Some famous reviewers have atrocious listening rooms!

Yes indeed, I too have had multiple conversations about reviewers' listening rooms with my audiophile buddies. The clutter, the tiny rooms, etc ... They look to be FAR from ideal. I'm assuming most of what they're doing is near field, otherwise the busy-ness of the spaces makes me wary of their reviews... Take everything with a grain (giant block) of salt.

I just finished Stereophile’s review of the Klipsch La Scala. Obviously we all know they are super sensitive, super dynamic & can crush just about any other speaker out there in terms of pure undistorted volume with not that many good watts. They only compared it to a 60 year old Altec Valencia! How about compared to speakers of a similar price range in terms of high frequency detail, imaging, low end detail ( did mention it cuts off around 50 hz). 

Funny. My brother just bought a mint pair with upgraded crossovers and powered by a Chinese variant of the LSA amp it just sounded slow, lethargic, and without resolution to me. It is incapable of boogie, of PRAT, of much other than tone. It reminds me of Grandpa's Buick Roadmaster badly in need of new shocks, struts, rubber, and an alignment. It reminds me of Koss 4AA headphones-the real sh*t in the day but that day is long gone. The S'Phile review? I suspect something is badly wrong in Denmark. Fish wrap. 

This seems to me like weighing yourself every morning on a scale that is off by 10 pounds.  So what, as long as it's consistent you will see if you are losing or gaining.

So (hopefully) they know how their room sounds and by extension they know what sounds better or worse.

You may punch holes in this very easily...don't bother.

Reviewers are "show girls" you'll never get what your expecting.

Use your own brain and ears.  'nuff said.

Regards,

barts 
 

Steven Guttenberg seems to live in a CVS breakroom's storage closet.

And may I repeat the nth time: so many audiophiles have the most "amazing" furniture and decoration worth 10s of dollars at a swap meet surrounding their 50+K equipment.

Is room acoustics important? Yes, but system synergy, level of components, quality of power, cables and vibration control are equally important.

I think that we have to acknowledge that different audiophiles claim to hear differently. I’m amazed at shows how audiophiles make claims about judging cables and electronics in horrible rooms.

I don’t know if they can actually hear THROUGH the crap or they are just suffering from self-delusion, but one thing I know for damn sure is I cannot.

So for me, that statement doesn’t match my reality. I have to have a good room first or the rest is nonsense.

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.

@mapman 

remember that one over the top review when jonathan skull announced to the world he removed his eyeglasses when listening and voila, everything sounded better and different!!! 🤣😂

It’s not just lousy rooms.   Do these people even have clean ears?   Who knows.  I guess some have better track records than others.  Some may even be superstars as advertised. 

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.

This is why I have measurements posted in my virtual system, anyone can just stick speakers in a room. To your point to call yourself a "reviewer" and not even have a professionally designed lab/studio is like quarterbacking the NY Giants from your sofa instead of the field, nuts.

Look how Darko posted his room treatment vendors in a video, nice:

Some of these reviewers are long term experts who I think could probably discern audio differences even in crappy rooms & maybe it’s better they don’t have “ perfect” highly conditioned listening spaces because most of us don’t either?

Many of the reviews I’ve read in the past few years leave me w/ many unanswered questions. I just finished Stereophile’s review of the Klipsch La Scala. Obviously we all know they are super sensitive, super dynamic & can crush just about any other speaker out there in terms of pure undistorted volume with not that many good watts. They only compared it to a 60 year old Altec Valencia! How about compared to speakers of a similar price range in terms of high frequency detail, imaging, low end detail ( did mention it cuts off around 50 hz). 
 

I guess it was just another glowing review for a company’s product that advertises regularly. The magazine took a substantial step down when Art Dudley left us. 

The way I see it is these reviewers with a large audience, many of whom will use the reviews to make a purchasing decision (hopefully along with more research) owe it to their readers to show them what their work space actually looks like.  Granted, not everything about how a room will affect the sound can be gleaned from a photo, but I would argue a lot could.

IMO, it’s like someone reviewing a Lamborghini writing about its acceleration, handling, braking and comfort, only to find out later that said reviewer never took the car out of their housing area or even first gear.  

I don’t know about his room, but Myles Astor has zero credibility with me. In a TAS review he stated the open E string on a 4-string bass (whether electric or acoustic---PLEASE stop calling an electric bass a bass guitar ;-) was located at 82Hz. It’s not, it’s at 41Hz. Where did Myles get that 82Hz figure? Ask him! And TAS technical editor Robert Harley didn’t catch it?!

Even worse, he described 82Hz as low bass. Not in this universe. Once again, an audiophile reviewer with no education in any technical aspects of hi-fi music reproduction. Embarrassing.

