@jperry Understood. You don’t read reviews, period.
When you said, "Don’t look at youtube reviews of HiFi equipment" I thought you were singling out Youtube.
I seen now you meant "Don’t look at reviews of HiFi equipment."
Sorry I missed that.
What, in your opinion, should the rules be for YouTube Reviews?
Recently, the OCD Hifi channel posted a David vs. Goliath takedown of Constellation. He does not own the unit, has none to handle personally, and bases his critique upon his examination of publicly available photos and their website patter. His video reads Constellation the riot act for their paltry construction and then questions their chutzpah for putting lipstick on a pig and suckering people in. He then contrasts the Constellation by comparing it to Jeff Rowland’s stuff, which his dealership carries.
Personally, I don’t own Constellation nor would I pay $55k for an amp. But I’m wondering what folks here — with intimate knowledge of the differences between seeing photos and handling gear -- think about this kind of takedown.
I’m imagining a spectrum of argument, pro and con this video.
On one end of the spectrum, one might argue for the OCD guy — "Look," one might say, "this is just such an easy target that all he’s doing is calling out a scam based on evidence that is so obvious that anyone could see it. OCD has Constellation dead to rights and he just bothered to make it interesting with a video. He doesn’t need better evidence to do such an obvious takedown. This is called "market correction"." Or words to that effect.
On the other end, one might say, "A channel with 11k subscribers had some duty of due diligence. A take-no-prisoners critique of a product requires that he at least have one to listen to, open up, etc. His willingness to draw a contrast with his own line of products is more than a convenient point of comparison of his video — it’s the main point, however disguised. What this amounts to is an unfair takedown of a product and company to help boost his own sales."
Or maybe there are takes in between?
In short, here I’m wondering about these questions:
"What kind of evidence is necessary for a public-facing critique?"
"What are the responsibilities of a public-facing review?"
"What kinds of reviews are appropriate for dealers to do?"
Be interested to hear from those in the industry, consumers, or reviewers on this question.
71 responses Add your response
I'm not blaming anything. It just seems like a complete waste of time. The only way to meaningfully evaluate equipment in my experience is listening.
Seems premature to blame the medium. There's a huge difference between, say, Darko, and many others. What one says ≠ how one says it, right? |
No doubt. I have my own analysis but don't know what others think. That's why I'm asking. You make a good point about Curl, and I agree!
Seems premature to blame the medium. There's a huge difference between, say, Darko, and many others. What one says ≠ how one says it, right? Then again, people used to suspect the "novel" or even the printed word. |
@jperry +10............. |
His take down appeared to be somewhat on point, though those so called "industrial" power supply capacitors are every bit as good as used as anything with an exotic audio name on it. The build quality of the Constellation stuff did look pretty poor, and the transformers undersized. Looked to be more marketing amps than audiophile amps. When you have people convinced that the wire connecting to the amp is more important than what is inside, anything is possible. |
The truth for me is when I see anything that cost more than I paid for a house, 25 years ago and all they do is make speakers WORK. I gotta ask myself a question, should I care what anyone has to say for, against or can't make up their mind about a 55K amp? I don't even read articles about such nonsense. 50K DACs, 59K Cables, 30K preamp, 300-900K + for speakers.. I wish everyone well that likes that type of stuff. I'll take a Rolls over any and all of it put together with a chauffeur/carpenter/doctor/mechanic/astronaut/bodyguard/10 to go along with it.. If you don't mind.. |
@hilde45 , it is up to the individual to make his own analysis. This would only be useful if you were intending on buying such an amp which few of us are. I think it is in poor taste for store owner to dis someone else's product especially if John Curl is one of the designers. He is not known for making clunkers. |
Yes.? The requirements are that you agree with YouTube.. Maybe YouTube doesn’t like Constellation. Who knows? We now live in a time where opposing views are not allowed. Do you really think that this is only involving politics? Ask Mike Lindell, who’s products were pulled from all the big Corp box stores. I’m sure there are others. But the point is that a level playing field where all views are heard and given consideration is gone. This will not stay strictly in the political field.. On a lighter note, why would anyone pay attention to someone who named their business for a mental disorder...ocd?
|
| Post removed |
Should this be about Youtube, specifically, they have certain threshold requirements that must be abided by. Some may wonder why they do the banning thing, but I think that has to do with deliberate misinformation regarding Covid and similar subjects. Politics. Any person providing a critique must have sufficient experience with and use of the object (service, whatever) in order to put themselves out as a credible authority. Any conflict of interest must be disclosed, and I would go further to require any communication with all the relevant parties to be disclosed. I think that would pass any test of credibility. So, the person here ought to have used one of his three remaining neurons and asked a person he wasn't associated with and with no conflicts and with experience etc to do the "review". Not perfect, but ever so slightly better. Anything less than this and it doesn’t pass the pub test. For without that, it could be a parody or malicious or any other rubbish that is protected by the US constitution. I’m deliberately avoiding the publisher/platform issue, despite I think that being very important. |