On a curious note they reviewed the totl Bryston amp a couple of months ago and it did not get a glowing review. Well, the next month there were no Bryston ads !!!!. Makes ya wonder. I just wonder if any of the mags can give an unbiased review and still keep the ads? Corrupt as Wall Street huh? Pay pay me and I wont tell. Mike
Yes , guilty , I do rely on reveiws as a starting point . AT my age you can only tote home so many two three hundred pound pairs of speakers . When you read many reveiws about a product and they mostly comply , from reviewers you have read for many years , you can narrow down the field . And to be honest , I can't recall being lead down the wrong path doing things this way . Besides I'm quite satisfied with the speakers we have in are main residence , they won't me going anywhere soon . I heard Jenny Lewis's Acid Tongue is avalible on LP . Happy listing .
Mr T, your comments are right on, however, I find it unfortunate when I read where a reviewer pans or praises something based on hearing it through a system that is in some way suboptimal for the piece being reviewed. In Stereophile, at least you get measurements that JA tries to correlate with the reviewer's impressions.
a review is dependent upon the rest of the chain. thus, a reviewer can affect the outcome by selecting the rest of the components to create a favorable or unfavorable result.
there is nothing wrong with saying that given a reviewer's reference compoents, he/she heard such and such./ with other components a different outcome would ensue.
Tmsorosk, "At least stereophile told it the way it was"
you are so funny making such a statement but then again I read a few of your other threads and you seem to rely on reviews and not your own ears which tells me allot, because you seem to rely on reviews so much have you read all the other glowing reviews out there in relation to these specific amps?
Did you hear that set-up personally?
I have the latest Bryston 28 Squared in my own set-up and I know of many others who are enjoying so what are you sugesting?
In the end as many have written above reviews are entertainment and that's it right or wrong but they do have a large influience on specific individuals and I believe you fall into the specific category.
P.S. I prefer the new Salon's by far over the originals, would I own either now? NO
At least stereophile told it the way it was and did it knowing it would cost them . And I will have to agree with them on there findings , this was not Brystons best product , and if you read Brystons Chris Russell's rebutal in stereophile's January 2010 edition page 139 you will no why .
The press is very powerful. Reviewers can makes us feel good about a product we own or want to buy, but they can also make us feel bad as well for buying a certain product. Suddenly, it is no longer about how it sounds or if we like it.
I had some speakers once that the respected reviewers disdained. I loved them and to me they compared well against the magazines' Class B rated products.
Eventually, I changed out my system to get a more "respected" brand name speaker. It ended up costing me a lot of money and time to get my system back to the level I felt I was at before making the change.
Since I have never owned or reviewed Bryston, I can not comment on them; however, I have owned and auditioned equipment reviewed be Stereophile. There have been times when I thought a component should have gotten an "A" rating as opposed to a "B", but in general I have found their reviews to be accurate.
OK, so perhaps reviewers don't exactly "buy" the gear they keep around for reference. But they do keep certain pieces around to compare with review equipment, and it appears to me that they try to keep gear that is particualrly good at one or two things, and/or better than average overall for a particular retail price point, even if this "choice" is colored by manufacturer "discounts".
That said, I don't always agree with reviewer's "choices" based on my (very) limited experience. But it is a "choice" on their part nevertheless. I guess I doubt very much that reviewers universally accept, keep and tout crap gear just because it is free, or worse, incentivised.
Agree with those members who believe that audiophile mag component reviews are for mere entertainment & glossy pix. Nothing more! Read them with this in mind. I know a reviewer who works for a audio e-magazine & he told me that the editor of that e-magazine denied him any further opportunity to write component reviews after that editor read some of my friend's reviews-to-be-published & saw just how candid my friend was re. the audio components. My friend wrote it like it was calling good, good & bad, bad. That just did not fly at this e-magazine! So, you can imagine how it is at S'phile, TAS & other glossy rags......
As another member wrote, learn to read between the lines - that's key! You can tell if the component is good, bad or ugly in its sonics. FWIW. YMMV.