Just stop. You can repeat something false a million times and it still doesn’t make it true. I’ve written and told you before that I never wrote that statement. Not to mention that despite my request, you’ve never provided a citation to the referenced quote. You have the wrong person. Not to mention I haven’t written for TAS since 1990 and Frank Doris, not RH, was my editor. So you have that wrong too.

Now get your facts right before going online and slandering people.

@jjss49 You can see the full presentation on YouTube - “Reviewing Loudspeakers: Mesurements and Listening Tests”. The tests were conducted at Harmon, where factors such as volume were controlled. I don’t recall much detail in how they trained the Trained Listeners.

If you’re in the business of reviewing gear, listening in the same environment time after time and having a baseline is probably most important. Live sound guys who are hired to run sound in churches, clubs, concert halls talk about “ knowing the room.”  I suspect seasoned reviewers are the same, consciously or not. 

I recall an article where Fremer talked about the incoming AC service in his building as being compromised as it was literally hanging off the building. Repairs were done and he claimed his system sounded much better. I remember thinking "Does that negate all the reviews he did before the repair?

Another issue is when old ears are used to evaluate music without a disclaimer.

Another issue is when young ears are used to evaluate music without a disclaimer.

(In other words both has "issue" and a age could be interesting to have declared.)

@tcotruvo

Trained Listeners were by far the most reliable. Next, a group of Audio Retailers. Professional Audio Reviewers were third, but with about one-fifth the reliability of the Trained Listeners.

referring to your post, i am curious to know what defined the group of ’trained listeners’ in the listening tests?

Another issue is when old ears are used to evaluate music without a disclaimer.

Bigkidz I believe you.Fremmer knows what he is doing.

I recently watched a video on reviewing loudspeakers. In it an elaborate test of different listener groups reliability was conducted. Trained Listeners were by far the most reliable. Next, a group of Audio Retailers. Professional Audio Reviewers were third, but with about one-fifth the reliability of the Trained Listeners.

‘The study was done so that the participants had to rank various speakers. Those listeners that were more reliable more consistently ranked the speakers. So they didn’t rank speaker A high one minute, then ranked it low later on.

Professional Audio Reviewers might have skills independent of listening skills.

What you might find of much more interest or “ entertainment “, have a look see at the rooms TOP mastering people use….. My hero is Joe and all the work he does for Blue Note / Tone Poet…..

There are others…….

Enjoy the music

Not everyone is lucky enough to have a wife (or partner) who will allow an audio system to be a centerpiece in their home, with the space and comfort to enjoy music. I think many of the reviewers mentioned could have a better space to listen to music but would probably end up sleeping on the couch. 

Your room is the most expensive component in your system.

and as Sam Berkow often said, the only way to eq a room is with a sledge hammer.

No doubt, MQA sounds good in these reviewer’s rooms :-)

Not to defend Fremer, but walls of records, edge on, are a damned good start for treatment of the generic room.

For the purpose built room it's very different. There the dimensions have to be accurate to 0.125" (sic), and room treatment can be minuscule. The science, yes the science of good rooms was done at the School of Acoustics at Salford University, and the published research is there for all to use.

Most of the magazine reviewers have terrible rooms, some way too small, others with wood floors and they claim there is no bass, speakers aren’t setup correctly,  and most don’t have any treatments. The more credible reviewers on YouTube and the internet pay more attention to room size, setup, and treatments.

This past year, TAS reviewed a few products that were 6-digits claiming they were the best of the best (what’s new, every product they review is the best). But in this case, multiple rooms at last years axpona sounded terrible with these products in these rooms. Multiple sites on YouTube and the web stated that these rooms sounded terrible, so when TAS came out with their reviews of axpona, they created a new column of terrible sounding rooms which was new. They had to do this because the other reviewers did this before them. 
HiFi+ years ago showed each of their reviewers rooms with a description of what reviewer had along with room dime sound. The other mags attempted to do this but failed

Four years ago when we were house hunting, I’d go into whatever room I was thinking of making the music room and clap and listen. When we bought the house we’re in now, wall to wall pad and carpet went down in the future music room. Then came the furniture and some acoustic panels. It’s by no means perfect, but now it passes the clap test.

"Nowadays I might read or listen them now and then, but strictly for entertainment purposes only."

Yup!  That's why I read these posts every night. ;)

Actually there is a serious point being made here.  I read and see often the listening rooms you All have.  I'm jealous.  My house/cottage is literally 20' x 20'.  So, of course my system is in the living room with the speakers on each side of the TV and no room behind to do any kind of proper cable management.  Small odd shaped room to boot.  Seven foot ceiling.  Not much room for proper speaker/Me placement.  The AC was done in 1960 by non-contractor type people.  Everything is in no way near built to code standards and the AC outlets are two prong.  Nothing was designed(or even remotely thought of) for todays electronics.

