reviews until after the fact anymore.

[cjr888]

I partially agree, but think this falls much more on a specific writing style, whether by author, or format dictacted by magazine/media.

 I think they are useful, though obviously this depends on context, in the same way that someone 'gets' how one person writes and another wouldn't.  Certain people that write audio reviews I take something from -- part because of writing style, part because they give impressions against wide variations of music, part because there's something besides technical description and frequency ranges.

I would agree that there are plenty of reviews or reviewers that are awfully close to useless.  I can read, and will read, eight pages of technical descriptions, descriptions of how things look and how a volume knob feels, and then read two or three pages of description of sound and be left cold and lost.

Things I definitely don't like:
- Representing one genre of music in a review
- Only using/mentioning one quality of recording (really good, really bad)
- Being ignorant to basical technical knowledge regarding
  system matching and audio concepts.  If I'm aware of
  them, a reviewer sure as heck better.
- Within the concept of synergy, not trying different things,
  or things that make sense -- everyone doesn't have your
  system -- get a bit of perspective, and understand that
  your readers have varying tastes and they're the one
  that are buying your writing.

Without reviews, you're at the mercy of what you're able to hear, and in context, and in said time period.  For a lot of people, these options just don't exist, or in an awfully limited context.  Reviewers need to put themselves in the perspective of their potential reader base, covering all angles, rather than writing personal diaries, or limited reviews that end up helping nothing but themselves.  Extremely brief or extremely cold reviews help no one -- they read like a brochure and most likely, we've already done that....and for free   Pretend to be someone that would be interested -- in sound changes, in budget, in context, and realize that there are varying groups of these people.

People that can put themselves in other people's perspectives as well as describe their our, people that can appeal to the human element make reviews useful, but I would agree that there are plenty of people out there that fail horribly at this, whether its as an audio reviewer, writer, or someone that ends up shedding any light on what people are actually looking for...

I read show reviews by individuals describing many, many rooms -- their informal reviews reveal the human element, and in part by describing multiple setups, reveal their preference.  From that, its easy to get an idea if the rest of their comments will mean something to you or not.  Those that have heard many systems, and have opinions that disagree with their perspective have the capability to at least understand and identify other's preferences.  These are the people we could use out there.

We need context and balance and synergy in people's reviews as much as we need it in systems.  When its coming from 'paid professionals', this is at least what we hope for.  Again, as long as people are consistent with their opinions/experience/preference, you can at least gain perpective on their comments.  If we don't have that, a review is completely useless.

I guess all we can do is hope for improvement?

[eric the red]

Isn't writing about how a component "sounds" like trying to describe in writing about how something tastes?

[Rocket]

hi,

i only use reviews as a guide only, recently i have been very lucky
with my equipment purchases.

regards

rocket

[JLM]

I look to professional reviews to get an idea about various pieces of equipment, but.....

Like many of you, I get very fustrated with them as well.  So I propose to set rules that reviewers should follow:

1.) State what the being used room is like and use an "ordinary" room that the average person might actually live in and/or afford.  Most ignore this.

2.) Use widely recognized, well respected associated equipment that have abilities beyond the equipment being reviewed.  (Why review amps with speakers that only go down to 60 Hz or cost half what the amp does?  BTW, I just read such a review.  While the less expensive speaker may provide the best match, it's probably not going to outclass the amp.)  Similarly, why review with a homebrewed/tweaked or obscure piece of equipment?

3.) Use widely recognized, well recorded music.  (Similar to #2 above, make it useful to us.)

4.) Compare equipment against equipment with similar specifications.  (For instance, don't turn the review into a solid state versus tube debate.  Don't compare $328 speakers against last year's Product of the Year that cost 5 times as much.  Just read that review too.  Don't compare apples to oranges.)

5.) Specify, via measurements, how loud, how low in frequency, how high in frequency, etc. that the sound reproduced was.  (I can't read a spectral analysis, but it would be nice to get the basics.  Most of us, especially those with small amps, want to know how loud was the reviewer  trying to listen.  It seems like most reviewers are listening at very high sound pressure levels.)

6.) Don't waste our time and bandwidth reposting all the information from the manufacturer's website or by telling us your life story if it really doesn't relate to the review.  Some reviews leave you wondering if they even mentioned the equipment at hand after learning of their philosophy of audio or the history of some portion of the industry.


Thanks, I feel better now.  But don't leave me hanging here gang, please add your ideas.

jeff

[Juan R]

A review  give at least some idea about the product, for example, I was looking for cd player, there was a nice piece of equipment but several peoples had the  same opinion about the machine. I decided to avoid that purchase. Tubes, there is no way that you can listen to everyone, you do some research, dont base in only one opinion but in several.

[MaxCast]

Isn't writing about how a component "sounds" like trying to describe in writing about how something tastes?

No eric, the later is easy....it tastes like chicken!

I think we read reviews to help narrow the field when looking for equipment.  Sometimes there is a little jstification going on, after all, who wants a piece that doesn't get a good review??  

I think reviews can make or break some products, especially the internet direct companies like we have here.  That's is why it is good that we have some mfgs here that are willing to send out audition samples.  This practice is growing and I highly recommend it to our mfgs here for the reasons eric mentions in the starting post.  So to all mfgs that don't have an audition sample....THINK ABOUT IT.  

For around $100 you could audiution 4-5 pieces of gear in your own home.

[Hantra]

Isn't the only way to get to know what a component sounds like is by auditioning it in our own rooms with our own rigs?

