Audio reviews: too many analogies, never simple, but most of all, never clear.

There's actually an art to writing.  It's lost on many who are used to text speak, don't read books, and are otherwise conditioned to expect "instant information" (and instant gratification) by YouTube, Google, etc.  

Whether that's "good" or "bad", I'll leave that to others to ponder.  

Just writing this makes me feel old.

Having said that, a lot of reviews leave me wanting for more and/or wishing they'd get to the point.  Sometimes I'm interested in the first few paragraphs of the review that talk about the design and implementation of the technology being covered.  Other times I skip ahead to the listening impressions, and sometimes I go right to the conclusion.  Most reviews are structured in a way that you can do that pretty easily.

It's also important to take into consideration that most of the publications are sponsored by many of the companies whose products are being reviewed, so there's almost no way that the review can be completely unbiased. 

There are those rare occasions where you see a product get a negative review, or where one or two distinct flaws are highlighted, but more often than not we're offered "it doesn't do ________ as well as some, but...".

I only read reviews in-depth when it's for an item I'm considering purchasing, and then I look for specific comments about sound quality and functionality that matter to me as well as comparisons to other products that I'm familiar with.  I also try to read between the lines where something may be glossed over or they're being polite.

At the end of the day, we all hear things differently and have different frames of reference.  We all have inherent biases as well.

IMO, you have to know how to "interpret" these articles. I appreciate when a reviewer tells you up front what gear is being used. I like John Darko and Herb Reichert a lot. They are easy for me to understand. I also like Clement Perry at Stereo Times. The worst for me is 6 Moons....talk about pompous and verbose....I can’t read any of their stuff anymore. In the past, I’ve read entire articles and wasn’t sure what the heck was said. Their publisher is the worst of the lot.

I am so glad that you started this thread hiendmmoe! I discovered a reviewer on enjoythemusic.com; Jules Coleman, who is absolutely over the top with just what you are talking about.

I guarantee that you will not believe how long it takes him to start talking about the product; in this case Sonus Faber speakers. He runs on about boring nonsense that is nothing that you don’t already know, and when he finally gets to the review, that’s bad too! It is hard to believe that the editors would accept his reviews...and there are more than one.

www.enjoythemusic.com/superioraudio/equipment/0420/Sonus_Faber_Il_Cremonese_Floorstanding_Loudspeake...

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.

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.