2. misc-audio
  3. 1351255839

6Moons.com vs. Stereo Times

I was looking for RMAF 2012 reviews today and my search led me to the Synergistic Research site. I noticed their Home Page announcement that "6 Moons.com just reviewed our Tranquility Base." When I clicked to read more I found that the review in question is of Ed Meitner's EMM Labs XDS1 SE SACD Player with the Tranquility Base being used in the context of the EMM product. Let's have a look at how 6Moons.com reviews this audio equipment.

On the first page of the review there are two page-wide views of the Tranquility Base but there is only a single brief paraqraph about the Tranquility Base, highlighted by this statement, "The Meitner was tested in tandem with an anti-vibration/noise-reduction platform." The reviewer then defers to a lengthy explanation from Synergistic Research on page two of the review, accompanied by one more page-wide view of the Tranquility Base. So far, the only "review" here consists of quotes from Synergistic Research literature and prominent photos of the Tranquility Base. I used to be in the advertising business. So far, this looks more like advertising to me than a review.

But wait. On page 3 of the review the comments about the Tranquility Base finally appear. But, as is typical of many 6Moons.com reviews, where twists and turns and tangents abound, couched in florid prose and convoluted phrasing, the review introduces a third product to compare with the Tranquility Base. This third product is a Japanese platform called the RAF-48. At this point things become muddied:

"The Meitner atop the RAF-48 platform was more austere. It was perfectly audible that the Synergistic created a golden glow which clarified but also saturated the top end. This lacked with the AR. Meanwhile the bass seemed better articulated and differentiated with the Japanese platform. The difference was not significant but repeatable and audible with each record ..."

Until we arrive at the very end of the review where we read, "This platform [the Tranquility Base] is manufactured with unique attention to detail. It is not very high and its outer edges are trimmed out with aluminum banding ...", along with more information taken from the Synergistic Research site about the physical features of the Tranquility Base.

The most important thing that the review had to say about the Tranquility Base was found on page 3 of the review smothered by the accompanying prose:

"The Synergistic Research Tranquility Base is a very interesting product. It clearly influences the sound in a good way. It is prohibitively expensive but worthy at least a listen just to be aware of what’s possible. I think it will be very versatile and improve the sound for any type of component sitting atop it."

In other words, the Tranquility Base does something good but it is way overpriced for what it does. On 6Moons.com you often have to wade through the mire to get to the point. What took them so long to get to the point?

This review confirms why I am not a fan of 6Moons.com reviews. In my opinion, their reviews are characterized by florid prose that is ostentatiously literary. And their convoluted comments are pockmarked by comparisons, digressions and tangents that twist and turn, ending by often obscuring more than they reveal.

In comparison, I find Stereo Times' reviews a breath of fresh air. 6Moons.com reviews make me feel like I am trying to unravel a puzzle wrapped in a mystery couched in an enigma. How do you feel about 6Moons.com and Stereo Times?
sabai
sabai OP
2,027 posts
 
Mountainsong and Podeshi,
"Too lofty and obtuse" are accurate descriptions from my point of view, as well.
sabai OP
2,027 posts
 
Nonoise,
You stated, "When I need to cut to the chase, needing clarification, I simply email Sraran and he distills it down for me quite nicely." I have two questions:

1. If his reviews were clear why would you need clarification?

2. If he can clarify things in an email why can't he do that in a review?
sabai OP
2,027 posts
 
Let's compare a 6Moons.com review with a Stereo Times review of the same products to get a feeling for what I am getting at here. These examples are typical, in my opinion.

The products in question are the Nordost Quantum line. They were reviewed by both 6Moons.com and Stereo Times. After I read the 6Moons.com review I came away feeling I was tied up in knots. I found their review typically long-winded and confusing. After I read the Stereo Times review I came away feeling that I had a very good sense of what to expect from these products. I found their review typically clear, concise and to the point.

How do you feel when you read these two reviews? Here are the links:

6Moons.com review

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/nordost/1.html

Stereo Times review

http://www.stereotimes.com/acc051410.shtml
newbee
4,767 posts
 
Tab110s, Thank you - I missed Chip Stern's piece. It is very interesting, even if long. :-)

Sort of validates my opinion of SE which I formed from a meeting with him when he worked for Mesa promoting the Baron. LOL when I look back - no one warned me and I mispronounced his first name! His reaction was IMHO appropriate to the size of his ego and self appreciation. Doesn't look like much changed after he created 6moons so much as evolved when he had something other than his self to control.
nonoise's avatar
nonoise
10,882 posts
 
Sabai,

The clarification I needed was when I needed to know if, say, a speaker would be compatible with an amp. From two separate reviews I'd try to glean what I could and then ask Srajan about it.

I've only done that a couple of times and he, like the better reviewers out there, would reply. I'd never write him to explain what he wrote about a particular piece: I'd just reread the article until it sunk in.

Sorry if I confused you.

All the best,
Nonoise
More to discover