Why is it in UK mags that the big brands never get poor reviews? Hmmm?

[Mike]

Damn!.... 'Rumbled' again!

No, you're right. I don't think theres that much 'crap' out there, at least not among the type of equipment submitted to an audio magazine for serious review. But I AM serious about not being interested, beyond occasional amusement, in reading about gear that's of poor performance. I'd like to think that gear that makes it into a magazine (that I'm paying for!) is at least of a standard that is worthy of me potentially spending my money on.

As for emerging company's not getting a 'fair shot', so to speak, I don't know. Do you really think they get a lesser deal from the mag's?... I'm afraid I'm very much a 'civilian' in these matters!

I've seen plenty of articles reviewing equipment from manufacturers that I'd previously never heard of, but I have no idea how much, if any, gets turned down.

Cheers,
Mike.

[Mike]

Just a thought...

Oi Admin!... Can we have a 'Tongue in Cheek' smiley please!

[Primalsea]

Hi Howard, well I think I can now see the hidden depths to how much you despise that four letter word and its not prat is it!!

As well as the reasons that you are hinting at another possibility is that they have to publish rave reviews on equipment that would seem to be popular with their reader base otherwise they will alienate them.

[Neil McCauley]

Damn!.... 'Rumbled' again!

No, you're right. I don't think theres that much 'crap' out there, at least not among the type of equipment submitted to an audio magazine for serious review. But I AM serious about not being interested, beyond occasional amusement, in reading about gear that's of poor performance. I'd like to think that gear that makes it into a magazine (that I'm paying for!) is at least of a standard that is worthy of me potentially spending my money on.

.

Funny that. I'd like to think it too. Ho hum.

[Neil McCauley]

!

As well as the reasons that you are hinting at another possibility is that they have to publish rave reviews on equipment that would seem to be popular with their reader base otherwise they will alienate them.

Yes, this is I believe true, but not necessarily for the obvious reasons. It's curious phenomenon, well known in advertising agencies and brand management organisations that a person who owns an item from a well known brand (in any walk of life i.e not just audio) needs to see that brand publicised purely and simply to maintain the brand value in their own minds.

Or put differently, the quality of the products must be good - but cannot in isolation be a substitute for reinforcing brand awareness.

One example from many is BMW in the 1980s spending on double page ads in the Sunday colour supplements advertising the then all new 7-series - despite the fact there was a waiting list. Curious about this, I asked the BMW brand manager. He pointed out that the value and prestige of the brand (note; not the car!) would dilute if despite owning one they didn't see continual exposure - to reinforce the validity of their buying decision.

It was lost on me. I bought a 850Csi - reasoning I didn't want to be seen in a glorified taxi i.e 735 or 740

---//--

[Mike]

Funny that. I'd like to think it too. Ho hum.

Eeh!... you are a cynical one aren't you!

Keep it up!

I was also suckered into the BMW thing back in the 90's!

I went from a 320 Coupe, to a 520I SE, to a M5, in less than a year. Bugger!