2. misc-audio
  3. 1079624068

Does "Non Compensated" Reviewing Still Exist?

I still subscribe to two of the major "audiophile" publications. To be fair, I would rather not reveal the titles of these publications, so for the sake of reference let's just call one Stereophile and the other The Absolute Sound. I have subscribed to both (and other) publications, on and off, for over 20 years. I have also seen a few other publications bite the dust in the past 20 years. I don't really have any specific interest in the equipment reviews but they used to be a great reference source. Although, I find that the music reviews and new music release information is pretty thorough and diverse.

I just received the newest "XXXXXXXXXXX" publication including the "500 Great Sounding Audio Products". It's actually the "Recommended Components" issue. I decided to thumb through the articles containing said components and read the "final conclusions" to some of these reviews.

Below, I have provided some "conclusion" excerpts from the "reviewed" components of some past issues also.

This "review" excerpt was on a turntable:

"I'm not about to tell you to hock the mink and dump the Mercedes. It only makes sense if you listen extensively to analog LP and have a large vinyl collection or the patience and desire to build one—which today will take no little effort. If you do take the plunge, it will likely be your final investment (periodic cartridge replacements excepted) in analog front-end hardware. The sonic benefits are, in this reviewer's opinion, genuine. But to seek them out must be, inevitably, a carefully considered, individual decision."

Here's another "review" excerpt on a CD player:

"I've heard CD players that had better rhythm and pacing, more midrange liquidity and transparency, greater depth of field, and finer resolution. But I can't recall hearing a more musically involving, fulsomely detailed, three-dimensional presentation from any other CD player at such a modest price as the XXXXXXXXXX."

Or another excerpt on a preamp:

"The "XXXX" is a success after all, but a qualified one: It can play music brilliantly well, and it can be a very good value. Having spent more time with this pretty little thing than I usually do with a review sample, I feel unusually comfortable in recommending it—but now, all the more, I look forward to the day when the clever people at "XXXX" turn their attention to the comparatively cheap and electrically messy world that most music-lovers inhabit."

After reading these compelling conclusions, I have to wonder why I actually read the article in the first place. I also have to wonder what the hell they are actually saying with all of their wishy-washy, totally vague, substance lacking, non-committal crap.

Does real, non-biased, non-compensatory reviewing exist any longer? Is there anyone out there who still does a review in the manner in which these aforementioned publications USED to review? 20 years ago? When these guys didn't like something, they TOLD you they didn't like it, and generally substantiated their reasoning behind their opinions. Likewise, if they actually enjoyed a component. They would be more than willing to recommend a listen OR a purchase.

Now? They don't say anything! I find, by the time you get done reading these reviews, you have no more information from listening evaluation than when you started. I take ANY review with a grain of salt. Electronic components only sound "right" to that particular user, in a particular environment, with a particular synergy, with particular corresponding components. But, it would be nice to have some sort of FAIRLY accurate reference.

Here is MY conclusion to some of these conclusions:

"The "XXXXXXX" is one of the best sounding components of it's type. It will compete with any other component in the same price range, if you actually like the sound of the other components in this price range. When listening to classical music, the orchestra REALLY stood out. Rock music reproduced with this unit was VERY dynamic and loud. Jazz and Blues had exhibited a wonderful "Toe Tapping" quality.

If you are in the market for a component like this one, you really won't do better, unless you consider purchasing a better sounding unit for more money. It IS lacking the dynamics, frequency extension, quiet operation, and build quality of better sounding units, but other than that, it's right there with the best of them in it's class, if of course, you like it's class".

Is this an over generalization, or is this a fairly accurate evaluation? Do others feel the same? Are there review sources that actually COMMIT to their opinions devoid of their commitments to advertising revenues?

Has this become a thing of the past?

128x128buscis2
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
Sean...Good question. My reasons were as follows, generally in order of importance.

1. I am familiar with the technology (from work) and I know that it has great (even revolutionary) promise.

2. I researched the CarverProZR line of amps. This included getting the schematic off their web site. (How many home audio manufacturers show you their schematics?). I also got the technical info from Tripath on the digital controler, used by this and several other well-regarded digital amps.

3. The price was right. (I was tempted by Spectron, but the price was out of line). No other way I could feed those power-hungry Maggies, not to mention the multiple subwoofers.

4. Last, and least, favorable (sometimes over-the-top)reviews of the sonics. These did not make me buy the unit, but they "enabled" the purchase for the other reasons cited.

