2. misc-audio
  3. 1315276819

What does it take to qualify as a reviewer?

Posted in this thread earlier;
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?fcabl&1313300093&read
some participants said they are reviewers.

One said;

"I myself was once asked if I would be interested in reviewing for one of the publications mentioned above, by its editor. I wasn't, but also declined because I didn't feel that I was qualified: not as an audiophile, nor technically, nor as a writer."

Another said:

"let us consider what might "qualify" someone as a reviewer. Would it be an EE degree, years of experience in audio, experience as a dealer in audio, knowing many manufacturers, being wealthy enough to not be bought to give a good review to get the component at a good price, being articulate, hearing well in tests, etc.?"

And he goes on to make some other interesting remarks in the same post, in my opinion anyway.

Out of respect to the OP and not to further divert the thread from its' original theme, I began this thread.

So, what qualifications, experience, education, characteristics etc., do you believe one should possess and needs to be a reviewer?

It would be interesting to hear from everyone for I myself haven't really thought about it and can't offer an answer. Perhaps others ideas could help us form an opinion.

Best,

Dave
corazon

Showing 3 responses by mapman

mapman's avatar
mapman
22,638 posts
 
1) Good writer
2) Good ears
3) experience with audio
4) desire to keep up with new developments
5) a basic technical background to be able to distinguish a sound technical approach from gibberish
6) be as unbiased as possible

At least in theory, this is how it should work.

Of course we all know the real world seldom reflects theory exactly.
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,638 posts
 
"Look at a cross section of the "reviewers" we read (well you read, not me); bearded old fat men, failed college professors, preachers, and midgets are only some of the cast of characters."

Midgets?

Really? Really?

I guess they use a taller chair when auditioning.

No Brad Pitt-like guys reviewing audio, huh?

Or Angelina Jolie types?

That might be good for sales!
mapman's avatar
mapman
22,638 posts
 
"I don't get the difference between people on Amazon, Crutchfield and this site."

People on this site on average are more OCD when it comes to audio than people on those sites.

For better or for worse....

Also those sites track cumulative average ratings for products across many reviews, which is a good thing in terms of being able to identify useful trends and patterns.

Audiogon does not track any metrics regarding reviews or any other qualitative aspect of the gear featured. Synthesis by users is harder and more subjective. The only metrics available are average sale prices of used gear (for a fee).

THis is a very static site. It must be doing well because it has not changed or evolved much that I can see over teh several years that I have noticed. Almost every other commercial site on teh internet does evolve, change and improve. Audiogon is a very interesting beast! Much like the high end gear featured on it.
More to discover