Are Hifi Reviews Flawed?

[Rare Bird]

Yep, I know exactly what you mean.

However, if being honest, wouldn't you say that you are (or have been) influenced by, for example, Russ Andrews and the whole RATA/Kimber cable system building methodology?

Evidence from what you write appears to suggest this therefore perhaps you're more influenced by the views of certain people than you think?

Marco.

I've always been one to find my own way around, my ears tell me so.Yes i have been a fan of Russ Andrews but more than anything the Kimber side of it.It was a revelation when you take into account the junk that was floating about back then,i still like Kimber but i also accept that other mid band companies such as Chord are just as good. Kimber is good to me, my ears are tuned to the vinyl sound but i don't want the hassle & time spent involved so try to get a simular sound from CD without the cold uncomfortable sound CD can give in bright players, Kimber does the trick so i'm happy to stick with it.Certainly some of it lives upto what it's claimSon the can.

Russ is actually more than an old hi-fi sales man & marketeer, he's talented in the sensible side of sheer electronics.. a lot i've learned about electronics is not from him, but he does/did things a simular way to what i would/have done, yes selling his products have been strategically involved within his litrature but most of it was common sence at the time to me, i can't really comment on what he does now because it mostly unintresting garb imho.One thing Russ wasnt guilty of is the destruction 'FE' companies did to people & the whole british hi-fi industry.

Off topic a bit maybe

I don't let people brain wash me, having company favourites (not influences) is good makes you feel more relaxed around your components.

.My fav products of all time (back in the old days) were
J.A.Michell, Logic Systems/Internatonal, A&R Cambridge, Castle Acoustics, Kimber..

[Marco]

Nice post, Andre. That's the 'mode' we like you in and want to encourage, mate, so keep it up!

I've got some work to do now, but I will comment on some of the interesting points you've raised later

Marco.

[Spectral Morn]

The simple answer to the question is yes.

The problem with any review, be it blind, double blind, panel based, individual based is there are way to many factors to take into account, and give a definitive result...we all want certainty, but it doesn't really exist in audio to the extent we want or hope for.

Leaving aside the oft trotted out reviewer bias, back handers, magazine depends on the advertising etc (some of which may be true..though I suspect much less now, than in the past).

The biggest issues imho, are the differences in listening ability, room acoustics, music used, how well run in was the item or items, how well set up were they, was the system used fully compatible and was the reviewer open minded enough to understand the product.

As far as I am concerned the review is only ever a guide and not gospel truth. If you and the reviewer manage to tick enough boxes of similarity in system, room, music taste...then you stand a better chance of agreeing with his/her/their findings. However you should never buy any product on the basis of a good/excellent review or an apparent agreement among magazine reviews, simply because your set up just may alter the items performance enough to make the review conclusions wrong for your set up.

Always try the items in your own system.

Over the many years of working in the trade and trying multitudes of kit/cables etc in my systems I have found myself agreeing with reviews a lot or only a little, and sometimes not at all....the words "Has he even heard this" has left my lips more than a few times. Audio systems are like jig saws, the pieces have to fit in order to give the full picture, and its no use trying to batter an element into the set up just because you hope it will work.

The important thing to take into account, is that you just never know if its just your set up or a bigger issue, until you have tried the item or items in a lot of very broad contexts. I have written items off in the past, only to find that item sounding stunning in another system...just because its sounds crap in your system does not make it crap always.

Years of trying audio out in various set ups does give you hunches and educated guesses about what will do what where, but it is still possible to get it wrong...as I have occasionally; and as they say, the proof is very much in the tasting of the pudding....you must try it out....to be sure.

One of the biggest problems with the current audio press, is the very heavily edited nature of those reviews...the amount of text that ends up dumped, can and does render reviews useless and quite often not even making sense anymore. My own opinion is that the best period of reviewing was back in the mid 80's to early 90's, but after that it seems to me that things were dumbed down. Big glossy pictures took over and the text was reduced. Was this dumbing down as a result of the change in reading ability or just a trend in magazine publishing, or an attempt to appeal to the masses by publishing audio porn? This at the expense imho, of the enthusiasts.

