Hi Microstip,
Yes I agree that we want experienced individuals and reviewers who positively contribute to enjoyment of this hobby. But we don't want just everyone . I haven't seen Ethan winer here, and I'm sure no one is complaining!
You want people that are not only knowledgeable, but also have respect for other members as human beings. The best way to tell that, of course, is to observe how they treat other human beings. If a guy disrespects the fans and his readers, misleads, greatly exaggerates, engages in ethically shady behavior by failing to identify obvious flaws (until the version is reviewed), trashes the competition as sounding colored compared to his favorite brand, makes fans travel to a different state, country, or continent to hear a comparison you have sitting in your listening room, do you really want him?!? So we want knowledgeable members, members who want share experiences, and who respect each other as human beings. Guys' nicknames reflect that...
The only 2 reviewers I remember on this site are "mellifluous" Myles B Astor phd and "Great" Peter Breuninger. I am busy and don't read all the threads , but I try to stay up on only for high end , reference products I'm interested in, and I don't know many of the guys. so there may have been other minor reviewers on the site that I am not aware of . Let's go through some of the guys:
"Mellifluous " Myles earned his nickname for a lot vinyl threads and fighting against audiophile re-education camps some were recommending. (What happened to a guy named pheloniois ponk? Didn't agree with him or share his frequently analytical taste, but he had a diverse perspective )
"Great" peter breuninger is harry Pearson's heir apparent, as his taste matches HP's closer than any living reviewer in the business today.
And "fearless" fremer earned his nickname and integrity for calling things in his writing as they really are, with little BS.
And Too bad ken Kessler doesn't post here! Another guy who gets it
So those who positively contribute are recognized!
Now fremer has his own site and he is busy posting there. And Mellifluous Myles and Great peter have their own sites, as I understand. So why would they compete with themselves and post here?
As for valin, I'm not sure how he got into this thread. He's a flawed genius. Yet because of his taste and preferences for the lean, clean, frequently analytical gear that he calls "transparency to source", its kind of like Michael Jordan choosing to play baseball instead of basketball. He as well may be dead dead to most fans. That is Too bad for the vast majority of us that don't share his tastes and preferences. Not sure he got into a digital thread, non-Magico thread, but I'm sure he will reappear when we discuss the next Magico model. But, again, why is it in valin's interest to contribute to any site other than the tas site and divert eyeballs/ advertising revenue from there?
As for Harley, again, he doesn't even contribute to the forums on the tas site. Last time I checked , and this was several years ago, those forums were deader than disco. So why would he post there? And, furthermore, what positive value does he add to the fans? In a time when there are so few dealers and fans have to travel to different Continents! to audition gear, this guy spits in the face of the fans and doesn't compare gear he has sitting in his room. So fans have to waste their precious time and money to travel to hear stuff they are not interested in. They have to go through the trouble to bring in gear into their home, instead of watching their kids smile or doing a million other productive and enjoyable things. And as they bring in gear ito their system, one has to disconnect, reconnect, risk banging stuff up, wait 24-36 hours to settle in- only to discover Harley has no fukkin clue. Harley's legacy is creating the fukk the fan audio culture. What would he contribute here? The conclusion to every piece of his writing is "this is a flawless piece of gear. It is the best because I LIKE IT." Same pattern all the time. I quit reading him a long time ago.
Fukk him! That product he loves is flawless only because he didn't do his job as seek a cohort of gear to compare it to. It is best because he likes the analytical sound and wants his friends to do well, so they can increase their revenues and make more gear with that same sonic signature. Let's not forget that the market resoundingly rejected the Q series after he claimed it was the greatest speaker of all time. Amazing Tom Martin, tas owner , lets him keep his job. Obviously, in his own mind , Harley had achieved great prominence, but he fails to realize that he treats the fans in a abusive, demeaning and arrogant manner. not only has he failed to help his readers achieve better systems THEY would enjoy, he has also wasted a lot of their time and money, and potentially made their systems worse.
In real life, measure of success is different: trying to teach my kids that their level of individual prominence matters less than how many customers' lives they help to make better and how many people they help grow to be better people.
There are a lot of reasons why one reviewer or another might be biased or not doing his job as well as he could. Some get really big heads and never come back down to earth. Some believe that only ultra-expensive gear from giant brand-names is worth reviewing. Others are just idiots that believe the latest technology will deliver them nirvana. Others are totally political or only care about ad revenue. They run the gamut. There are a few really great reviewers though and I know who they are.
I mostly focus on three things when I select a reviewer for my products. (That's right, they don't select my product for review, I select them and their system based on past history. This way I can avoid dealing with idiots and pre-biased individuals and instead focus on their listening and writing skills and the quality of their system.):
1) the quality of their system and whether they are smart enough not to go down the garden path (garden path can be jitter, tube harmonic distortion, cable filtering etc..) Many reviewers systems are just not up to snuff IMO, so my components are not going there.
2) their ability to understand the significance of the component I have designed and differentiate it in the marketplace. I am all-in for shootouts.
3) their willingness to insert it in their system and use it in the way that is optimum per my guidance
Steve N.
Empirical Audio