What do you expect a reviewers system to be


There has been quite a bit of discussion on reviewers systems, long term loans, favored purchase price etc.
but what do you expect your favorite reviewers system to be if he or she is to be taken seriously about the component under review. does the reviewers system have to be the same as yours. does it have to sound good, or should it be so detailed and etched that its not great fun to listen to, but you can sure tell the difference when a new component is substituted. if not the latter, then how can you tell if the new component just makes the system sound better, but may have aberrations of its own. And, if you demand the review have that detailed system, does he have to pay for it at retail so he can avoid criticism and have to listen to it all the time, or can he have another system he may enjoy more, or for which he got discount pricing.
Myself, I doubt that there are many full time reviewers who are independently wealthy and could afford. I'm ok with a reviewer using whatever system he likes to review a product, so long as he is familiar with that system so he can readily recognize changes, for better or worse. If thats a bose table radio,so be it. but what do you all think?
manitunc
My expectations are simple. I expect a reviewers system to be what I would call "real-world." By that, I mean the system consists of relatively well-known brands that are not "out of this world" in cost.
Well thought out and the reviewer is able to relate why that is.

To me, its more about different and perhaps more attainable ways to achieve really good results than it is anymore about new products sounding better than ever before and BTW perhaps also costing way more as well in order to get it. That's often a bunch of malarky IMHO. Even if it does, its a subjective call to say so, and getting really good sound is nothing new, just more ways to get it than ever and probably also for lower cost than ever before in most cases.
There are many good thoughts I agree with. I think the system except for the piece under review should remain constant.

What I mean is during the review no other components should be changed, only the one component under review.

This way a person can really discern the components impact. That's what you'd do at home. Then if you are comparing another component of the same type you would get a good picture of how the two match up.

Best,

Dave
"What I mean is during the review no other components should be changed, only the one component under review."

"This way a person can really discern the components impact. That's what you'd do at home. Then if you are comparing another component of the same type you would get a good picture of how the two match up."

All that tells you is how that component reacts to that system. The results could be totally different in your system.