what are your views regarding reviewing styles ?


at the risk of being simplistic, i would say there are two broad categories of reviewing--criticism and reporting and the connotations of subjectivity and objectivity.

a reviewer can present an opinion of a component,providing evidence from listening, as to its quality relative to other compoents of the same class and then express a preference for that component relative to other components of the same class, often using ornate phrases.

alternatively a reviewer can describe his perceptions without using adjectives, not indicating a preference in an attempt to be factual. the idea is not to influence the reader by using words which may have a positive or negative valence associated with them.

much of today's reviewing is what i would call advocacy reviewing. there are very few instances where reviewers try to strictly inform without influencing.

what do you think ?
mrtennis
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.
Post removed 
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.
Post removed 
the subject here is reviewing.

regarding 6922 and a carmel colored cd player, i was remiss in not defining the term.

essentially, given a definition, one could confirm perceptually whether a player experienced by another person, satsified the description of the term "warm" or "caramel colored".

i guess, in the final analysis, one might say that a perception is an opinion in which case, any statement is an opinion as opposed to factual. if that is the case i guess it doesn't matter whether i ask for facts, if every statement is a matter of opinion.

the best i can hope for is unambiguous communication where terms are defined/described and one seeks perceptions which confirm or disconfirm the description offered.

you might still be right by saying a confirmation would still be an opinion in which case you are correct and i'll back off for a while and do more thinking.