I am very curious here; how much real weight do you guys give to everything Michael Fremer said?
* Just as one of several examples (because I've been reading this reviewer since he very first started reviewing); in his latest review of the NAD T 787 A/V Receiver, he terminated his review by saying:
"Overall, the NAD T 787 is the best-sounding A/V receiver I've yet heard." - HomeTheater August 2012
And if you look at his ratings for
Audio Performance, Video Performance, Features, Ergonomics, & Value; it just don't make any sense at all!
Plus, he said that it is a
"future-proof modular design". What!!! ...With only seven power amps, no MultEQ XT32, no Audyssey DSX, no Pro Logic IIz, and a whole lot more ...
And he said that those seven amplifiers are powerful!!! ...
98.9 watts at 0.1% THD into 8 Ohm loads, what's so powerful about that?
Plus the front panel
"exudes simplicity and maintains an industrial design esthetic"!!! It is ugly! Other manufacturers have much nicer designs, and much more simple too.
Sorry, for that small interlude but I think that any article or review needs some real insight on the people who write them, no?
And I can give you a multitude of other similar examples just on Michael Fremer's reviews and articles.
For me, real integrity and intelligence are must have values for any serious discussion on things that matter the most to us. No?
Phono (analog) has its own attributes and qualities, so is CD (digital).
And the choice we made at the end is a direct reflection of our own personal preferences (sound quality preference, practicality, accessibility, ergonomics, ease of use, and all that jazz.).
There aren't two distinct camps really; there is simply a vast audience out there with all different views of their own and applicable in real life.
There, I said my