2. amps-preamps
  3. 180737-107

What should be mandatory in every professional published review-

When testing a company's newest amp, preamp, etc, and it is a refinement of a prior product that was on the market, ie, a Mark II, an SE version, a .2 etc, it should be mandatory that the review includes a direct comparison with the immediate predecessor. IMHO, it's not enough to know ion the product is good; it's also important to know if there is a meaningful difference with the immediate predecessor.

I'm  fan of Pass Labs, and I just looked at a review of an XP22 preamp. I find it very disturbing that there was no direct comparison between the XP22 and the XP20. And this lack of direct comparison is ubiquitous in hi-end published reviews, across all brands of gear tested. I don't blame the gear manufacturers, but rather the publications as I view this as an abdication of journalistic integrity.

 

Opinions welcome- 

128x128zavato

Showing 2 responses by 1971gto455ho

1971gto455ho's avatar
1971gto455ho
405 posts
 

Wow sts… poked that bear didn’t ya Lol. Perhaps one should review burgers and fries then they just get fat probably retaining their sense of humour.

Cheers

 

1971gto455ho's avatar
1971gto455ho
405 posts
 

Would Seem the General consensus is Research yourself, listen to your own hands on hearing. Not all reviewers are bloated blowhards that said who cares it’s you that has to be happy and that’s what matters. IMO we’re all Professionals when it comes to liking what you hear, no course involved with that, Don’t have to train a monkey to eat a banana, why should we pay a b…hard to tell us what they hear. Now if it’s specification technical that has value, but it still boils down to your personal hearing.

💪😎💪

More to discover