"Long-Term Equipment Loans: A Win-Win for Everyone" by Robert Harley, The Absolute Sound

[Elliot G.]

After reading all this and of course giving some more thought to the topic that Ron so eloquently framed this is certainly a conundrum.
I think the different methods by which the reviewers get gear to write about all leave questions in my mind.
The long term loans which is the major subject here does leave some with the sense that there could be some impropriety possible.

I think that the great er question to me is what are the other possible ways to do this?
How can this be done where this is not an area by which people question the result because of the ethics?
People can disagree with a reviewers taste, their conclusions, their likes and dislikes this is to be expected but when these are questioned with the undertone of corruption this is quite a different area.
Personally being someone that has given product to reviewers I feel that we tried to do our homework on whom we would like to look at our gear. We did this not by taste but rather by giving the gear to those we felt were the best qualified at what they do. There was no quid pro quo and the gear stayed for a reasonable amount of time for the process to happen. In my mind that is a period of a few months perhaps 3-4 as I do realize that the reviewers personally or company wise can't possibly buy all the products. If they did they would be running a huge used equipment market and be in competition with the retail and wholesale portion of the industry.
I am aware that certain companies and certain products have stayed for a very long period of time in reviewers homes. I think this can be viewed as an issue and perhaps should be discussed in these publications etc. as to why?
Perhaps the biggest issue is the lack of clarity. Why are they there so long?
I can see both sides of the buying the sample as well becasue at the end of the day a reviewer does need a system and a reference from which to work. The reference IMO does also lead to what products they can look at and what they can possible use in there room and system that would work in that environment. As we all know audio is not universal and everything does not play nicely with everything else.
IMO the reader is left with deciding, like with an critic, what they are looking for from the review, what types of product they are interested in, and with whom do they relate?
I have a few that I prefer and take their reviews as a good source of information , there are others that to me aren't worth my time . I do suggest that the readers do their homework and make a wise choice. I don't believe that any one can choose what is right for others and they shoudl retain the responsibilty to do thier homework, If you don't have someone you can realate to and to trust in this Industry/hobby whatever you IMO can have a very difficult journey .

I really dont see a viable conclusion to avoid the loaning of equipment. The audio Industry is small, undercapitalized, very competitive, very entrepenurial, extremely opininated and tribal. I think its not the loan that is the issue but rather the lack of clarity of the terms and in many cases , not all, the qualifications fo those who receive them.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

After reading all this and of course giving some more thought to the topic that Ron so eloquently framed this is certainly a conundrum.
I think the different methods by which the reviewers get gear to write about all leave questions in my mind.
The long term loans which is the major subject here does leave some with the sense that there could be some impropriety possible.

I think that the greater question to me is what are the other possible ways to do this?
How can this be done where this is not an area by which people question the result because of the ethics?
People can disagree with a reviewers taste, their conclusions, their likes and dislikes this is to be expected but when these are questioned with the undertone of corruption this is quite a different area.
Personally being someone that has given product to reviewers I feel that we tried to do our homework on whom we would like to look at our gear. We did this not by taste but rather by giving the gear to those we felt were the best qualified at what they do. There was no quid pro quo and the gear stayed for a reasonable amount of time for the process to happen. In my mind that is a period of a few months perhaps 3-4 as I do realize that the reviewers personally or company wise can't possibly buy all the products. If they did they would be running a huge used equipment market and be in competition with the retail and wholesale portion of the industry.
I am aware that certain companies and certain products have stayed for a very long period of time in reviewers homes. I think this can be viewed as an issue and perhaps should be discussed in these publications etc. as to why?
Perhaps the biggest issue is the lack of clarity. Why are they there so long?
I can see both sides of the buying the sample as well because at the end of the day a reviewer does need a system and a reference from which to work. The reference IMO does also lead to what products they can look at and what they can possible use in there room and system that would work in that environment. As we all know audio is not universal and everything does not play nicely with everything else.
IMO the reader is left with deciding, like with an critic, what they are looking for from the review, what types of product they are interested in, and with whom do they relate?
I have a few that I prefer and take their reviews as a good source of information , there are others that to me aren't worth my time . I do suggest that the readers do their homework and make a wise choice. I don't believe that any one can choose what is right for others and they should retain the responsibility to do their homework, If you don't have someone you can relate to and to trust in this Industry/hobby whatever you IMO can have a very difficult journey .

I really don't see a viable conclusion to avoid the loaning of equipment. The audio Industry is small, undercapitalized, very competitive, very entrepreneurial, extremely opinionated and tribal. I think its not the loan that is the issue but rather the lack of clarity of the terms and in many cases , not all, the qualifications of those who receive them.

Elliot.

I do agree with most of what you wrote and I think your closing paragraph to be very accurate.

