Some famous reviewers have atrocious listening rooms!


It’s almost sad, really.  Some reviewers I’ve been reading for decades, when showing their rigs on YouTube, have absolutely horrible rooms.  Weird shaped; too small w/o acoustic treatment; crap all over the place within the room or around the speakers; and on and on.  
 

Had I known about the listening rooms they use to review gear in the past, I would not have placed such a value on what they were writing.  I think reviewers should not just list the equipment they used in a given review, but be required to show their listening rooms, as well.
 

Turns out my listening room isn’t so bad, after all.  

 

 

128x128audiodwebe

Showing 1 response by dayglow

Reviewers are just for entertainment purposes only and yes, many are not entertaining. Room acoustics has been the "hot" topic for several years now and an easy way to criticize other Audiophiles expensive systems. Is room acoustics important? Yes, but system synergy, level of components, quality of power, cables and vibration control are equally important. There is the idea by some a Hegel/Source Point 10 system in a treated room can outperform a Burmester/Magico system in an untreated room which is pure nonsense. More people need to get out demo and actually hear equipment from the budget Hegel to Burmester level of gear to actually have valid opinions. In Summary who cares about Fremers room, Darko and electronic music, Cheap Audio Man pushing junk gear and Andrew and Wife claiming the Polk R700 is an endgame speaker.