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
The original post asks about what it means when a reviewer likes something and I much earlier in the thread wrote a sad but true comment about it meaning little.

It was later pointed out that it is hard to find dealers who have the equipment to demo. This is true. Times have change and it is sad for the consumer that such a large percentage of demoing dealers have gone away.

Still, your own ears are the things that matter. Although audio shows are much maligned I find that I generally get a pretty good read about equipment at shows, especially speakers.

I know this mostly does not directly answer the original post but I think it addresses the reason why the OP asked the question.

Having listened to thousands of pieces of equipment in my career, two effective ways of selecting equipment seem to be:

1. Look for consistency on forums in the details of what posters say about the sound of a component. This means the exact descriptors, not just "xyz blows everything away" says little but exact descriptions that are repeated by many people are very telling.

2. Find an industry professional (dealer, manufacturer, distributor at a show or by luck of hearing his system) or very experienced consumer whose system you absolutely love and get advice from that person.
Dear Lewm: About that " first watt " comment I think there is a misunderstood by you or a bad explanation by me. I'm not talking there about tube vs SS but only that: that IMHO that very first watt is not the most important issue but what the speaker demands on current that's different to what you posted.

About the Telarc 1812 I think that you don't know what you are talking about and till today you can't understand why I use that LP as an overall analog test through my comparison audio items process.

On the distortions on SS amps all depend on the amp design, any good top SS designs works fine with no trouble with any kind of real world speaker " with reactive rather than simple resistive characteristics ". Maybe you read it that exist a trouble but that as many other SS myths is only one more myth. As on any kind of electronics the name of the game is DESIGN quality and execution of that design: knowledge level and skills of the designer.

+++++ " I believe that the best sounding amplifier, tube or SS will be one that has it's lowest distortion at it's lowest power output, such that distortion (we are talking THD) only increases as power demands increase " +++++

as you I disagree with your statement: THD is only one factor with influence in the quality amp performance but there are several other ones. I know that you are sticky with tube amps and nothing wrong with that but try one and again to support that amp technology has no sense to me or your ignorance level on today SS vs tubes is really high and if it is in this way could be useless to continue this discussion when you ( IMHO ) has no facts or foundation on your statements other that that is what you think and this " what you think " is not enough.

You said more than once: " I do not at all rule out SS amplifiers " but in all the years that I have to know you I can't remember any time you tested in your system a SS amp sharing your experiences even I never see any post from you talking on how good could be the SS technology. Lewm, facts is the name of the game here and you missed this issue.

Anyway, thank's for your posts.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
Since English might not be Raul's first language, I'd like to recommend two words he might consider becoming familiar with: Redundancy, and brevity. I'm a giver...
Raul's post makes you wish Audiogon had a limit on post length so he'd be cut off, just like when you get cut off by some voicemails.

Reading his posts in this thread, I find it ironic that he has "enjoy the music" as permanent part of his signature, but insists that the music that I am enjoying through my tube amplifiers cannot possibly sound good since tubes are so inferior to solid state. Raul, perhaps you should change your sig to "Regards and enjoy the music, but only through solid state amplification, and a moving magnet cartridge"?

His campaign against tubes smells of the same bias espoused by those who dismiss(ed) analog technology as inferior compared to digital sound reproduction. It apparently also reached its limit and couldn't be improved.