'Review speak' bullsh*t

[Beobloke]

Disappointed that no-one's mentioned how we're all being bribed by manufacturers for good reviews yet.

Come on chaps - try harder!

[Macca]

.

I tend to gravitate towards the more independent (and rather well off reviewers who don't need to advertise anything or prove anything to anyone). 6moons comes to mind. Although they do grant themselves a big slice of poetic licence when it comes to babbling on about the texture of the mid-range etc. But they're often good reads none the less.

If you want your product reviewed on 6 Moons you have to pay a fee. Okay so maybe that would not stop them giving a bad review....but does not make them completely independent to my mind.

[Firebottle]

You don’t say what they are reviewing.

Indeed, as the actual piece of kit is irrelevant to the point I was trying to make about the tosh being written.

'with the unusual combination of a well lit and highly revealing upper midband'
What does one combine with a traditional phono circuit to give this? Is this unusual? Utter bollocks if you ask me.

[YNWaN]

Not if it’s a cartridge.

However, I realise what you are really saying is “listen to my rant”, so rant on.

[walpurgis]

Disappointed that no-one's mentioned how we're all being bribed by manufacturers for good reviews yet.

Come on chaps - try harder!

Bit unfair that, you're putting reviewers on the same level as our politicians.

[Spectral Morn]

Disappointed that no-one's mentioned how we're all being bribed by manufacturers for good reviews yet.

Come on chaps - try harder!

I have no doubt in certain quarters it happens.

A few years back I had a UK distributor, give me grief because I wrote that his room had sounded awful at a major UK show. It did, it was terrible. He told me I was not 'playing the game' and I should re write what I wrote. I told him simply that I can not write positive things where there had been none. To have done so would have damaged my credibility regarding what I hear. To say awful was good, would have done that. I was not willing to compromise my reputation.

Regarding subjective descriptors the origin of the reviewers language lies with the Absolute Sound and Stereophile who were first to chart this course, and everyone who has followed in their footsteps. Its hard to convey listening experiences without using somesort of lexicon of well understood words, or phrases. Anyone want to have ago, think you can create a new lexicon, feel free to write a review and either publish it here or I will publish it on my site, if you are interested in doing so. I think once you have ago, you might find it a lot harder to do than you think.

[jandl100]

All kit sounds different, imo.

If you are a reviewer then you have to try and communicate the differences to the reader.

Tbh "a well lit and highly revealing upper midband" seems like a decent attempt to communicate a subjective impression.

That's much better, in my view, than just saying "I liked it" or "I didn't like it". That doesn't really convey any useful information at all.

But, hey, whatever.

[Audio Al]

OK OK I know reviewers have got a job to do but some of the stuff they write is tosh.

It's not difficult to engineer something with a very flat frequency response, or to achieve very accurate RIAA equalisation. So when I read something like this I think 'oh dear':

The xxxxx's wide open, glass-clear midband integrates smoothly with a strong bass and crisp, extended treble. This makes for a very neutral reading of whatever LP you care to play, with the unusual combination of a well lit and highly revealing upper midband, and very low record surface noise.

What? the? F? Well lit 'upper midband', did they fit the front panel LED'd in the wrong place

Plus I thought record surface noise performance was dependent on the stylus and cartridge.

If it's that good I want one No mention of blackness though

[jandl100]

I did quite a few reviews for Hifi Pig in its early years, and I fondly recall coming up with a phrase which sent 'Daniel Quinn' into paroxysms of rage and derision concerning reviewer bullshit.
Something along the lines of 'dynamic glass ceiling'.
I knew then what I meant and I still do. In fact I think it was rather a neat turn of phrase.

[hornucopia]

Can a glass ceiling BE dynamic? (-:
Better than 'veils being lifted' etc.!

But I often wonder where we end up if things are constantly better than before....