Sjofen The Clue speakers

There are two issues at play here, the actual "sound" of the speaker and the review process. I am perfectly willing to give full credence to onhwy61's opinion about the process regardless of whether or not he's heard the speaker, but I disagree that pulling the product while the review was in process is being pro-active. In my mind, that's being reactive. I agree w Soix who said

when results seem so far off to what was previously experienced by the reviewer and the manufacturer offers both the reviewer and customers personal support to get it right, the reviewer should have at least made a phone call to make sure he was providing an accurate representation of what the product is capable of.

But in my opinion, the fault extends higher up the chain of command than just the reviewer. The editor(s) should have caught this one, and sent the draft review back to the reviewer with instructions to, at the very least, go through the phone/email consultation process. Given that most speakers that are reviewed are set up by a representative of the manufacturer, that's the LEAST S'phile should have done.

In the most recent issue of Stereophile there are separate reviews of a Revel subwoofer and a GoldenEar floorstander. For the subwoofer review the manufacturer sends the subwoofer, a pair of main loudspeakers and the loudspeaker designer is present to handle the setup. The setup involved placement, audio measurements and software controlled EQ and crossover selection. With the GoldenEar the company president shows up to do the setup. Apparently the loudspeaker is sensitive to the listening axis and in the reviewer's listening room needed to be tilted forward for proper treble balance and integration.

In each of the above cases the manufacturer's assistance made sure that their products would perform optimally. This type of assistance is standard in the audiophile review community. What I question is whether a typical purchaser of the products can expect to obtain optimal performance? If I buy the loudspeaker does the president or designer show up at my house and make sure the loudspeaker is properly setup? Should audio reviews include a "results may vary" disclaimer?

In the on-line version of the Stereophile The Clue review the comments section has someone's real world experience with the loudspeaker. I found the comments very informative.

Onhwy 61 says

In each of the above cases the manufacturer's assistance made sure that their products would perform optimally. This type of assistance is standard in the audiophile review community

Precisely my point. Why, in the case of (the clue) was the manufacturer not allowed to provide same?
He goes on to make a very good point:

If I buy the loudspeaker does the president or designer show up at my house and make sure the loudspeaker is properly setup? Should audio reviews include a "results may vary" disclaimer?

Well in the case of {the clue} they will talk you through it. I would suggest that in the case of a unit that is particularly sensitive to set-up, the review should point that out. In the case of (the clue) it would have been most informative if the reviewer had made use of that offer and told us all how that worked out. But IMO, the real concern here is that there should be a level playing field. So far, S'phile has offered no credible explanation why they did not allow their common set-up practice for (the clue). Until they do, their credibility has taken a major hit, IMO.

Fair points Onhwy61. I have no idea why some manufacturers get to optimally set up their speakers for review and others don't. My guess is that if the manufacturer offers to do it S'phile would probably let them do so, but that's just a guess. From that perspective, and certainly if I'm Sjofn, I would've asked to do just that knowing how placement/room sensitive the speakers are and how important the review would be to future sales. Maybe they did offer, but no way to know at this point.

But to me by far the biggest blunder here again was that the reviewer was proactively offered help if needed and he for some reason didn't make any effort to take advantage of that despite being significantly disappointed with certain aspects of the speaker's performance. That to me is just flat out indefensible, and IMO this reviewer is completely incompetent and should be fired. I know I'd have zero confidence in anything this guy has to say going forward. He's lazy or incompetent -- probably both actually. He certainly at the very least doesn't have the reader's best interests in mind.

I also found the S'phile online comments odd in that one guy spent hours and hours trying to get the speakers to sound good, and once he found the right spot he was very happy with and impressed by the speakers. Why wouldn't that guy just contact Sjofn for help??? Probably would've saved him a ton of time and frustration, and the company makes it clear they are there to help each and every customer. Sometimes people just baffle me. And I echo what Swampwalker said that had the reviewer worked with the company as he should have it would've made for a much more complete, interesting, and most importantly a more informative review. And it would've actually helped prospective buyers understand what to expect if and when they buy the speakers and the significant difference it makes between having the speakers properly set up or not. And it would've gone a long way in answering Onhwy's question as to whether buyers can expect to achieve optimal performance or not. EXACTLY THE POINT. Isn't the ultimate value of a review to let readers know what they should expect if they actually buy a product? The reviewer did a complete disservice to both the manufacturer and the readers. Epic fail.

Wait. Shouldn't reviews in glossy, high circulation magazines generally be favorable anyhow?

I see them as analogous to writing a recommendation letter. If I have nothing good to say, or if I have a lukewarm recommendation, I'll simply pass on writing the letter. If {the clue} didn't perform well for the reviewer, then just bag the review before starting it and review another component -- after communicating the reason why to the manufacturer, of course.