Audio reviews: too many analogies, never simple, but most of all, never clear.


How many reviews have you read were it takes at least 2 paragraphs for the the reviewer to actually give 
hint this article is actually audio related or even gives mention to what he or she’s reviewing. Get to the subject matter. Leave out your less than perfect dramatic writing skills and lets start hearing about the actual review. I’d rather hear about comparisons between audio components than analogies between wine and taste related to transparency and how that gives rise to what they are getting ready say. What does wine have to do with audio transparency, nothing! Also they have a tendency to talk more about recordings that I’m sure 99% of the readers of the article have never heard of, or would ever listen to.
And when you looking for some sign of what they actually think of the components they’re reviewing they never give you a straight answer; it’s always something that leaves, at least for myself, asking, well where’s the answer. 
hiendmmoe

Showing 2 responses by hiendmmoe

I’ve learned to just go to the conclusion and take it with a grain of salt. They never give you information that truly matters like: room size, cables, and associated equipment. If they do it’s never clear.
There are a lot of things that most reviewers miss when evaluating a component.
Most critical are how components interact with others down and up stream. Also I find it totally ridiculous when a reviewer gives a component a bad review based on only one set of components used within the review. Reviewers should have at a minimum, at least one other system to evaluate the same component to see if there was a miss-match between components that caused them to reach a negative opinion for that component. Where the numbers ( specs ) do mean something is the interaction between components of different impedances and design principles.