I have found a few dealers and distributors over the years that have been receptive to providing equipment for in-home auditions, albeit by holding a CC on file, limiting the time in home to 2 weeks. Freight was waived if the product was purchased. I can only think of 2 items I ever sent back and they were relatively inexpensive in comparison to the companion components sent for audition.

This is indeed a very interesting thread.

 

[Salectric]

I have no problem with companies loaning gear to reviewers; in fact, I think that is far and away the best way to get equipment into their systems for evaluation. What concerns me are LONG-term loans such as the Valin-Walker situation. It makes total sense for a reviewer to have access to a borrowed piece for 3 or 4 months. Beyond that we get into serious questions of potential bias.

I also have misgivings about reviewers being able to buy gear at so-called “accommodation” prices. I understand these are sometimes wholesale prices but I have heard they are sometimes below what a dealer has to pay. That isn’t fair. It’s also easy to see how the potential profit on resale could color a reviewer’s stated opinion. For example, a reviewer buys Amp X after his review and later finds Amp Y sounds even better. Will he be restrained in his praise of Y because he doesn’t want to hurt his chances of selling X at a good price?

I realize there are no easy solutions but one improvement would be for magazines to agree on these 2 rules:
1. No loans longer than 4 months.
2. A reviewer can purchase a reviewed item at a fixed discount like 20% or just strike his own deal with a retailer like the rest of us do.

 

[cjfrbw]

Long term 'loans' aka gifts or lease-less leases etc. are ongoing advertisements for the manufacturer and a 'capture' of the 'regulatory' (LOL!) function of the critic. It means another layer of interpretation for the consumer. The critic allows him(her)self to be captured in this manner to have something otherwise unaffordable or just plain free, justifying it on the basis of having a viable 'reference'. Who's going to pay attention to a critic who listens on 'lower echelon' stuff?

Whether or not their ethics are ‘pure’ or not begs the question. They cannot possibly plug an item into an isolated system and deliver a meaningful assessment to a diverse audience of audiophiles with diverse circumstances, which means they are disproportionate influencers with limited basis for their conclusions. They are elected clerisy in a popularity event. Their job is to generate a select group of products and assign ‘value’. It's a fashion contest. The fashions are always changing. They are claiming to have a mental library that can parse this stuff out through divination.

Pick your high priests and your audio porns for entertainment. You’re still going to have to do some work on your own.

 

[Elliot G.]

Elliot.

I do agree with most of what you wrote and I think your closing paragraph to be very accurate.

I have found a few dealers and distributors over the years that have been receptive to providing equipment for in-home auditions, albeit by holding a CC on file, limiting the time in home to 2 weeks. Freight was waived if the product was purchased. I can only think of 2 items I ever sent back and they were relatively inexpensive in comparison to the companion components sent for audition.

This is indeed a very interesting thread.

Im glad you found a good one to work with . I was however referring to the review process of the magazines not consumer policies.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

Im glad you found a good one to work with . I was however referring to the review process of the magazines not consumer policies.

Well I do not take anything a reviewer prints, or says seriously. They are used car salesmen.

 

[PeterA]

Well I do not take anything a reviewer prints, or says seriously. They are used car salesmen.

I understand that sentiment. I actually like Tima‘s reviews of the Lamm gear. He writes about his recordings and describes what he hears using language I can understand. His review of the LP 2.1 deluxe was very well written and informative and his listening impressions are quite similar to what I hear from that product in my system.

I read JV’s Magico Mini II review. I found it a good read and it prompted me to go out and hear those speakers in three different settings. I eventually bought a pair and lived with them for about 10 years. They remain the best looking mini monitor I have seen and the best sounding mini monitor I have heard. I also liked the Magico Q1 and it might have been more resolving, but it didn’t quite have the magic for me.

I also bought the Airtight Signature Gold based only on JVs review in TAS. That was a very good cartridge.

That was then. Now I don’t really read reviews in magazines anymore.

 

[Elliot G.]

Well I do not take anything a reviewer prints, or says seriously. They are used car salesmen.

I dont believe that to be true however ther are good and bad in everything. The audio Industry has some very qualified and good reviewers and some of the other kind as well. I think one should read and make there own judgements. A reviewer after all is just a human doing a job. Whether they review food, cars, movies etc. If I find I like the things they do their opinion has more influence and is more trustworthy. If I don't then the opposite. I do not however believe that ALL of anything fits into one catagory.
One should read/listen/learn/experiment/discuss/find others and then distill this into knowledge and act upon it.
My best advice is to find people that are more along the path and try to learn something from them. I have said this many time we all hear but we do need to learn how to listen. Please keep an open mind as this really isnt a mine is better than yours thing. If you want to learn and grow it is very possible and you might find what it is you are looking for, It is a skill just like many others and practice makes for improvement.

 

[Avidlistener]

I haven’t read this entire thread, but while not nearly as valuable, theater reviewers get access to shows, movie reviewers get copies of films. As long as it’s transparent, I don’t see the issue.

