2. amps-preamps
  3. 156634-5435

Audio reviews: too many analogies, never simple, but most of all, never clear.

How many reviews have you read were it takes at least 2 paragraphs for the the reviewer to actually give 
hint this article is actually audio related or even gives mention to what he or she’s reviewing. Get to the subject matter. Leave out your less than perfect dramatic writing skills and lets start hearing about the actual review. I’d rather hear about comparisons between audio components than analogies between wine and taste related to transparency and how that gives rise to what they are getting ready say. What does wine have to do with audio transparency, nothing! Also they have a tendency to talk more about recordings that I’m sure 99% of the readers of the article have never heard of, or would ever listen to.
And when you looking for some sign of what they actually think of the components they’re reviewing they never give you a straight answer; it’s always something that leaves, at least for myself, asking, well where’s the answer. 
hiendmmoe
wspohn's avatar
wspohn
579 posts
 
I know what the OP is complaining about.

 I don't always have any interest in whatever maunderings the reviewer indulges in (like the late Mr. Dudley and those frickin' bunnies), but reviewing audio must be a fairly dry pursuit and saying the same things over and over a mind numbing activity, so I endure the prologues and check them for any interest level on my part, then ignoring the ones that don't do it for me.

Easy to skip to the conclusion page and see what the outcome is.

And to the OP who said " What does wine have to do with audio transparency, nothing!" - I have found after very extensive personal investigation that sufficient wine may result in a very significant deterioration in the level of audio transparency perceived by the listener!  ;-)
geoffkait's avatar
geoffkait
23,365 posts
 
I’m pretty sure all audio reviewers and audio e magazines have to have some motivation to review things and write and publish reviews. These guys aren’t independently wealthy, you know. Well, actually some of them are.
maurice1937's avatar
maurice1937
36 posts
 
Miller Carbon
Thank you for your initial post on this topic. I thought perhaps I was the only one that skipped trashy paragraphs in a review and fast forward to the listening tests. I also bypass the reviewers musical choices used in testing. Any comparisons to related equipment is welcome so are the conclusions
References to "Orange Man" (always negative) tells me something about the reviewer.


edcyn
1,876 posts
 
I agree that audio reviews can be frustratingly long-winded these days, but I love it when a reviewer uses analogies from outside the audio world to better describe what he/she is hearing.  I want the review to be subjective.  Bring on those food and wine comparoes!  On the other hand, yeah, I appreciate it when reviewers engage in musical chairs as they substitute other components in the chain as they attempt to describe what the component under review brings to the table.   But you don't have to cross every "i" and dot every "t."  My poor eyes begin to blur.
wyoboy
238 posts
 
+1 douglas_shroeder

Too broad a brush here--you learn who to trust and what is fluff.  Reputable reviewers like Fremer (& Dudley!!) can say what they want for as long as they want before getting down to business--i can always fast forward to conclusioin and Atkinson
More to discover