Waiting for the Truth

[Frazeur1]

Here in lies part of the rub, we all have different ideas on what a good review is, or what it is to include. Some people are more technical-minded, some not so much. And then we have each reviewer doing his personal take on things, it certainly is a hit or miss type of thing, or at least maybe one might get little bits of this and that?

I do not read reviews often, but I used to, mainly the typical ones, HFN, Stereophile, TAS, and some of the online review thingies. I think maybe the best one can really do is once you have followed maybe a handful of your "preferred" writer/reviewers, and have actually gone and put your own ears to the equipment that they have reviewed, one can at least get some sort of idea about what they are on about. As long as those reviewers don't waffle around and keep their own priorities as to what they like, it at least gives you a smidgeon of a baseline-if that is at all possible.

In the end, we owe it to ourselves and our own ears regardless. I find most reviews difficult at best, like a chef trying to describe how a certain food would taste to a person that has only ever eaten at Mc D's.