Do you actually believe reviewers buy equipment? Their equipment is either on long term or permanent loan. When a reviewer says he likes it so much he is going to buy it, you can bet it was a gift.
In the late '90s a well known and trusted reviewer started his own magazine. In his review of a speaker he said he was buying the review sample because he liked them so much. The speakers immediately showed up in a classified ad for 50% of retail. I recognized his phone number because I sent him interconnects which were never returned.
It is unfortunate when a product receives a bad review. It is unfortunate for the manufacturer and for anyone that owns that product because it would make it impossible to sell. Maybe the manufacturers should be more careful about what reviewer they send their products to. If you have a product like Bryston don't send it to a reviewer that only reviews the most expensive equipment because that is what he will compare your product to and if he mainly listens to tubes, forget it. It's all relative.
So, who is at fault in the case of the Bryston amp? Bryston didn't like the review, so they cancelled their ads or Bryston stopped advertising and got a bad review? Which came first?
The problem with reviews is that they are just not very accurate in that they paint a product with a very small brush, their room, a few amps or preamps... rarely do they use a preamp from the same mauufacturer, their favorite cables may not work with everything, even if you need a wall street bonus to pay for them. Thus, the MF review of Bryston did not impress me in a negative way. I just think MF failed to examine the amp more thoroughly and give the readership a more complete review. Before a negative review occurs, the magazine needs to realize the consequences of the review, and try to find other speakers, preamps, cables, etc. to optimize the product. The manufacturer should give a list of speakers which will or known to work well, and provide a preamp with the amp. This is just good service to the readers. I think they (reviewers)just get lazy, and use what is on hand,whether it be good or bad in synergy. As far as Bryston is concerned, I like their sound. I have had the 4BSST, have listened to the 14BSST, which did get a good review in stereophile, as did the CD player and DAC, and their warranty is first rate. I bought them because they were very musical. Try the 4BSST with the Aerial 10T, a quicksilver preamp or Bryston preamp, and the 7BST is also good with this speaker and there is magic. I also have used the 4BSST on top and 14BSST or 7BST on bottom with the MAggie 3.6, and this was also sheer magic with dynamics to spare. The bottom line, Bryston may not work with all other speakers, preamps, etc., like everyting else. Matching is what keeps us searching...One bad review, I don't think Bryston will slow down. I tend to find reviews like one brief snapshot, nothing more, nothing less. Always trust your ears. I think MF would agree. He heard what he heard. If I get 7BSST2 monos, I won't be getting his speakers.....
FWIW, I have work in the wine industry for over 15 years now and I can tell you that the wine rags, especially Wine Spectator, are notoriously pay-for-play. Advertise and you get a lot of your products reviewed.
>>04-04-10: Knownothing I usually think that if you want to know what reveiwers really think, look at what they end up buying for themselves<<
That's an excellent point but please keep in mind what they buy is usually at a highly discounted price. The real question is would they buy the component at full retail? We will never know that.
It is also quite common, more than most folks realize, for reviewers to pay absolutely nothing for a given component. I represented a company some years ago who made it a practice to give the reviewer each component reviewed gratis. Count me out of that game.
Mitch2 hit it on the head. Want a bad reveiw? Just look at what pieces of gear from well-known manufacturer's don't ever get reveiwed by any of the big magazines. Probably a reason that they don't, since most reviewers attend the big electronics shows and smaller events around the country where they listen to gear and, by their own admission, screen what they're going to look at in more detail.
So, the Bryston amp must have peaked somebody's interest, and then it didn't pan out under closer scrutiny. Interesting, because other Bryston gear has been receiving rave reviews lately, especially their small integrated, CD player and DAC. In any case, I read the original review and Manufacturer's rebuttle with some interest, thinking this must be have been a real dilema for the editors.
I usually think that if you want to know what reveiwers really think, look at what they end up buying for themselves. I don't always agree with their choices, but at least you know where they stand on that particular piece.
Audiophile Consumer Reports? Take the subscription cost for CR and multiply that by the ratio of their subscriber base to that of Stereophile or TAS. Think it will fly?