Are you able to do this?  I always find it interesting when people talk about this b/c I know TWO dealers who will let you take gear home, and try it out.  Both of them happen to be dealers who work out of their home, and realize exactly what you are talking about.  

The brick and mortar guys have either been burned doing this, or are just oblivious to this fact, and too arrogant to care what something sounds like in your system.

Heck, a dealer I had been going to for 7 years, and who I bought my first mid-fi rig from wouldn't even hook up a $5,000 component in his OWN store to let my friend and I hear it.  So, my friend bought one off the net, and saved $1,500.  If you're not going to like it, at least you'll be $1,500 to the good vs. buying it unheard from Mr. Brick and Mortar.  That guy is out of business too as of last month. . .

B

[Dan Banquer]

I think the link I have posted below says pretty much what I think about most audio reviews done in high end.

http://www.mastersonvideo.com/features/20021101.htm

From the past 10 years of being a part of this business I can tell you this much: The great bulk of Audio Reviewers in high end have no formal training in music or engineering, and it shows.

[Hantra]

Well said Dan. . .

But without reviews, how are we supposed to find out about products?  There are so many companies making so many products for just us small amount of folks, and it is impossible to really know what's out there without reading a mag or two.  Especially if you are like me, and you have what is essentially a Tweeter in your area, and no high-end shops at all.  

I truly wish there WAS a better way, but I don't see it yet. . .

B

[Dan Banquer]

My suggestion to all of you is to demand better. Demand that reviewers have formal training in engineering and music. Demand that reviews are not to be written for entertainment purposes only, or advertising copy.
Demand that the reviewers know more than you do.

How's that for starters.

[Carlman]

delete this post

[Carlman]

Dear Hifi Magazine or Website,
I demand that you use reviewers with a background in Engineering and/or Music.  I know more than most of your reviewers and I've only been in this hobby 5 or 6 years.  I need more than entertainment, I need more than comments and reactions.  I need to know why.  I need scientific explanations.  Without this information how can anyone make a judgement on whether to purchase or find a demonstration?

So, hifi magazine or website, what do you say?

Thanks,
Hifi Enthusiast

The 'honest' or probable reaction:
HF Enthusiast,
We have a highly trained group of reviewers we call upon to perform reviews for a wide variety of readers... Our goal is to sell ad space, and potentially product to keep advertisers.  We really don't care what you think because you have no choice nor do you know who our reviewers really are... They may write for 2 or 3 publications... maybe more...

Plus, engineers' and musicians' reviews would be over 90% of our readers' heads.  That wouldn't sell gear.  Plus, how many engineers do you know that can write or have enough creativity to make it enjoyable to read?
Thanks,
The Man

----------------------------------------------------------------------

So, my thoughts are that a letter won't work....
How would you 'demand' better?

[randytsuch]

Are you able to do this?  I always find it interesting when people talk about this b/c I know TWO dealers who will let you take gear home, and try it out.  Both of them happen to be dealers who work out of their home, and realize exactly what you are talking about.  

Hantra,
I find this interesting.  When I was looking for speakers, almost brick/mortor store I asked would let me do an in home demo, if I wanted.  I think I would have to leave a credit card number, and most wanted it done when they were closed for the day, both reasonable requests to me.  There was only one store that refused, and they would have let me bring my equipment into the store, and hook it up there, if I wanted to.
But, I ended up not taking the stores up on their offers, and bought my speakers used on the Net.

Randy

[Dan Banquer]

Carl: you have a wondeful sense of humor, I busted a gut reading your post. However; if the magazines got enough of those letters and e mails and started to notice the subscription rate drop off, do you think they might change their tune?
BTW the advertising rate is directly tied to the subscription rate.

[JohnR]

I dunno. I think "professional" reviews are an irretrievably flawed concept. Don't write the magazines to fix it, with any luck they will all die and then people can get back to listening to music instead of lusting after expensive equipment that sounds like doggie doo.

Reading comments from owners is much more useful. Who cares if they don't have a "reference" system to compare stuff in -- I bet most of us don't either!

How people describe the sound is not the most important thing. Ask a different question: are they happy?

After all, would you rather buy a piece of equipment that sounded a certain way, or one that made you happy to have bought it?

 

[cjr888]

Are there any review sources (magazine or online) that people find more beneficial to themselves than others?  I'd be curious to see how varied the opinions are and why...

[Carlman]

Glad my humor was well received...

I agree with John about how happy a system makes someone but, I'd have to know what makes that person happy first.  For example, I know Hantra has a good ear for acoustic guitar and a little about his tastes in music reproduction.  If it makes him happy, I know why.  Same is true (to a degree) with some of the other NC audiophiles on the circle.  Whereas with someone I don't know... I don't know what they like.

Also, I've found non-professional reviews to be sometimes even MORE useless... like on www.audioreview.com.... This leads into a topic that has been discussed on this forum at least once or twice before.  (reviewing reviewers, etc.)  

Bottom line for me:
Knowing what the reviewer likes creates 90% of its validity for me.

[JohnR]

Whereas with someone I don't know... I don't know what they like.

No... but if some unit makes them happy, and you read a bunch of other people that it did the same thing for... might be worth investigating, no? Maybe it's a whole new class of happiness to you, you never know

Also, I've found non-professional reviews to be sometimes even MORE useless... like on www.audioreview.com....

Hah, touche! Written a couple of useless ones there myself

Lemme try putting it a different way: listen to what people say when they're "talking," not when they're "reviewing"...