The review wehave been promising is up
who da ho? who be pimpin’? you callin ME a HO? man you da HO and yo mama da HO MAMA ok i got that outta my system, thank you now @twoleftears -- throw away your gear stat, and call audiotroy so they can sell you a whole new rig that won’t sound broken... man you do not know what you are missin out on... 😂🤣😆🤗
|
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/bricasti-m3-w-network-card-vs-usb yo yo whodat ho? 🤣😂🙄😪 |
my take, just one person’s opinion, a person who likes this place... @audiotroy is an aggressive, vocal seller here in this forum, jumps in and sells on numerous user threads... and though they disclose who/what they are when they post, in my opinion, what they do here is NOT OK -- let’s take it to an extreme... someone posts a question here on how to make a set of vandy 2ce’s work in their room... then seven retailers jump in, say ’hey man, ditch those lame-ass speakers, i sell these great xxx-yyy-zzz, greatest thing since quad esl’s, they will embarrass your crappy old vandy’s’ -- see the problem that arises? .... there is good reason why in the good ol’ days (not that long ago actually), when industry folks did this ho-ing here on the users forum they were quickly told to stop it... in my view, we shouldn’t lower our standards to where this behavior is accepted ... just cuz they say they are sellers doesn’t make it ok that they pollute the discussion threads repeatedly as for TAS and how/what they write in reviews ... we should still read these, as any published info, even if colored by commercial incentives, can be indeed useful info -- but we should just understand how this industry works, it has been this way for decades since stereophile and tas and many others have gotten popular and become ’brands’ of their own as industry publications aimed at the consumer ... they are advertising driven, that is their bread and butter, we the end users are the targets of the advertising... it is a mutually beneficial eco system where reviews are used to support advertising, in turn to sell gear to end users, usually through retailers online or physical... published reviews, even relatively weak, low-accountability ones without comparisons like those in TAS, are real work to do, and these people gotta eat, be paid for their work, so it is just how the game is played... tas needs to survive financially like any other publication and its not easy ... we as subscribers pay almost nothing to read it... in my view, there is no fault in this, we as consumer just need to clearly understand the ’wiring diagram’ and see these reviews for what they are, and not be naive.... once understood, we can understand better why there are so few negative reviews, negativity on any product is stated extremely subtlely, few comparisons are made - it makes the money machinery work .... this is no different for youtube reviews, asr reviews, part time audiophile reviews -- each has their economic/financial wiring diagram... all try at some level to be honest, have integrity... but there are always degrees of this, life is shades of grey, no clear cut black and white, nobody is pure... we as users just need to be aware of this... sorry for this long one... |
dave, no apology needed for mis-spelling, my smart-alek post wasn’t picking on that - i empathize re your struggles post-stroke, and wish you all the best on regaining good health my point was just to reinforce what i posted on earlier, about reviewers and what incentivizes them, and how difficult it is to be entirely objective and not become co-opted by commercial advantages the role affords... be it accommodation pricing, long-term or permanent ’loans’ of gear, and so on... my hope is also that you as a forum member will focus on mainly providing useful new info for the benefit of the end users who come here to become informed, and keep the frontal selling tactics to a minimum cheers and best wishes
|
