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 1 response by dodgealum

If the word "mandatory" is freaking people out how about each publication developing its own "template" that their stable of reviewers would adhere to in order to insure some continuity and comprehensiveness to formally reviewed products. If I were the editor of such a magazine or online publication, I would suggest the following:

  1. Room dimensions along with any room treatments;
  2. Associated equipment;
  3. Statement of preferences--as an audiophile, what am I shooting for in terms of sonics;
  4. Relationship with manufacturer--any financial interest, discount offered on purchases, history with brand, etc.

Seems to me this would help the buying public make better sense of the reviewers findings.