what are your views regarding reviewing styles ?

i may not have completely communicated my point.

a review is a collection of perceptions.

it is at least a report of what a reviewer heard after hours and hours of listening.

there are ways to describe what one hears which are analaogous to a report.

like a scientist who does an experiment and reports findings.

a reviewer has anecdotal evidence to present regarding the sound of a component/stereo system.

if a reviewer says he does not the ring of a telephone with compoent a but does hear the telephone with component b, this is factual reporting based upon the reviewers perception.

such a statement, one could infer is objective without an attempt to influence.

if a reviewer says i heard instrument a behind instrument b--again a perception reprted without an attempt to influence.

finally if a reviewer reports nan inability to tell whether there were 1 or 2 violins on a recording, or whether an instrument was a tenor or alto sax, such information is useful to a potential buyer.

it is this approach which i consider reporting--communicating perceptions, without ornate phrase which are relevant.

Wow. This discussion is Really getting complicated here.

Here is just a short slice of my opinion on this topic.

I feel a certain form of reviewing should be taken as nothing more than pure entertainment, and if it entertains, well that's that. But you can throw credibility out the window.

Do you really think that, regardless of ''reviewing'' styles, a reviewer that is ''wined and dined'' in Europe, on a manufacturer's invitation to visit their company, can be taken with the least bit of credibility ? Sam Tellig (Tom Gillet) and his ''Sam's Space'' in Stereophile comes to mind as a glaring example.

All reviewers are not like this, of course. Nevertheless, objectivity is seriously non-existent when this happens.

Not far behind, the reviewer that ''liked the amp (or whatever) so much that he bought the review sample''. In this case, ''buying the review sample'' is somewhat easier to do than for you and me, as it is usually purchased at ''accomodation pricing'' a well-known unwritten audio-insider law where you buy gear direct from a manufacturer at roughly 50% of retail value (meaning dealer cost) for lesser-know reviewers, and for FREE if you are a reviewer with a strong readership and infuencial power, like Tellig, where I suspect the guy never pays for anything, probably including his toilet paper, if it can be proven that he cleans his interconnects with it and a dab of whooppe oil.

For this reason, I find that in many cases, the only view on reviewing style should be taken in the context of pure entertainement, supported of course with generic techno-detail color commentary. Blah blah blah, and here goes yet ANOTHER gizmo that a reviewer ''could happily live with on a long-term basis'' Taken as entertainement, anything is possible, and everything is in support of this, as long as it hits home, meaning that it gathers attention and starts a buying frenzy on Audiogon or in the hi-fi shops. We are suckers for doing so.

I just feel that it is a bit naive to consider it otherwise, an no more complicated than this. If it grabs your attention and entertains, great. But for me, at least with certain writers, zero credibility, but a fun read still. Please yourself the futility of ''analyzing my paragraps one at a time''. Kepp it simple and fun - and get back to the music ! There's a lot more happening THERE.

this is my last comment on a subject i feel strongly about.

i'll try the restaurant example.

your friend recommends a restaurant. you ask what he ate and describe the taste and discuss the service.

let's say he reports without any opinions.

he states what he ate, the ingredients of the food--spices, sauces, etc. he doesn't use any adjectives.

he discusses the temperature of the food and the time it takes from one course to another.

in short he reports on his experience as if he were an observer.

with this information, i have a shot at making an intelligent decision as to whether to patronize the restaurant.

the same "observer" approach could be used to describe the results of auditioning a component.

a decision to purchase a component requires honest observations without using adjectives. it is enough to say " one instrument appeared to be positioned behind the other and i perceived a sense of space between the instruments".

such a statement is reporting. it converys information. there is no hype, no attempt to influence. if a review were full of statements similar to the above statement, it could be useful and it would qualify as a report, not a criticism.

hi tvad:

i think we agree that my restaurant example and your restaurant example represents a factual description of an event.

where we don't agree is what we would like someone to tell us about an experience--audio or otherwise.

aesthetic experiences are highly subjective. if someone says the food was spicy, or the meat was tough, or the sauce was salty--adjectives, adjectives and adjectives.

i might not agree with his perceptio and therefore would not decide against eating in that restaurant.

i say give me the facts and let me decide. giving an opinion
using adjectives doesn't help me if i am looking to buy an amp. i would like to experience evreything. unfortunately, it is not possible. so, if i am going to make a decision based upon someone's experience, other than my own, i need facts, not opinions, descriptions, not sentiment.

don't tell me the wine is sweet. tell me how many grams of sugar per ounce.

the most important opinions to me are my own, not those of others.

it's not a drab, monontonous world comprised of facts. it's information useful for making intelligent decisions.

preferences are idiosyncratic, but facts are more objective.

get two people to eat in a restaurant and you get three opinions.

as jack friday said "give me the facts, maam".

there are two many opinions, virtually no knowledge and not enough facts.

perhaps the best example is someone going to las vegas and telling me it was hot. when asked the temperature, says is 85 degrees. is 85 degrees hot ?, is a teaspoon of sugar in coffee sweet ?

opinions often obfuscate, facts clarify.