I have not been disapointed. As I mentioned in a prior posting, I screwed up some speaker cable wiring, such that one poor amp was working into a load of less than one ohm. The darned thing just kept pumping out the amps so that the sound from the speaker was "almost" OK, and it took me a while to figure out what was wrong. I don't recommend this wiring scheme, but it did show that this amp has balls.
exertfluffer
270 posts
 
It's funny....when you get down to it, most everything is either driven by either sex or money!
Look at organized sports. I can remember seeing so many "fixed" boxing and fighting matches over the years, I think I might as well have watched WWE wrestling and been done with it!
But, back on course...you're right. As one who's worked in the audio business for many years, and is intimately familiar with many of the products that are ultimately reviewed, I've had to sit back and laugh while reading some of these reviews, as you've quoted I mean YOU KNOW someone is paying HEAVY BUCKS to get some of the praise and "inflated boasts" and "ratings" that gear too often undeservedly gets! And it's always the mass marketed, highly advertised product that apears on 6 pages of some rag that get's a garanteed AAAAAAAA rating or whatever...then slowly manages to slip to class C the next two or three "components" lists and such!
Well I for one have come to expect it, and understand why this kind of thing exists. It's obvious. The industry is relatively small, and needs help from all sources if people are to make good living at this stuff. Infact, audio/video equip manufactures would have anyone picking up a components list guide to believe that sonic and visual Nirvana exists by simply buying their class such and such of product!...and it doesn't. I've heard systems on many many occasions, comprised of all "Class A rated" components sound just aweful! But then all seasoned audiophiles know that you simply can't throw gear into a system and expect wonders. Doesn't work that way. Balance, synergy, set up, acoustics, placment, tweaking, calibrating, knowledge, experience, and dedication goes LIGHT YEARS BEYOND what the average audio enthusiest ends up with, or understands what is capable! And no, the best audio/visual systems don't come from simply reading a list of recommended pieces, maybe hearing them (possibly set up wrong), then buying them online from some questionable warehouse, and sticking em in a room at home with out a clue as to what they're doing! It's no so simple.
So to me I don't mind if a review doesn't say much! I'm used to reviewers "dancing around" the specifics and generalities, or "padding" a review for whatever reasons or incentives/agenda's they might be writing from! I think it's simply "ear candy"! I mean even if it "told it like it is", what is that going to do to the oveall quality of what people end up with who read this stuff anyway? In my experience, little to nothing more than they would end up with from reading "Enquirer-Star-Globe reviews" on audio gear!
This is why I've always laughed at some of these major mag's reviewing systems. IT doesn't really do much more than provide enjoyment, and something to fantasize about! Because you still gotta end up trying this stuff to find out anyway to KNOW ANYTHING of what something does in a REAL SYSTEM, IN A REAL ROOM!
So I say LET EM MAKE THEIR MONEY, and preach there sermons, and put whatever they want in "Class whatever!" In the end, it doesn't matter..let the informed understand what's what, and what's not! The true audio experts, serious audiophiles and those "in the know", will always have better systems, better audio/visual experiences, and the ability to pass on WHAT THEY KNOW to those whom they have good relationships with.
Yep, relationships and money. The Gas prices go up a couple/few times ever year, after the news reports some oil tanker dropped a couple of barrels of crude overboard when they came port-side. Or the water and power companies decide to declare some mysterious and suden "suppy shortage", and prices go sky-ward. Hummmmmmm....I see a trend here.
themadmilkman
182 posts
 
Sean--

The reviewers may have other jobs, but most publishers work exclusively as publishers. There are a lot of people working behind the scenes of a magazine that people don't often remember. THOSE are the people who are truly reliant on advertising dollars, not the reviewers.

Sorry I didn't make myself more clear. While it is true that a small reviewing team can put together a website or newsletter and review all the equipment that they want to, to publish a full-length 4-color magazine requires more funding than most people realize. And to keep that magazine successful (most fail in the first year) is even more difficult.
themadmilkman
182 posts
 
While I'm on top of my game here--

As time goes on the full effect that magazines have will be interesting to watch. The Y Generation, or whatever you want to call them, reads more magazines now than anybody else ever really did. They also, however, rely on the internet for more information than any other demographic. So where will this put the magazines in 5 or 10 years? I'm not sure if any of the magazines right now can adjust to these market changes-- especially the Absolute Sound, given the way they charge you to download past reviews. Heck, where will audio be in 5 or 10 years? These kids can be turned into audiophiles with the right entry-level products and marketing. But who's going to do it?
electric_monk
38 posts
 
As far as reviewing goes I wish the audio mags took the same tack as my two favorite computer mags. PC Gamer and Maximum PC (the same company produces both) are very informative in the review process. They have no problem rating games poorly (Terminator 3 just received a 23% rating) regardless of the company that puts it out.

They also have a column called the "Dog House" where users write in to complain about poor treatment by and shoddy products from manufacturers, either current of defunct. They clear up a lot of confusion for the readers by cutting to the chase and telling you what you want to know, not what the advertisers want you to be told.

One really good idea is a small bio column listing the current games and products that the reviewers are hooked on at the time giving you some insight into what type of games float a particular reviewer's boat (whether it be Sims, First Person Shooter, Strategy, etc.). Maybe we will get lucky and a mag like this will come along for the audiophile commmunity.
More to discover