Reviewing the Reviewers


Check out http://www.high-endaudio.com/index_ac.html and follow go to the "Audio Critique" page, and then to "Reviewing the Reviewers" page.

This site is run by a man named Arthur Salvatore. He has written much about all aspects of audio on his site...his recommended components, his recommended recordings, his store, etc. He writes like a lawyer, but it seems like he actually has integrity...he must not be a lawyer. :-) Seriously...anyone interested in a point by point analysis of modern audio reviews should check out this site. He's analyzed many reviews and developed his own list of "rules" that most reviews tend to follow (and he's dead-on)...usually because the writer doesn't want to say anything negative about any particular sponsor's (or buddy's) product.

He received an angry letter from Michael Fremer. The letter and his analysis are included on the site. It makes for a long read, but it can be fascinating. Besides...it's information than every audio joe (or jane) should be aware of when they read any review...especially when they're planning on pruchasing a product highlighted by a particular review.

If you want to see textbook examples of his "rules" put into practice, just check out any Soundstage review written by Marc Mickelson.

Enjoy...
phild

Showing 3 responses by djjd


This one's a real head-spinner on several levels: Would it be an example of irony or hypocrisy? Or perhaps even ironic hypocrisy?
Tubegroover - You missed my point in this thread too. My question about irony and hypocrisy was not directed at Mr. Salvatore's article. My question was directed at some of the remarks made in this very thread -- and in other recent threads -- where a few of Audiogon’s “anointed" engage in precisely the kind of behavior they complain of here. I didn’t think I would need to explain, but if you read through this thread again, the hypocrisy should be obvious. If it’s not, then read the thread “Trelja in New York” in the context of this thread.

The shallowest layer of (situational) irony I see in this thread is that by trying to discredit certain reviewers, some of the posters have used the same objectionable “review” methods they so strongly object to and, in so doing, they ended up discrediting themselves -- the opposite of the intended outcome. Hoist with their own petards, so to speak. (There is also a nice example of dramatic irony here, since the posters in question could not see they were engaging in the very same conduct they complained of, while some readers in the Audiogon audience could see it.)

A deeper level of irony is that by posting “reviews of the reviewers,” the posters opened themselves up to being similarly reviewed and charged with the very same crimes -- another contrary and unintended outcome. For instance, I think the following remarks made by Trelja in his first post above apply with equal force to Trelja himself: “He is continuously on his high horse. One that lectures and patronizes, rife with condescension. As if he is somehow gifted, or better than the great unwashed. Able to hear better than others. Able to judge a component better than others. ... Bragging about his reviewing talents and experience one minute; chiding those less experienced in the field... In fact, the whole review of this product was an utter waste of time. One in which several variables were juggled without the slightest thought about them.... How could the conclusions of this review elicit anything along the lines of credibility? His anger ... is of no surprise. His indignation is a running theme of his personality. Witness his retort.... To say that he was less than courteous would be a supreme understatement.”

Not my words, nor would I choose to use such derisive language to criticize anyone else. However, because Trelja chose to use these words to attack another person, I don’t have a problem reflecting them back at the source. When in Rome....

In lieu of Trelja’s own words, I probably would have used words something like the following to review him as an Audiogon reviewer: I think many of Trelja’s posts are intelligent, insightful, and informative, and they have therefore contributed positively to the discussions here. But some of his other posts have been mean-spirited, irresponsible, and perhaps even libelous, and this has significantly undermined his credibility in my book. I think Audiogon would be a better place without those kinds of posts, though it would probably be a worse place without Trelja’s participation and the sharing of his knowledge in his more balanced posts.

In musical terms, I’d say that, at times, Trelja is way too forward and aggressive -- it's difficult to listen to such “in your face” presentation. Such an attacking presentation lends new meaning to the phrase “Hey Joe, where you goin’ with that gun in your hand?” Sometimes he’s very strident and harsh like a bad solid state amp; in such cases, he can veil over relevant details even though the details are probably all “in there” and capable of being presented objectively if only he didn’t have the occasional bias or imbalance in his source material. Could be made smoother, warmer, and more detailed by a relatively minor adjustment of position or orientation. Unfortunately, this adjustment isn't likely to happen since he seems firmly bolted to his present position. Too bad for us. To take the edge off, perhaps we could try running him with a set of good tubes (e.g., a six pack of NBB Fat Tire Ale).

This is my attempt at a partial review of a few of the reviewers on Audiogon (the foregoing remarks apply to some of the other posters as well). It is intended to be thought-provoking and humorous, albeit in a poignant way. Better, me thinks, than hammering away with unexplained -2,-2 ratings. Done with “reviewer” issues I hope; back to the music.

Still to come: The potential for recursive irony as other reviewers now review my hypocritical review of those who hypocritically “reviewed the reviewers.” Dizzying indeed.

Don
Hi Trelja - Thanks for the challenge; I like a good argument. It would be easily to get into a shouting match with you, but I think there’s too much hostility in the world already, and I don’t want to add any more. So I’ll try to keep it civil.

What would you like to know about me? Here’s all you should need to know for your next salvo. I’m probably not as smart as I think I am, but I hope I’m smarter than I sometimes act. Admittedly over-educated, but I don’t use this against others (some of the smartest people I’ve met never had the chance to go to college). I spend most of my time working on ecological problems, but I feel we’re now losing the battle, and the world looks pretty dark to me these days. Music helps.

