Recommendations to "Professional" Reviewers?


What would recommend to the reviewers at Stereophile, TAs and the likes? Not in terms of equip to review, but what they need to include in their review write up more consistently? Also not about ind discounts etc....what should they do more to make the reviews more helpful to us consumers? Lets start this thread as quite a few reviewers are Audiogon members and hopefully take this feedback.

From my perspective,
Need to consistently contrast & compare against equipment in similiar price range: frequently done but not consistently...comparing to the mfr's old model is not helpful enough without the added info on competitors. Not asking to name what is "best" but what are the rel individual strengths and weakness within the group?
Try to link technology used to listening results: a lot of times, we see write ups dealing with this as separate issues: though at times it would be pure conjecture, but at least make an attempt
Don't tweak excessively: the review is about the equip, not what tweaks u can do to your system
Try to suggest other equip in the chain that would seem a good match
When reviewing Hi-rez digital, always always first comment on redbook CD capability (I have seen quite a few exceptions to this obvious rule!)
henryhk

Showing 1 response by cdc

Subjective rating scale as done by enjoythemusic
Tonality 85
Sub-bass (10 Hz - 60 Hz) 80
Mid-bass (80 Hz - 200 Hz) 90
Midrange (200 Hz - 3,000 Hz) 85
High-frequencies (3,000 Hz on up) 85
Attack 85
Decay 85
P.R.A.T (Pace, Rhythm, Acceleration, Timing) 85
Inner Resolution 80
Soundscape width front 85
Soundscape width rear 85
Soundscape depth behind loudspeakers 75
Soundscape extension into the room 80
Imaging 80
Fit and Finish 90
Self Noise 100
Value for the Money 100