teajay is the exception that proves the rule.
Six Moons and Stereo Times are two of the better review sites.
Six Moons and Stereo Times are two of the better review sites.
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.
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.
Showing 4 responses by millercarbon
Let me tell you guys what I know about reviewers. If you're obsessed with audio you can be a reviewer. If your appetite for new gear far exceeds your ability to purchase said gear and you are able to learn a few terms and string them together not totally ungrammatically you can be a reviewer. There's a very few exceptions for guys like Fremer who earned their money the old fashioned way and then later on figured out that if they were clever about it they could make enough to cut back and not have to do any real actual work. But by and large its guys who have a monkey on their back and will do anything for the next fix. I could give you one I personally know as a beautiful example but see no reason to ruin his good thing or impugn the rag he writes for, as they may have other reviewers who don't deserve to be slandered by association. Just please take my word for it, reviews are always to some extent bought and paid for. Except for mine. I am the one uncorruptible exception. My hearing has been tested and confirmed perfect by kenjit. GK has audited my system and it is proven to contain no wires. Or speakers. This heavily cabernet-influenced segue in no way detracts from the compliment paid noromance, which does indeed belong in the Glossary of Audiophile Terminology. |
Welcome to the decline of journalism, hiendmmoe. The time respecting approach you’re wanting used to be the norm. First sentence lays out the theme. First paragraph fleshes it out. Subsequent paragraphs follow a structure. Like this. The New York Times style book is the industry standard. The Times has an ideology to push, and its an ideology that cannot win on its own merits but only with the help of a manipulative narrative. Over time this narrative style of writing has corrupted the whole of journalism, to the point where its impossible to read a Stereophile review without Orange Man Bad slipping in there somewhere. Or wine. Take your pick of irrelevant culture comments, virtue signaling segues. What I do to save time is scan right past all the fluff, which in my book most of the tech talk is just as bad, and skip to the listening impressions. Then while reading those I skip past any reference to music I don’t own. All I care about are the listening impressions. What did the reviewer hear? How does he describe it? If its not what I’m looking for, or even if it is but he hasn’t demonstrated an ability to adequately describe it, then I am gone. Done. Its amazing how well this works. All my gear has been bought this way for years now, and I don’t think it ever has failed me. My turntable, arm, cartridge, phono stage, interconnect, amp, speaker cables, and DBA were all bought this way. Its a shame what they have done to journalism. Oh well. We gotta roll with it. Adapt. Darwin. I Ching. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6NxWID2r6E |