Who is Michael Fremers'

I find that the reader must be intelligent enough to understand the listening bias of the reviewer and learn to read between the lines at times. I find most reviewers consistent to their biases. Certainly, some are gifted writers helping our hobby grow. They often inspire new interest and often entertain us within the hobby.

There is no mistaking that a reviewer is human. They can be wrong or off base at times. Instead of being upset with the reviewer, I would suggest the reader needs to be intelligent enough to know that a review is only a guide. The consumer must decide for themselves.

I have learned through vast experience that all changes are room and system dependant. I can go to a friends house and he can claim that he has a remarkable improvement in sound. I can leave without being impressed.

I remain even more confused on absolutes due to the fact that I have listened to extremely similar systems in different rooms (both rooms designed for sound) and had completely different experiences.

Both rooms used the EMM Stack, w. Wilson Maxx IIs and Halcro amplification. Both used the same cables. One used the EMM preamp, the other a VTL preamp. Without indicating which room I preferred, I left one in shock of how lifelike the presentation was. The other room sounded just like a great stereo system. It just didn't have the magic of the other system.

What does this tell me? That if the same system can sound different, how can we expect a reviewer to echo everyone’s opinion.

The Dynavector XV-1s is a perfect example. Loved by most, but hated by a few. Is it the tonearm? Does the person have the right system? Can we trust the person's ears or listening bias? Maybe it was just bad luck.

While reviewers can be biased and advocate something they like or prefer, we must be reviewers ourselves. That is the great thing about this forum and others.

This past year Time Magazine's Man of the Year is a mirror. This truly echoes the importance of each of us. Nothing has contributed more to this than the internet. We are the reviewer, we are the consumer and we can make or break a company. I often purchase electronic equipment based on user reviews. I read the reviewers article, but qualify it with the user comments posted afterwards. I am not the first to purchase but benefit from the experience of others. Most reviewers know that they are subject to public scrutiny in today’s age. What a wonderful time we live in.

Shane,

I stopped listening to Vinyl these days. What??? Yes yes yes. Been busy w. a distraction where I don't want to pick up a stylus at the end of a record. How I love CD/SACD in those rare times.

Truth be told, I just love the SQ, ZYX combo. The Denon is just sitting. I don't want to recalibrate my arm for the Denon & take off the Jade. The Jade gets 40% playtime compared to 50% for the ZYX & 10% CD.

Once the new arm comes the Jade or ZYX will move around and then the Denon will get some playtime & maybe break in.

A funny note. As some of you know, I live abroad and don't get my Stereophile in hand until I travel to the US. I did not get to read the review of the Raven AC, but instead had a friend read it to me. As he was reading it he skipped over parts. He then mentioned that the Raven A/C was closed in on the treble. I started laughing. I was like, he must be using the Millenium Mat which gives a darker/warmer balance. Then I read the review myself a few weeks later. Basically, the review echoes my experience exactly. I have noticed this on a few occasions. That basically says it all. Is it an absolute? No. But it shows that the reader must question the review and read it carefully to understand what is often between the lines. For a reviewer to truly knock on a product it really must be bad. They can put someone out of business. They need to be even handed and diplomatic.