When a Reviewer "likes" something


... what does that mean in your opinion. I read in one of the last Stereophile mags a comment from Mr. Atkinson where he wrote about the differences in "opinions" in forums or in printed mags. After all he ended with the argument, a component is good when a reviewer likes it.
Isn't is more helpful, when a reviewer knows something about a real tone reproduction? Or is it ok, when he used every month another CD or LP he got for free, a kind of music nearly no one wants to listen to?
Harry Pearson used in the 90's always the same records for his reviews but that was an exception I think.
What is it worth for you when - for example - Mr. Dudley/Fremer/Valin/HP .... "likes" something? Do you have the same "taste" they have?
I know it is possible to like a Turntable even when that unit can't hold the proper speed, or is extremely sensitive to any influences, there are endless recommendations written about such units...what is it worth for you?
Atkinson for example measures units, some have top datas but they can sound very boring, far away from the real thing, some have no top datas, some "tests" are shortened because a unit can reach a area which can be pretty dangerous (see one of the latest Agostino units, just as an example) but they are rated Class A in recommendations anyway....
When someone "knows" what is right or not, then his "liking" is only a personal opinion which is more or less uninteresting or?
Most customers (not all of course) would prefer to know what a unit is really able to do sonically, or not? Would knowledge destroy the joy of Hardware rolling? Or is there a reason why reviewers use low efficiency speakers when they have a tube amp for review (for example Lamm ML2.1/ML2.2 with Magico Speakers)? Is the matching "expensive + expensive" the proper way to show competence?
128x128syntax
One thing for sure, in the end, no substitute for trusting one's own ears.
Swampwalker, I'm basically in your camp. The point you touched on has also been discussed ad nauseum on the Forum, because I personally do not believe in the notion of "faithful sound reproduction." The very term is either an oximoron or a non sequitor.

We all know that recorded music, regardless of medium, is highly engineered. I suspect that one might even be disappointed by a live music performance versus an engineered sound studio recording. But that is a discussion for another day.

But to the point in your post above, I still think it's better to start on a level playing field regardless of how the final presentation sounds. That is, if a speaker is reported to have a flat FR and have a certain acoustic presentation -- if driven by a SS amp -- but not so if using a tube amp, I want to know that before making a buying decision.

Maybe some folks don't care. I freely admit that a speaker that is ruler flat when measured in an anecheoic sound room will likely not be ruler flat when you take it home. BUT, at least I have some comfort in knowing I'm playing on that level playing field.

And for the record, I love my ARC tube gear. I also think my Paradigm S8s are fine speakers. I'm just a tad rattled because I figured out too late what it really means when one says a speaker is "tube friendly" or "SS friendly," or both.

And since this OP is about reviewer reliability, I think this very important issue should be prominently raised in every tech review.

Mapman, yes in the end you're correct. But if there is a really serious electrical incompatibility between an amp and a speaker, you don't get to the ear part.
I don't get it. And it should be pointed out that with all the references to correct speaker/amp matching, and all the proclamations about how one amplification technology is clearly better than another, there isn't a single reference to what it all means as far as actual sound, and THE SOUND OF THE MUSIC. With all due respect to those posters, it seems that you are discussing the superiority of one technology over another only in the abstract. So, because electrical theory says that this or that should be better, it is going to sound more like music? Haven't we learned anything yet?

One poster goes so far as to say that one technology is more natural, but the other is more accurate? Huh? Really? Natural, by definition, IS accurate.
Bifwynne, please correct me if I am mistaken, but it appears from your posts that it was only when you read Karsten's paper that you realized that your tube amp was not a good choice for your speakers. It may be a silly question, but how did they sound before you discovered this fact?
Frogman, first off, the purpose of my posts is not to eschew the superiority of tube versus SS -- technologically or acoustically. Not at all! My posts speak to the issue that one should be mindful about whether a particular speaker is a good electrical fit with a particular type of amp, be it tube, SS, or perhaps both. Period.

As to how I came to this issue, although I don't know dork about EE, I'm a EE/scientist whanna-be. So I read and ask a lot of questions, both publicly on the Forum and privately via e mail. The process for me has been a slow learning curve.

Based on a number of private and public conversations with the EE/engineer geeks, I believe that a really bad electrical match can change the acoustic presentation of what comes out of the speaker. Depending on the degree of mismatch, the speaker might not wind up sounding like the designer intended.

A couple of the Forum techies convinced me to try the 4 ohm taps. Initially, I thought the sound was terrible. The geeks convinced me to hang in there. So I did.

What I think I'm hearing now is a tighter low end FR because the speakers take an impedance dive to 4 ohms below 100 Hz. So the 4 ohm tap is a better impedance match. The damping factor is probably a little higher too.

I'm not sure why or even if the speakers sound less forward than when driven on the 8 ohm tap. It might be that driving them on the 4 ohm tap tames the acoustic response at the 2.2K Hz crossover point where impedance climbs to 28 ohms.

A tube amp would naturally put out less power facing that much impedance; a tube amp is much less affected by the resistive load. See the White Paper. If all that is so, then my tube amp would be putting out more power (watts) at the impedance bump as compared to a tube amp. Ergo, the possibility that the speakers might sound bright and forward.

Perhaps, running the speakers off the 4 ohm taps lessens the power output at 2.2K Hz impedance peak. Not really sure. Got a private e mail into one of my geek buddies to see what he thinks.

I'll tell you this in summary -- regardless of whether I or anyone else likes my speakers more or less on the 4 ohm tap versus the 8 ohm tap, what IS important is that the acoustic presentation is different. And that's the point I'm trying to get at here - electrical matching (or not) affects the acoustic presentation. Frankly, some may like the coloration, and that's a personal choice.

I hope I answered your question.
Audiophile discovers sound effected by impedance matching! Did it take a lot of research to reach that conclusion? Don't mean to be really rude, but that's basic, basic info.