Noise Floor?  Mute point in my house. I have a small gas heater in my living room to heat the whole house.  The gas hot water heater is next to it.  The fridge is only 12 feet away.  So, something is always making noise.

But!!  I rent.  I pay $350.00/mo. and that includes the gas and electric bills.  AAHHHH.  Life is good!

Lawrence From MI

a big part of being experienced in this hobby is understanding room interactions and how gear setup (most importantly the listening triangle and proximate room boundaries) affects how the sound is heard by the listener

with a good understanding of this, once seeing a room and the system set up within it (or some good pictures of it), one has a decent idea of how the rig will likely sound... not 100%, but i would say at the 60-70% level, assessed by experienced hands... of course, some difficult rooms can sound quite good if the owner knows how to configure the system within it, manage the deficiencies ...

all this said, this doesn’t make any reviewer’s work worthless... as in all situations where advice is being sought and given, the recipient is wise to understand where the advisor is coming from, the operating context and experiences that may shape the views and assessments given... a cancer surgeon will often advise resection as the best course of action, whereas the leading oncologist may lean towards chemotherapies... it's just human nature, predictive of how human experience is gained over time and how views are shaped

Several people here seem uneducated on what actually makes a room good for music reproduction. 

I suspect many listening rooms full of crap and that look messy may actually be reasonably good audio environments. With little repeated dimensions and/or room treatment there's less likelihood of strong resonances in a room.

Fremer's room is an Absolute mess, still, I bet it sounds pretty amazing.

Darko always seems to have a nice listening space IMO. It's never cluttered. His new apartment in Portugal is getting a nice room treatment.

Listening rooms are the hardest thing to get right. Anyone with mucho dinero can buy wonderfully expensive equipment. However, very few can have the dedication required to build a proper listening room. What a waste...

Fremer is a really good example.  He spent $2m+ (at retail, he never pays retail) on his system and $$$$$ on his power supply but listens in a small cave full of LPs and equipment.

Get your priorities right Mikey, especially now you're playing for the opposition.

@jayctoy - once you hear Fremer's set-up then you know exactly what he hears with his system and basically what he describes is what he actually hears.

BUT otherwise the cat is out of the bag.  AND if you actually notice, none of the speakers are actually set-up correctly.  That also is the issue when you go to a dealer or at a show.  Even the manufacturers do not know how to correctly set up their speakers.

Happy Listening.

Only audio gear of interest to me is the room. Everything else is easy enough.

Mike Lavigne is not a reviewer.Check his room.Agon member.

You can check Michael Fremmer too.Tell

me if it looks like nice to you?

@audiodwebe

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.

It’s not just their rooms.

It took me ages, far too long, to realise that none of their opinions count for much.

Most of them have vastly differing tastes to me (safe and boring audiophile fare) and I’m not too sure about their hearing either.

Or their sincerity.

Nowadays I might read or listen them now and then, but strictly for entertainment purposes only.

@ secretguy

There are some that go way too far with room treatments!

Spoiler alert: You don't need ridiculous looking "treatments" for good sound.

I went to visit a reviewers place , where his system are I don’t remember any acoustic treatments? But his systems sounds so musical and involving.

In my new book, "The Lucky Audiophile - Anecdotes from High End Audio" (Amazon) I share many pictures of my different listening rooms and equipment over the years.

Yes, the room makes a difference to the quality of sound and resolution, but I think critical listening skills and the ability to describe what you hear are more important. Like Herb and his room. Or REG and Myles Astor and their rooms.

always get info, if possible, on a reviewers listening room -- it is important context to their review output

the beloved herb reichert for instance... steve guttenberg has well documented herb’s apartment and the set up in his yt vids... it is basically semi nearfield listening with quite a lot of hard/reflective surfaces... that is important to know when reading herb’s words on gear...

Onhwy61, For sure you can’t tell much from looking at pictures, but I recall a favored reviewer waxing eloquently about the spatial qualities of a DAC as heard on one of his systems the photos of which cast serious questions about either what he actually heard or whether or not he had other motivations for giving an ’outstanding review' and recommendation (actually the DAC is/was excellent). His speaker set up had the speakers close to a back wall, one of the speakers (typical multi driver boxes) had no side wall reflections issues and the other speaker was within one foot or so of an untreated sidewall. A very poor set up IMHO if your seeking to maximize stereo imaging. FWIW.

You cannot hear how a room sounds by looking at pictures of the room.