Gotta agree with Cmalak. One way magazines get around it is to pre-screen products and then only review those products that are going to get either a positive, or very positive, review. Since the advertisers primarily fund the magazines, and certain readers are going to complain either way, I see no upside to publishing negative reviews. In reading reviews, I look just as hard at the compatabiity of the partnering review equipment, and the reviewer's listening preferences, listening room and experience with similar equipment, as I do at what they say. My approach is to read the magazines for entertainment, take the reveiws with a grain of salt, and base final buying decisions on my own ears and listening preferences.
I've been saying this for years and it's never been more evident. As a matter of fact one of their staff called me out on this during a phone call. I stood my ground.
With all of the dirt, politics, and money in play I wouldn't trust any of these clowns reviewing a hearing aid for grannie.
Back in the day when brick and mortar audio stores could be found in almost every town, I heard the Bryston gear here and there but never really liked it.
I can be swayed but in the end I believe only my own ears. They can write whatever they want. I'm wondering how any high-end hifi company can stay in business these days with so few Salons to visit for an audition.
If readers truly want non-ad supported magazines that offer professional and non-biased or at least non-influenced reviews, then put your money where your mouth is and be prepared to pay for such a publiucation through much higher subscription fees.
You cannot have it both ways!
I'm with you on that one. The only mag I keep subscribing to is an ad-free HiFi Critic from the UK.
As Rick said, are you saying that there is corruption in the audio press? Shocking, just so shocking! Before long people will expect the New York Times to be honest and truthful, which of course, will never happen.
Probably not a lot of Bryston advertising in Stereophile these days. I like reading Stereophile, but that magazine is HIGHLY influenced by advertising, among other things. One must CAREFULLY read between the lines of the equipment reviews to extract exactly what they mean. Also, for the life of me, I cannot figure out why they would give a class B, C, or D rating to a product when a cheaper product has achieved a higher rating. They should merely state ""the following products were reviewed and are not recommended at this time because better sound can be achieved with products of lower cost". That would push manufactures to either improve their products or lower their prices. Wouldn't that be nice? Just my rant. Thanks for listening.
Stereophile reviews have never been very reliable, but they ARE very powerful. The sad part is they can make or break a company with their reviews.
Come to think of it Bryston never did get great reviews. In fact they currently have a better following than ever. Most of my friends use Bryston amps for subwoofers and I have heard Maggies demoed with Bryston amps with good results. I said good, not great.
In the past Bryston was known for their reliability and 20 year warranty.
All the bitching and moaning about the high-end audio mags is a bit juvenile. In their current business model (ad-supported that is), customers should understand that you are not going to get an unbiased review of equipment and learn how to read between the lines. There are positive reviews and then there are really positive reviews. It's like Wall Street stock research. Please tell me how many stocks get rated Sell vs. the much more popular Buy or Hold ratings?
If readers truly want non-ad supported magazines that offer professional and non-biased or at least non-influenced reviews, then put your money where your mouth is and be prepared to pay for such a publiucation through much higher subscription fees.
I went to the show in Jacksonville last month and there was a panal of 3 caps that bosted how they were the best reviewers on the planet. Online reviewers were crap and didn't know squat. Peacock feathers all over the room if you ask me.
$$$ is the bottom line and I would trust the online reviewers over the big $$$ Mag. reviewers anyday.
Reading my notes, AS mag only has one superstar reviewer and you can not build a mag around one superstar was said by the peacocks.
Always let another man/woman praise you/your works and life will find that you will be exalted in due season. Sounding your own horn has a uncertain sound to it.
let's examine this from the manufacturer's side. if you give an ad to an ad agency and they do a bad job on the ad, you will no longer do business with them.
if stereophile presents one of their products in a manner which will reduce sells, Bryston will consider that stereophile is hurting their business and not advertise.
it is unfortunate that business relationships are in such a state, but that's the way it is.
if you don't take ads, you can say anything you want about a product. but then again , you could get sued.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
