What should be mandatory in every professional published review-

soix

THANKS for your perspective as a reviewer. I didn’t mean for anyone to think I’m making a broad accusation about the integrity of high-end audio reviewers— I certainly am not. Just as I took camera reviews in consumer magazines like Popular Photography with a bucket of salt, maybe the mid-fi and electronics publications are less reliable (I’ll use that euphemism) than high end pubs like AbSound, Stereophile, your former publication, and others. I will name one name. I had a fellow who puts together really expensive systems for people (up to a million $$) and who has been in the industry for many years tell me that Robert Harley’s reputation for integrity is unimpeachable. I would assume that, as Editor of AbSound, he expects the same of his writers. I hope so.

If a reviewer has some sort of a relationship with a company whose product they have reviewed (eg, they were allowed to buy the review sample at a discount) I just want to know. Even at a discount, they are voting thumbs-up for the product if they choose to buy it with their hard-earned dollars. That’s a valid endorsement, though some might think it’s inappropriate to get that discount because it seems like pay to play. FWIW

As to the rest of the debate, many good points made. I could never be a reviewer because I am too much of a people pleaser, and if I liked a company and its people I would find it hard to be candid about a piece of gear where they missed the mark and say so. Tough love is necessary, as people rely on reviews to guide them in buying sometimes very expensive gear which is often difficult to audition due to geography. I live in the boonies and have to travel hours to the big city, and sometimes other big cities to audition. 

Cheers

If a reviewer has some sort of a relationship with a company whose product they have reviewed (eg, they were allowed to buy the review sample at a discount) I just want to know.

@patrickdowns I’ll save you the suspense — all reviewers who write for a publication can get dealer pricing for a product they review (typically 25% to 50% off depending on the product type and if they’re sold direct or through a dealer network). Most publications/sites pay reviewers next to nothing for the many, many hours of work it takes to write a review from unboxing to finish, so dealer pricing is a meaningful perk that incentivizes reviewers to sacrifice all those hours to do what they do. That said, reviewers get to hear lots of gear so if they buy the review sample, even though it’s at a discount, it’s only because they feel that component is truly special and is about the highest praise a reviewer can bestow on a product. I only bought a review sample if it was significantly better than what I had in my review system, and since most reviewers have at least pretty good systems/components it makes quite a statement if something gets purchased after a review is completed. Anyway…

Hi soix

Most publications/sites pay reviewers next to nothing for the many, many hours of work it takes to write a review from unboxing to finish

I take issue with these terms of work, but I suppose it’s the reality in magazine/publication economics. The problem, as I see it, is it incentivizes reviewers to review gear they are personally interested in and anticipate buying. If the publication assigns the items to be reviewed, that makes it more neutral. I will admit that I would write a review of the Treo CT if I could buy them for a 50% discount! 😎

I only bought a review sample if it was significantlybetter than what I had in my review system, and since most reviewers have at least pretty good systems/components it makes quite a statement if something gets purchased after a review is completed.

As I said, it is an endorsement of a bought piece...the reviewer putting their money where their mouth is.

In a more perfect world, more magazines would be like Consumer Reports and would buy the gear they review, to maintain more objectivity. Prohibitively expensive of course.

I appreciate your candor and feedback (and you love Vandersteens too!).

I take issue with these terms of work

I encourage you to try writing a review for a publication and go through that whole process again and again before taking any issue.  I submit it’s not as easy as many people seem to think.  Not sure how anyone could not love Vandys, but then there’s no accounting for individual taste.  😝

@soix

I encourage you to try writing a review for a publication and go through that whole process again and again before taking any issue.

The reviewers at What-Hi? have got review writing down to a formula.

Nice large colorful photos and a few words that say absolutely nothing.

The words ’could be’ and ’might be’ tend to get used quite a lot.

It’s been the audio equivalent of Playboy magazine for decades.

Lots and lots of entrancing pleasures lie therein all glammed up to the eyeballs sumptuously lit. None of them will ever look as good once you’ve got them back home, but no worries, there’ll be plenty more different ones next month.

As a coffee table entertainment journal it’s perfectly acceptable.

As an audiophile review magazine it’s worse than useless.

Positively misleading.

The fact that it’s probably the UKs longest lasting audio magazine once again underlines the fact that readers prefer entertainment even when it’s masquerading as information.

I was surprised to find that it had been acquired by Future Publishing back in 2018. I guess the previous owners Haymarket felt the wind was blowing the wrong way and let the WHFs future survival become someone else’s problem.

That’s the trouble with these magazines, they’re not much use as information but we’ll still miss them once they’re gone.

Online magazines, at least for me, are even worse than online books.