2. analog
  3. 1368037639

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
corazon
210 posts
 
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
rrog
1,958 posts
 
"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.
david12
1,454 posts
 
I suspect many reviewers don't have a system themselves, but are using review items to make up the system. Nowone is going to make there first million as a HiFi reviewer and as others have suggested, some of the items reviewed will be beyond their, or any of our means, for that matter.

If you read reviews carefully, many report on using the item with other kit in for review at the same time.

In an ideal world, the item for review will be put in a stable system one at a time, I suspect in most cases, if the reviewer has a system, it will have 2, 3 or more review items in it at any one time. I am not sure how anyone can give a valid opinion, if this is the case.
peterayer
1,382 posts
 
Not sure I agree. If a reviewer is reviewing a pair of speakers and he has three amps in rotation, then over time he can try all of the amps with those speakers and inform the reader about differences he may hear.

Same could happen with one tonearm and three cartridges.
lewm
13,109 posts
 
If a reviewer is using equipment similar to mine, and if he writes intelligently, I will take more than usual notice of what he or she may say about the equipment under review. But "more than usual notice" is not a lot of notice, for me. I generally read the reviews only to find out what the gear looks like, what inputs and outputs it has, and what other features might be of interest to me, including features of the circuitry, where electronics are concerned, except most reviewers say nothing about circuit design other than to repeat the babble from the manufacturer's promotional literature, which is worthless crap.
More to discover