Unfortunately the state of HiFi reviewing (and other hobbyist reviews) is corrupt. Too many competing agendas, too much manipulation, bribes and so on. I began to take offense when too many political views were included in audio component reviews. I sent a few letters into publications asking a simple question: How do the political views of the reviewer improve my understanding of the quality of the component under review ? You can substitute aesthetic/dining/travel etc preferences for "political views". Some editors did not respond, the rest responded with basically the same answer: "free speech" . No one gave a direct answer. Oh Well.
I have read audio publications for a long time. I like some reviewers and tolerate others. My experience is to read reviews over time to understand the preferences (biases ?) of the reviewer. A gross example would be a tube and vinyl friendly reviewer now addressing a class D amp driven by digital streaming. Will the resulting review be accurate and does the reviewer have enough experience to determine the absolute quality of the components under review ? Reading the review in the abstract you would not know, but if you are familiar with the reviewer and their style then you can easily pull relevant information and leave the filler behind.
Several comments referenced 6Moons. Well they are potentially among the worst offenders. 1) the owner is on record as stating that unless a component blows up in testing, or has completely incomprehensible ergonomics, it will not receive a negative review. 2) unless the reviewer is an audio designer/engineer, or has demonstrated professional expertise in the area of design under review, then the reviewer is not qualified to give a negative review 3) the power of the press is substantial. A negative review can put a company out of business thus he (the owner of 6m) does not want to be responsible for ending someone's business- hence a negative review will not be published 4) they are pay to play: want a review- buy an ad on the site. ALL of the above can be confirmed through web search. Hey- at least they are honest !
I have read audio publications for a long time. I like some reviewers and tolerate others. My experience is to read reviews over time to understand the preferences (biases ?) of the reviewer. A gross example would be a tube and vinyl friendly reviewer now addressing a class D amp driven by digital streaming. Will the resulting review be accurate and does the reviewer have enough experience to determine the absolute quality of the components under review ? Reading the review in the abstract you would not know, but if you are familiar with the reviewer and their style then you can easily pull relevant information and leave the filler behind.
Several comments referenced 6Moons. Well they are potentially among the worst offenders. 1) the owner is on record as stating that unless a component blows up in testing, or has completely incomprehensible ergonomics, it will not receive a negative review. 2) unless the reviewer is an audio designer/engineer, or has demonstrated professional expertise in the area of design under review, then the reviewer is not qualified to give a negative review 3) the power of the press is substantial. A negative review can put a company out of business thus he (the owner of 6m) does not want to be responsible for ending someone's business- hence a negative review will not be published 4) they are pay to play: want a review- buy an ad on the site. ALL of the above can be confirmed through web search. Hey- at least they are honest !