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
edcyn
1,876 posts
 
I wrote reviews for a living for close to forty years and, yes, like a bunch of you I just can’t help but lose my emotional equilibrium when a review doesn’t meet my august criteria. Trouble is, whenever I turn up the steereo to mellow out, my wife bangs on the door with a sledgehammer.
213runnin
914 posts
 
Miller Carbon, I do believe I just learned something about journalism by reading your post.  Thank you for that, it explains a lot about the current state of affairs in the poor excuse for journalism that exists today.  I am sick and tired of ideologies and agendas being pushed instead of the truth.

For the subject at hand, sometimes I enjoy the scenic route, as long as they get to the point eventually.  Other times I want "just the facts, ma'm", and I scan through to the bottom line.  Sometimes I can tell when the reviewer is damning with faint praise.  Sometimes I can't find much value in the review, but I always want some measurements, putting the item on the test bench.

But when it comes to reviews, I just can't get that worked up about it.


gordon
134 posts
 
Audio reviews chew more than they bite off.  Their taste in music is prosaic at best.

russellrcncom
316 posts
 
couldn't agree more with millercarbon and hiendmmoe.  The reviewers are often self-indulgent to a fault (similar to the media where now they,re the news rather than what they're reporting).  I subscribe to the two mainstream audiophile publications as they,re relatively inexpensive (TAS and stereophile) but I,m usually disappointed by the choice of components being reviewed.  75% of the components reviewed represent stuff I can't buy in this lifetime ( or any other).  The other 15% - 20% are budget components which are there as tokens and little more to keep people from constantly complaining about exclusively reviewing exorbitant components.  Virtually nothing in the middle ground.  What about taking a different tact and instead of reviewing amps costing 6 figures only review it ifs providing a exceptional sonic breakthrough that has to be heard to be believed. This would eliminate 90 to 95% of the mega buck components but it would be so much better for the average audiophile.

kren0006
1,859 posts
 
The less the reviewer talks about the component, the less they like it. They may not come out and bash the component, but read between the lines....
More to discover