Class D Amplification Announcement

The more things change, the more they stay the same. The bashing of audio reviewers by audiophiles who are themselves wannabe reviewers; it’s been sport as long as there have been audiophiles. Out of control egos who are so convinced that it is in their opinions, and their opinions only, where truth can be found. These audiophiles always forget that there is, and always will be, no substitute for personal experience with a product. The usefulness of audio reviews is simply as guides to making a more informed buying decision; no more. This requires following a reviewer’s  output in order to gain a good understanding of where the reviewer is coming from. One isolated review is of little value; context is key. For me, the ultimate value of reviews is determined not only by what the reviewer says (writes), but also by how he says it. Attitude counts for a lot in my book. So, speaking of attitude:

In this thread we have the comments of two reviewers with distinctly different attitudes. One comes on like a bull in a china closet lambasting a publication that has been at the forefront of this hobby much longer than most and insults the integrity of a specific reviewer for that publication. The other reviewer, the subject of this attack, responds in a gracious manner, explains his position and demonstrates reasonableness all the way around. Hmmm…… which of these two reviewers will I be most inclined to go to for, if not “truth”, a guide to help me make a more informed buying decision? A no brainer in my book.

Re the bull’s main (I think) criticism of the mentioned publication: He forgets (or is simply unaware of the fact) that since it’s inception, one of this publication’s main stated tenets has been to never base a review on comparisons to other products; only to the sound of music itself instead. That is where having “a good understanding of where the reviewer is coming from” comes in. Imagine that…a comparison to the actual sound of music. What a quaint proposition!

The bashing of audio reviewers by audiophiles who are themselves wannabe reviewers; it’s been sport as long as there have been audiophiles. Out of control egos who are so convinced that it is in their opinions, and their opinions only, where truth can be found. These audiophiles always forget that there is, and always will be, no substitute for personal experience with a product. The usefulness of audio reviews is simply as guides to making a more informed buying decision; no more. This requires following a reviewer’s output in order to gain a good understanding of where the reviewer is coming from. One isolated review is of little value; context is key. For me, the ultimate value of reviews is determined not only by what the reviewer says (writes), but also by how he says it.

@frogman Bull in the china shop here. As a reviewer I think this is very, very well said. Learning to read between the lines of any review is key to getting the most out of it. Sorry for coming across maybe a bit too strong, but I, like many audiophiles, am passionate about this hobby and sometimes I’m not as “gracious” as maybe I should be and for that I do apologize and will try to do better on that score down the road. All that said I still strongly disagree with both you and Andy about the importance of comparisons as there can be significant unreliability of judging a piece of audio equipment without them. I’ve been proven at least partially wrong on my initial assessments almost every time once I compare a review product to something else, which is why I think comparisons are critical for not only getting it right but also for providing crucial context for both the reviewer and the reader thus making the review more accurate, informative, and useful in conveying how a component really sounds.  Anyway…

regarding reviews, and in particular, doing apt comparisons of competing gear in reviews, i am 100% with @soix

of course a review can be a piece with just well crafted prose about the subject piece, and on its own it is of some help, but to me, as a consumer of such reviews, it is NOWHERE as helpful as when a reviewer carefully states his/her perceived sonic differences, pros and cons, versus what most would consider to be head on competitors/alternatives to the review piece

comparative info, even if subjective, is VERY USEFUL to a reader gathering info, for a whole host of reasons (hardly worth enumerating, it is common sense) -- that said, for a publication that needs to please many, multiple stakeholders (i.e. advertisers, retailers, and so on), one can understand why sharp comparisons indicating ’a may be better than b’ is unwise and undersirable from the reviewer/publication perspective

still, it doesn’t change the fact that comparisons are useful, indeed very useful for the reader, as much as many commercial reviewers try to avoid them

If any Class D amp is “good enough” for you, you’re lucky.  Not being able to hear the differences will save you lots of money.  Unless you buy an Aavik. 

@lloydc Have you heard any of the newer GaN- or Purify-based amps?  They’re not your father’s Class D anymore.