A nice discussion of reviewers priorities.


I was wondering from anyone that has followed a reviewer if you could tell me of ones that prioritizes what I do? 
I value the artistic expression of music. So I presume micro details that are presented in a natural way are important in that regard. For example I know I get caught up in how a note on a guitar is played differently by diffeent musicians on different guitars, even how the individual strings are played either by themselves or in a chord. The different tension and how long a note is held, whether it is hammered or picked.  Maybe it is because I play that instrument.
Also the closer it sounds to the real event is nice. What I mean by that is that everything coming over my system needs to fit timing wise and timbre wise for me to connect to it. Those are valued details that don't get lost on me.
One thing that is low on my priority list is soundstaging or imaging.  I don't pay much attention to that.
I hope this lends itself to a nice discussion that we all benefit from.
I figure I can benefit a little more from the reviewers that I am more inline with, and l hope you would also.
Please if you are real familiar with a reviewer share your thoughts.
Thank you
marqmike

Showing 2 responses by roxy54

I would say that you would probably like reviews by Alan Sircom. He seems to view the sound of a component through the eyes  (and ears) of one who appreciates the nuances of artistic expression as well as the  overall gestalt of a components sound. 
I agree with Art Dudley, and I 'll add Herb Reichert. He's not extremely analytical, but he certainly approaches music from the emotional angle.