2. analog
  3. 1364382162

When a Reviewer "likes" something

... what does that mean in your opinion. I read in one of the last Stereophile mags a comment from Mr. Atkinson where he wrote about the differences in "opinions" in forums or in printed mags. After all he ended with the argument, a component is good when a reviewer likes it.
Isn't is more helpful, when a reviewer knows something about a real tone reproduction? Or is it ok, when he used every month another CD or LP he got for free, a kind of music nearly no one wants to listen to?
Harry Pearson used in the 90's always the same records for his reviews but that was an exception I think.
What is it worth for you when - for example - Mr. Dudley/Fremer/Valin/HP .... "likes" something? Do you have the same "taste" they have?
I know it is possible to like a Turntable even when that unit can't hold the proper speed, or is extremely sensitive to any influences, there are endless recommendations written about such units...what is it worth for you?
Atkinson for example measures units, some have top datas but they can sound very boring, far away from the real thing, some have no top datas, some "tests" are shortened because a unit can reach a area which can be pretty dangerous (see one of the latest Agostino units, just as an example) but they are rated Class A in recommendations anyway....
When someone "knows" what is right or not, then his "liking" is only a personal opinion which is more or less uninteresting or?
Most customers (not all of course) would prefer to know what a unit is really able to do sonically, or not? Would knowledge destroy the joy of Hardware rolling? Or is there a reason why reviewers use low efficiency speakers when they have a tube amp for review (for example Lamm ML2.1/ML2.2 with Magico Speakers)? Is the matching "expensive + expensive" the proper way to show competence?
128x128syntax

Showing 10 responses by peterayer

peterayer
1,382 posts
 
I first learned about Jim Smith by reading one of the ads for his book "Get Better Sound" in either TAS or Stereophile. I'm glad I did. I bought the book and hired Jim to voice my system. I suppose I might have eventually heard about Jim some other way, but it was these magazines that I credit.

This thread started being about reviewers but many of the posts are about the magazines. Are they one and the same? I think not. There's lots of information in the magazines that is not a review of some equipment.

What each of us decides to do with the reviews is up to each of us. I am happy to subscribe to and read the magazines. They are very cheap and sometimes have some useful information in them. I have even narrowed down a short list of equipment to audition based on reviews I've read. And some of the articles are quite entertaining.
peterayer
1,382 posts
 
It's great that some enthusiasts have the interest and time and resources to investigate very thoroughly certain audio topics/problems and then arrive at what is for them some "answer" or result to their inquiry. Perhaps reviewers should fall into this camp.

Many others just want to relax and enjoy their music without being haunted by the quest for the truth. Perhaps reviewers too often fall into this camp.

As far as "I like it" being an attitude which leads to audio cancer, well that is pretty provocative. I like listening to the BSO on Friday afternoons, and I also like listening to my stereo in the evenings. And the more one sounds like the other, the more I like it.
peterayer
1,382 posts
 
Lewm, I think Raul seems to want his system to reproduce what is on the recording with as little distortion as possible. You seem to want your system to sound like a live music. Those seem to be different goals.
peterayer
1,382 posts
 
Lewm, I see your point. I just think that at their most fundamental, the goal of capturing exactly what is on the recording and the goal of capturing a sound that seems real, are different. Perhaps, in the case of a great, realistic recording, the two goals coincide. But far too often, so much of the original musical event is lost through the recording process, that a faithful reproduction of the recording can't sound like real music.

Isn't this what is loosely described by the a "musical" vs. an "analytical" system? In an ideal world, I happen to think they can be the same, but we have the problems of the recording itself.

There are those who argue that a system really is not capable of ever sounding better than the recording itself, because it can't add or fill in what is missing.

Well, perhaps we are saying the same thing.

Regarding reviewers, J Valin of TAS actually addresses this issue in some of his reviews. So when he describes a component as getting him closer to the recording versus one providing the emotional connection to music, I tend to understand what he is trying to describe. When he writes a component gets his system to sound more like the real thing I think he uses words like "emotional gestalt" and "transparency to source" to describe this distinction.
peterayer
1,382 posts
 
Syntax, Your original post really opened up a can of worms: It's now SS vs tube and analog vs digital.

Perhaps those debates should be moved off of this thread. Thanks for your opinions Raul, but could you start another thread about those other topics.
peterayer
1,382 posts
 
Raul, Since you prefer digital to analog now, have you abandoned your tonearm design? I have been waiting for your arm and Dertonarm's (Daniel's) arm designs for quite some time now. Where are the details? Has anyone heard or seen these two highly anticipated tonearms?

Since this is a thread about reviewers, perhaps someone has read a review of them.
peterayer
1,382 posts
 
It is not clear to me that Raul wants a review of his tonearm in the mainstream press. They do have some requirements about dealer networks, availability, etc. And then there is the advertising budget and audio show debuts......
peterayer
1,382 posts
 
I can think of at least two reviews in which the reviewer states clearly that he hopes he can work a deal out with the manufacturer so that he can "keep" the review sample. By "keep" I suppose he either means: on an indefinite long term loan or an extremely good accommodation/industry insider price. These statements were expressed in the concluding paragraphs of the reviews.

I guess we are supposed to think from this that the reviewer really, really likes the component. But it also comes across as an overt request for a prid pro quo.
peterayer
1,382 posts
 
The reviewer's income is and should be no one's business. Also, how he or she acquires a component should not be anyone's business either. Once it is asked for in a review though, it creates an impression of bias, in my opinion. That's all.

A condition of wanting something usually means that we also like it. But if we like two components roughly equally, we usually buy the one that is less expensive. Now in the case of a reviewer, are we to assume that his/her reference system is comprised only of the components that he/she gets the best accommodation deals on? What does that tell us?
peterayer
1,382 posts
 
When a Reviewer "likes" something...

...it seems to me that he has three choices: he can return it, he can buy it for some price he can afford, or he can borrow it for some period of time.

There are plenty of "long-term" loans out there.
More to discover