Some famous reviewers have atrocious listening rooms!

@cd318 

Reviewers exist primarily to promote product.

Really?   I used to review a bit, and have known many audio reviewers.  I can't think of a single one who thinks of themselves that way, or who approach their reviewing just to promote a product.

I can hardly think of a single review which came close to describing what I later heard in person.

Maybe you weren't terribly good at, or didn't put much effort in to weeding through reviews.  There isn't a speaker I've owned or had in my house for which I haven't seen a quite accurate review. 

The great majority of products that received glowing reviews turned out to be crushing disappointments in real life. [fully loaded Linn/Naim six pack was shockingly bad when I'd been expecting near perfection]

Ah, looks like you were maybe to high in your expectations regarding reviews.

Time and time again I reminded myself to never again trust ANY reviews.

It's the oldest adage in audio but you really do have to listen for yourself.

Why did you need reminding?  Pretty much all reviewers, and most audiophiles, would tell you to listen for yourself.  Generally it makes sense to use reviews to narrow down speakers you would be interested in auditioning.  They point you in some directions.  Reviews normally aren't substitutes for auditions.

Though I can think of at least one speaker that I bought based on a review or two, since I could not audition it anywhere.  Though I already had experience with the brand and I didn't just expect to love it because I read some good reviews.  I'd sell it if I didn't like it.  It was an excellent speaker, sounded mostly as it was described in the reviews.

@prof               Thank you for talking sense.

Maybe they're reviewing based on how most people in real life would use the gear... 

it's only the minority odd "audiophile" ducks that isolate themselves in a perfect chair in some perfect little space away from the rest of the life of their homes.  

Andrew Robinson has an interesting take on this, as he does on many practical things... He has a video where he discusses his ten biggest mistakes on his audiophile journey; the biggest mistake was the dedication and expense to build a perfect separate theater room... it was underused, and when he went to sell his home later, the theater room detracted from the home's appeal and ended up being a big waste of money.

curtdr

Yes the "underused dedicated home theater" has been a theme that has often cropped up in the dedicated home theater forums (e.g. AVSForum).  One really should go in with a realistic idea of how many people will likely use the theater and how often.

In my case though I created a projection based home theater system, I didn't want a dedicated room that felt separated from the rest of the house.   I merged it my two channel listening room, which is the front living room of the house on the main floor.  It's a high performance room in which dark curtains can be pulled all around the room to cut screen reflections for a very dynamic, big image and immersion.  But it is bright and cheery by day, eminently accessible and comfy, and so my family is often in there and I used it every day, whether for reading, listening to music, watching movies or TV etc.    I didn't go with awkward looking home theater chairs in such a room, but had a huge sectional sofa custom-built, which has come in handy as I've had many guests watch sports and movies with me there.

Once you have a room that feels like you are going off in to some other dark pit to watch movies, it can actually feel to some people more of a barrier.

Nothing is more insulting to the music than some audiophile's listening room that is set up like some sterile audio lab with a lone chair centered in a room where nothing is allowed to "live" in it except for some aesthetically awful acoustical panels, all their high-end gear stacked on the floor, and speakers set up to imply the person doesn't actually listen to music. They hear it but they're not listening to it.