I don’t work for any audio-related dealer or manufacturer. Never have, probably never will. No relationships with anyone in the audio business either (though I’ve made a few friends on Audiogon I hope). I don’t get any "endorsement" freebies, deals, or discounts on audio gear from any dealers or manufacturers. Never have, probably never will. I buy all my gear new or used just like many of the other people here. My average income is less than $20k a year; always has been since I got my first job pumping gas at $2/hour. Not a trust-fund baby. Still paying off student loans. At my urging, my parents have been spending what little prospect I have of an inheritance. Never owned a new car or a house. Probably never will. Not impressed by money; detest greed and waste. Impressed by good music and other things sublime or beautiful (including a clever idea or a good argument). Spend most of my spare change on music. Not a saint; make my share of mistakes (including a few whoppers). Not afraid to admit I'm wrong.

Been an audiophile since mid 1970’s. Still have my original top-of-the-line Akai 8-track player/recorder (boxed up now with a bunch of old tapes) and Nakamichi RX-505 cassette deck (sees occasional use and remains enjoyable). I don’t profess to know more than you or anyone else here; I’ve actually learned quite a bit at Audiogon (even a little from you). I think everyone has something positive to contribute, even if they don’t always say things I can agree with. I think every audio product on the market (well almost every one) has some merit when used in the right system or with the right recordings or by the right listener. I think people should be nice to each other. I try to set a positive example. I like Audiogon because there are some genuinely classy and intelligent people here -- a really interesting and diverse community of folks; most everyone is respectful and interested in learning more; a quantum leap above the other sites, I’d say. I think you (and a few others) could be more polite in the way you present some of your opinions on Audiogon. But I know I can’t control that. I will nevertheless continue to give the occasional nudge. Too bad if that chaps you or seems condescending (probably is - no apologies).

From your line of questioning, you probably think I’m pissed at you for criticizing certain products in your post “Trelja in NY”. Actually not the case though. I can’t say what you did or didn’t hear at the NY show, and it was never my point to debate you on that. For instance, I own Talon speakers and completely disagreed with your characterization of them, but I didn’t try to dispute what you say you heard because I couldn’t go to the show to hear that system in that room for myself. (If you’d like to engage in a debate on this product, I’m ready and willing, but Talon products can readily defend themselves when auditioned in a proper setting.) If you read my NY post again, I think you’ll see I didn’t actually defend Talon or any other manufacturers at the NY show. If some manufacturers didn’t set up their systems properly to show their gear in a favorable light, they deserve some criticism. In your NY show thread, a few people criticized some of the same products you did, and even though I didn’t agree with some of what they said either, I didn’t have a problem with their remarks because they generally allowed for the possibility that room set-up or other factors may have contributed to what they heard. My problem with your NY review was that you didn’t allow for such possibilities (except, as I recall, for saying some products other than Talon were played too loud). This seemed unfair and lacking in objectivity, and I said so. I know I’m flogging a dead horse with this -- asked and answered -- but you wanted me to put it all out on the table, so here it is again.

In addition, when I read your post about the NY show, I also recalled the very harsh comments you made about Michael Fremer in this “Reviewing the Reviewers” thread. Your NY show review therefore struck me as being extremely hypocritical, as did your scathing remarks about Fremer. I singularly detest hypocrisy (sometimes guilty of it myself, but at least I try very hard to avoid it). It always eats away at me until it boils over and I have to say something about it.

So I vented. And I did so knowing this would subject me to retaliatory attacks from you and a few others like you. I didn’t hide behind the rating system; I did what I think all others here should do -- when something’s bothering them, spit it out in the most polite way they can. What I said apparently bothered a few people, and they said so. Good for them. Their comments didn’t hurt me (I expected some backlash), though it did compel me to carefully re-examine my remarks in the context of their statements. After doing so, I still feel comfortable with what I said and how I said it. If I didn’t, I’d offer you and the others an apology. But I think I'm right on this one, so I stand by what I've said, with no reservations or regrets, and you’ll therefore get no apology from me.

The instant thread asked for “reviews of the reviewers.” I think my remarks about you (and a few other Audiogoners) fall within the scope of this topic. When criticizing someone else, you’ve gotta be prepared to reap what you sew. Doesn’t feel so good when you’re on the receiving end, does it? Nonetheless, I don’t think I was overly hostile or mean-spirited in what I’ve said thus far. (Other than using the word “hypocrisy” and mentioning that you’ve lost my respect, the only mean words I directed at you were your own, and even then, I found more polite substitutes to use.) I also tried to add some levity to my remarks (bad analogies and good ironies are always good for a laugh). Finally, I tried to provide an example of how someone can disagree and even criticize without being mean or vicious. Again, I don’t expect you to follow the example -- you can keep saying whatever you want to say in whatever way you want to say it. But maybe someone else will hear what I’m trying to say, and perhaps this will make Audiogon a slightly less antagonistic place for those who are put-off by libelous, slanderous, or disparaging comments like some of your’s. (For those of you out there who actually enjoy reading vitriolic attacks, I might suggest getting some counseling or watching some pro-wrestling or daytime talk-shows to address that craving. Music is supposed to be fun, not hostile.)

Trelja - if you have any other questions about me or about why I said what I did, I’ll be glad to see if I can provide some more answers for you. However, I don’t think any more explanation will resolve this controversy, and I think we’re now trying to squeeze water out of a stone. So if it's OK with you, I'd prefer to get back to music. But, by all means, keep blasting away if that'll do it for you.

Don