Reviewing the Reviewers - and the decline of HiFi


I know that Arthur Salvatore has an ongoing tirade with Michael Fremer, and whilst I don't wholly share his views so far as Fremer is concerned, I support the sentiment that reviewers themselves ought to be themselves reviewed.
I say this after having read another 6Moons review that basically says that the item they have reviewed is the best thing since sliced bread. With the exception of HiFi news - and that was about 7 years ago, and HiFi Critic (which is regrettably not distributed very widely as yet)- none of the magazines ever criticize products.
This may well explain why the industry is in such decline. Let's face it in the United States Breitling made more than the whole of the US HiFi industry put together! Think I am mad? Well think on this cars sell, and continue to sell well. New cars are by and large a luxury, because we can recycle old cars, but we convince ourselves on their necessity. Car reviewers are unfettered by the need to give wet reviews. The buying customers are therefore not forced to listen through the BS of a review to get some real and genuine information.
Manufacturers also have to wake up and not be so hypersensitive of any genuine comparative criticism - it leads to product improvement. The reviewing industry should get out of the habit of expecting 5 star reviews when they lend equipment to magazines for 'extended periods'. let's face it - most people see hifi and music as coming out of white ear buds, computers, and mobile phones.
lohanimal
"(Again, please feel free to correct me)."

Who would be tempted to try! I enjoyed your most comprehensive input. It is refreshing to hear from someone with a broader knowledge and view of the subject as a whole to put things into a more balanced perspective.
"(Again, please feel free to correct me)."

Who would be tempted to try! I enjoyed and learned a thing or two from your most comprehensive input, a good thing. It is refreshing to hear from someone with a broader knowledge and insider view of the subject as a whole to put things into a more balanced perspective. So much for those VSPs, eh Nonoise?
First of all I am glad this thread has provoked a response. I very much agree with Robskers ideal.

I used Breitling as an example of luxury product, that to all intents and purposes is completely and utterly irrelevant to the end user, yet attracts a lot of money. Hifi, let alone the high end, is very much perceived, outside HiFi circles as utterly pointless. Yet we have a watch company that thrives and takes money from the type of people that can afford to buy, and ought to be attracted to hi-fi. I used the Breitling example having read an article at the back of HiFi News.

As to the demise of HiFi - let's face it - 'it's hifi but not as we know it'. You don't have the hifi stores packed to the rafters on Tottenham Court Road anymore. It does not attract the mainstream expenditure as a proportion of our income as it once did. In the past most people did not have a Sony Walkmen, and listened to music on a hifi at home. Now the truth is that the majority of people regrettably never listen to music other than through white ear buds, and the closest thing to bass is from their car boot.
HiFi has, by the year, and I've seen it in the last 10 years become more and more of a specialist and marginalised hobby made of small boutique brands. As this continues the products become more and more expensive. Take for example the Vendetta Research phono stage - it was a high end product, and can probably beat the vasst majority of todays phono stages. Index linked, whilst it will not be cheap, it certainly will not cost you the ridiculous sums that some top end phono stages do currently.
If you do pick up an older copy of HiFi News and read a review by MArtin Colloms for instance, he was not scared to be genuinely critical of a product, and likewise clearly explain his position. His magazine called HiFi Critic is much the same in that regard.
Manufacturers, understandably love what they make, but you can't send a product to a magazine, pay the magazine to review a product, and then also expect an uncritical review. It's a ludicrous set up. There is one on-line magazine that won't say boo to a goose, and says everything is the best thing the reviewer has ever heard.
A reviewers job is to provide a critique, a comparison, and relate it to the reader.
Some reviewers start of very well like Roy Gregory did in the early years of HiFi plus, but as time went on, he had to ward off and respond to several letters about his bias in favour of Audiofreaks imported items. Worse still in the reviewers system edition, I have a funny feeling that he had quite a few items from Audiofreaks in it. The list just keeps going on. Alvin Gold in the late 80's and early 90's was never scared of criticizing Linn products for instance - in particular the halo wearing LP12.
Compare this to Jeremy Clarkson and the Top Gear crew. They may well be 3 middle aged twits, but they can relate products/cars to the buying market. Likewise they have absolutely no fear in actually being openly critical of a product.
Hi-fi is slowly turning into a cottage industry, and this is due to the fact it is simply not attracting customers. Another thing - the 1970's was the 'Golden Age' of hifi - paradoxically it was the time when luxury watches were doing their worst ever as the cheap Timex LCD watches were the thing to buy. Fast forward to now...
Whilst your experience is doubtless courant, it is, nevertheless, descriptive of magazine and journalistic practices to run as a viable business. It explains to some degree why magazines publish what they do, and why - (I say to some degree, because I am sure that there are several other factors that would perhaps take too long to describe).
However, magazines have also been influential over time - such as the storage of vehicles post manufacture that Top Gear highlighted, or fashion magazines such as Vogue that have criticized working practices in clothes manufacture in the developing world.
Interesting analysis, Lohanimal. If, as you say, high end audio is becoming a cottage industry, would it be safe to say that it can be rescued and maintained by the remaining major brands that still hold audio to a higher standard?

I'm referring to brands like Luxman, Accuphase, Marantz, etc. that have the wherewithal to weather the economic storms and retain that look and feel that we associate with the high end, not to mention the niche players and local makes that seem to be doing just fine for the moment.

Reviewers of any sort aside, for the moment, these that I mention will be around for a long time to come. I believe the relevancy of reviewers is overstated and despite the debate, only provide a touchstone of sorts.

All the best,
Nonoise