There are so many great products available, why would a reviewer want to live long term with an inferior product, when they can return it and get another component?

As others have stated, a review isn’t the final arbiter of what we buy. A review gets you interested in a product and then an audition confirms whether or not it’s something you’re interested in.

My guess is that for many reviewers, they are not being paid much. Cordesman was or is some sort of military consultant. Another TAS writer I’ve corresponded with is a doctor.

This is an esoteric hobby and a damn expensive one with a fairly small audience.

People should get perks and access to the best gear, especially if they are not being well compensated. Judge the reviewer by their reputation, writing skills and ability to illuminate what are often very fine details that are also highly variable depending upon the other gear used, which often changes.

Same for magazines and sites that cater to the hobby. They do what they have to, to survive.

Unless someone has tried making a living as content creator in this highly fractured world of millions of things competing for people’s attention, they have no idea what’s it’s like.

 

[thedudeabides]

Long term 'loans' aka gifts or lease-less leases etc. are ongoing advertisements for the manufacturer and a 'capture' of the 'regulatory' (LOL!) function of the critic.
They are elected clerisy in a popularity event. Their job is to generate a select group of products and assign ‘value’. It's a fashion contest. The fashions are always changing. They are claiming to have a mental library that can parse this stuff out through divination.

Although I respect those who find his reviews "useful", I find your post to be a perfect description of JV. Gear he typically reviews is way above my pay grade but I have to laugh when I read his very long list of "reference" gear at the end of his reviews. And how does he account for all of the variables created by all the potential "combinations" of all his "reference" stuff. He must have a very large storage room(s).

I do respect MF. My understanding is that he has purchased every thing in his system except for wire. Not perfect but pretty darn close. I wonder how many other well known reviewers can say the same.

 

[microstrip]

I often say magazines are information and entertainment - in the old days I often bought them at airports and railway. The quality of the information we get from them depends on the writer and also a lot on the reader. Rule number one - a review can't tell you to buy something, at best it prepares you to listen to it.

The famous review of the Audio Research tube preamplifier did not tell you to buy it, just to sell the Mercedes!

 

[Audire]

I often say magazines are information and entertainment - in the old days I often bought them at airports and railway. The quality of the information we get from them depends on the writer and also a lot on the reader. Rule number one - a review can't tell you to buy something, at best it prepares you to listen to it.

The famous review of the Audio Research tube preamplifier did not tell you to buy it, just to sell the Mercedes!

IMO after reading this entire thread and my own experience, reviews are merely “entertainment.“ My mistake is that I use to take them seriously. No more. My subscription to two magazines expires this year. Bye, bye!

 

[Gregadd]

I take my entertainment seriously

 

[microstrip]

IMO after reading this entire thread and my own experience, reviews are merely “entertainment.“ My mistake is that I use to take them seriously. No more. My subscription to two magazines expires this year. Bye, bye!

I am now just addressing HifiCritic, Stereophile and TheAbsoluteSound but these magazines have had editorials along time from their editors explaining the objectives and discussions on how to read the magazines. A magazine is much more than just the opinion of a reviewer about particular equipment - I think that the desire to rank and compare equipment sometimes prevents people from benefiting from reading them.

 

[Audire]

I take my entertainment seriously

Entertainment reviews aren't necessarily Audiophile quality! It’s subjective at best. As far as objective reviews the articles IMO don’t come close. I’m done with the reviews.

 

[cjfrbw]

I would love to hear a mainstream critic review this system as presented by OCD Hi-Fi Guy on You Tube. No commercial politics here with everything being modified or DIY. They would probably wind up scrubbing themselves afterward.

It is pure WAF poison. It's more likely Ked review material. Those single ended 'triode transistor' amps based on Pass DIY designs probably put out 40 to 50 watts apiece. I like the background comment 'you could weld with one of those' or something to that effect.

 

[andromedaaudio]

Entertainment reviews aren't necessarily Audiophile quality! It’s subjective at best. As far as objective reviews the articles IMO don’t come close. I’m done with the reviews.

Lol .
Live and learn .


Jeffy i took your post and put it here as the discussion doesnt belong in the XVX thread
Off course there is a way to reach audiophile nirvana , just buy what you want .
Same as reaching car nirvana or any other " nirvana ", buy what suits you.

Whether thats a XVX a Magico or a Set or a Horn .

And people who cannot stand criticism of either should develop thicker skin imo

 

[facten]

My subscription to two magazines expires this year

letting mine go as well

 

[Al M.]

letting mine go as well

Haven't had a subscription in two decades.

 

[Elliot G.]

Entertainment reviews aren't necessarily Audiophile quality! It’s subjective at best. As far as objective reviews the articles IMO don’t come close. I’m done with the reviews.

OY VEY it just doesn't end.