I think its also a big factor in how you approach the magazines you read. This attitude will affect how much you get out of them. I could go into details, but you all know what baggage you take individually to each title you read. Rather than trying the items out to see if you can agree with reviewer X you right it off, because in your mind reviewer X is a deaf prat. Now who has a closed mind?

I like a balance between technical writing/tests etc (some of which I can follow) and the subjective. What I hate is 2/3rds of description of how it looks and how it works, huge pictures and a 1/3rd or less of how it sounds and in what context it sounded the way it did. I miss the days of the second or even third opinion you got in The Absolute Sound magazine.

This topic is a very complex one and there are factors that sit outside of the reviews themselves that will effect what is published. However someone like Alan Sircom will need to comment on those aspects.

I firmly believe that we have a second rate audio read today compared to the past, though the years that have passed, have in some areas given us more hints as to why certain things measure a particular way and sound the way they do. That is progress, but sadly the text that goes along with those test insights, is lacking in substance and detail to tie the two together.

The audio press is flawed (as all things are), it could be better, but I suspect that financial aspects due to a dwindling readership and the decreasing relevance of quality audio to the masses will kill off the few quality titles that survive.

For myself, in the context of the reviews I write for AOS, its fun finding out how things sound and interact with each other both for the positive and the negative. I am glad most of you enjoy my SOG items, and I like sharing them with you, but they are only guides no more no less. The results and conclusions are valid at the time of writing and in the context of my room, kit, musical taste and hearing. If you agree thats great, if not...well we all can learn how a particular item or items perform in a different context. Its all about learning and the journey....oh yes and having fun.


Regards D S D L

[Themis]

Hifi reviewers are -in general- not commercially biased, but they eventually get biased (like anyone else, I guess) through their personal convictions or friends.
If you follow carefully their reviews, these things appear clearly between the lines. We just need extra attention and absence of blind faith. Yes, "blind faith" is the key word, I suppose.

[hifi_dave]

Unfortunately, magazine reviews are now part of the advertising. When did you last read a bad review of a product ? and how often have you read a review which is the complete opposite of what the product sounds like ? The mags don't dare upset advertisers with unfavourable reviews as they can no longer exist without the advertsing revenue.

With some of the mags, you can take a look at the products being reviewed and know which reviewer will be writing and (pretty much) what they will say.

[Clive]

There are all sorts of issues, these have mostly been covered already.

I do want to add my weight to the comment that reviews tend to be rather short nowadays, word limits grossly restrict one's ability to set the context for reviews. I prefer to see reviewer preferences stated in the context of the product being discussed. This takes quite a number of words, reviews in the main mags nowadays should mostly be thought of as entertainment and light reading. They add to your thoughts about products but should only ever been seen as part of the picture.

I've written a few reviews per year for HFN, HFW and enjoythemusic, this is since the early '80s. I've only had one review bounced, this was for a hybrid SS/valve preamp that suffered hum, seemingly due to the 50Hz power TX hum field vs a US 60Hz hum field. I could not avoid commenting on this so no review was published. I wasn't asked to remove the comments but clearly I was not well thought of for having made the unpublishable comments in the first place.

[Rare Bird]

Unfortunately, magazine reviews are now part of the advertising. When did you last read a bad review of a product ? and how often have you read a review which is the complete opposite of what the product sounds like ? The mags don't dare upset advertisers with unfavourable reviews as they can no longer exist without the advertsing revenue.

With some of the mags, you can take a look at the products being reviewed and know which reviewer will be writing and (pretty much) what they will say.

Do you remember the old Mayware Ads telling the home truth, mayware got banned from a certain magazine for this. Those actions made the penny drop for me.

[hifi_dave]

Refresh my memory.

[DSJR]

I agree about the "reading between the lines" comment above. Most of Martin Colloms' reviews had to be read that way - by the things NOT said...

The existence of sites like this one must hopefully help in gear choice as we're not all valve and Tannoy owners (nor are we all Techie owners - hang on a minute, I am [SL-150].

I'll try and give the best help I can from my memories and experience, although I can't remember the details of Andre's Mayware post above, despite selling and setting up more Formula 4's than I care to remember (why do they fetch such silly money today, as there aren't many super high-compliance carts about these days?).

[hifi_dave]

Not all 'vintage' hi-fi has merit. There was an awful lot of junk around in the 70's, 80's and 90's, just as much as there is now.