2. misc-audio
  3. 1033958883

Audio vs. Other Reviews

Compared to reviewing in other industries, it seems that audio has very very few poor reviews, and I wonder what the difference is. I read music review magazines and they have no problem giving something one star and calling it horrible. I used to read computer game review magazines and still read a copy now and then, and they, too, have no problem trashing a bad game. In both cases, there is a lot of gradation as well - things throughout the spectrum. Every review doesn't end with, "You should check this out, because it may just be what you're looking for!" as the worst it might say.

In pricier categories, car magazines tend to be a fair amount more critical than audio reviews. They also do fairly massive head-to-head comparisons, comparing, say, 10 sport coupes in single go, and rating them, something we're always asking of, but rarely receiving from, audio magazines.

So why is it that basically every audio review is positive? I realize that often, if you read between the lines, the reviews give you a lot of reasons to perhaps steer clear, but why so subtle? Is it really so much harder to do a head-to-head comparison of 10 integrated amps than the same number of luxury sedans? If audio magazines fear advertisers backlash, how do the car magazines deal with the same thing?

Or is it just that, on average, audio components are very capable, and that criticizing them would be unfair?
kthomas
kthomas OP
911 posts
 
Reviews are most definitely not a substitute for personal experience / auditions. My own answer to the question is a combination of a couple points made above - first, that audio components are reviewed mostly as individual components, but behave in the context of a full system, and second, that most products are, indeed, at least pretty good, and therefore fairly difficult to be negative about.

Still, every review magazine is dependent on advertising for its survival. The audio rags constantly tell us of the separation between editorial and ad sales - ie, no conflict of interest. And yet, I regularly read a review of a component where the reviewer clearly isn't particularly thrilled, but any comments get so watered down that it comes out, at worst, as a back-handed compliment. Maybe it's this way with review mags for higher ticket items. It just seems that you read the comment, "can't match the performance of this $2K amp for anything less than $4K!", but you never read the comment, "This $4K amp is excellent, but you can get the same performance for half this price elsewhere. Therefore, while I like this amp a lot, it's not a particularly good value." Maybe I'm expecting too much.
zaikesman
3,017 posts
 
I basically agree with all of the above, fine points made by everyone. I do think that the current standard reviewing style is of very limited value to audiophiles. There are a few good dealers here and there whose takes on what's what are much more on the money than anything you will get out of the mags (although rarely so when concerning competing brands they don't carry). While I have posted about this previously in great detail, I'll just reiterate here that perhaps the most indicative sign of this milquetoast trend is the ridiculous "grade inflation" exhibited by Stereophile's now-worthless 'Recommended Components' farce. There seemed to be a trend a while back in both some mags and webzines toward multiple-reviewer perspectives per component, but that now looks to have fallen by the wayside a good bit, which is a step in the wrong direction - especially given today's impossible proliferation of published 'reviewers' who possess no track record with the readers to refer back to.

But I'm also not sure if a lot of audiophiles could truly handle a 'real' critic in this business. If audio reviewing were the profession of one of history's great critics - say George Bernard Shaw or Mark Twain - then we'd have to accept criticism of more than just the latest black box, and audiophiles as a group are probably just a little too neurotic, anal-retentive, and insecure to deal with that challenge in good humor. In other words, validation, rather than questioning, sits better and sells better with us. Come back to audio, J. Gordon - it needs you!
unsound
7,334 posts
 
Right on Zaikesman! I for one am reluctant to subscribe to the "audioperfectionist" as it seems to echo too much of my current thinking. I want more than validation, I want some one who can present a valid challange to my prejudices as well. As for Mr. Holt, his keen ear and no nonsense sincerity is sorely missed. Perhaps he is appropriately pioneering the home theatre front, but I for one have yet to appreciate it.
More to discover