The "how many reviews it got" rule


This is my rule of thump when I purchase components online
without having heard them first.  If a component received a
lot of reviews, chances are the component is very good.
I mean the component has to be good to attract a lot of
reviewers. Most reviewers probably wouldn’t
bother to review something he doesn’t like in the first place.
andy2

Showing 3 responses by fleschler

Art Dudley used to extol the virtues of EAR gear. Then he reviews their latest Classic CD player and said it sounds terrible (for the price) distorted while Atkinson supports that view with measurements. Sure, it was defective, putting out 6 volts instead of 2 volts. He sends it back and issues an update that it is good and should be in the company of similar priced single boxed players. No kidding. I own the EAR Acute and heard a stock Classic. It’s a great player with the stock tubes even (mine had to have NOS Amperex). The forum trolls were merciless saying how junky EAR equipment is and how they should know better than making defective equipment because of the review.

Yes Inna, it does seem like a lot of cash for a similar sound but one can purchase a used EAR Acute (strictly for CD playback) for $2K.

Sometimes the magazines go crazy for new technologies but downplay the negatives. High Fidelity cables have never sounded good in over a dozen very different systems I’ve heard them in. Yes, they have patented the heavy magnetic cable implementation, the bigger magnets, the more expensive (and the worst sounding).

Sometimes they leave out the required synergies necessary to make something sound great. B&W speakers (as well as Wilson and Magicos) need a TON of power to sound as good as the reveiewers say. No SETs or typical amps without great current reserves for them.

Also, back in the 90s, a Counterpoint Amp was deemed mediocre by RH and returned to the manufacturer. They said they changed it. He then gave it a big thumbs up stating how good it is. Turns out, Counterpoint didn’t change anything and resent it to him. You can’t trust most magazine reviewers.
The best sound I and all the critics in the past several years heard, were the Ultra 11 Von Schweikerts. I’m considering the VR55K at $50K-$60K for a smaller room than the showroom hall. How about the great sounding, efficient Lumenwhites, virtually unknown except at shows. Tannoys a big name but rarely do their big speakers get reviewed. These are companies with great, efficient speakers.
XTAC speakers commentary on why they are unique and superior to ALL other speaker designs (per the manufacturer). https://audiomachina.com/xtac/commentary/

I’d love to hear speaker engineers/designers comment, especially on the Time/Amplitude equation.

Here's the extract from his white paper on what a speaker should be:
1. Full frequency range without the use of different driver types or any crossovers. 2. Adequate Dynamic Range and S/N ratio. 3. Absence of diaphragm flexure or breakup in the audible range. 4. Idealized acoustic radiation pattern. 5. Real-world room installation and performance optimization. 6. Reasonable manufacturing and installation difficulty. 7. Reasonable cost.