The Absurdity of Some Recent Audio Reviews in Stereophile.

[FrantzM]

Caesar

Within the same manufacturer .. The highest priced models have to be superior ... Between manufacturers .. It's different ... Price point throws you a curve .. A HUGE one ... My example is that with this notion of Price point, the best speaker is the CAT MBX at 1.4 Million and likely the best amps are the Wavac at 350,000 K. The best cable ... You get my point .. Because some of these would be in their own category ... all by themselves ...

 

[Ron Party]

Boy is this thread all over the place, with some debating the *proper* role of the in print or on-line reviewers or the *proper* content of such a review, to state nothing of topics such as one amp *smoking* another or the *better/best* way of auditioning new gear for purchase.

Does anyone remember or care about the OT?

... there are some obvious and tragic examples of audio reviewing that really leave me shaking my head at the stupidity of remarks that are made by people who should know better....

Two fine examples can be found in September's Stereophile...

Do you have your own tale of dumb audio equipment reviews? Please share them. We all need a good laugh now and then and I’m sure there are plenty of equipment reviews out there to laugh about.

I've just re-read all 11 pages of this thread. It seems that, as Frantz posted on page 4, all is well in subjective audiophilia, for no one has answered Marty's call with a tale of a dumb audio equipment review:

This would not be a repeat of my last post ...denial is setting in or it could be that all is well with the state of the Audiophile press and Industry ...

We haven't seen the end of those pseudo reviews but we might be seeing the end of this industry as we knew it ...

 

[MylesBAstor]

Boy is this thread all over the place, with some debating the *proper* role of the in print or on-line reviewers or the *proper* content of such a review, to state nothing of topics such as one amp *smoking* another or the *better/best* way of auditioning new gear for purchase.

Does anyone remember or care about the OT?



I've just re-read all 11 pages of this thread. It seems that, as Frantz posted on page 4, all is well in subjective audiophilia, for no one has answered Marty's call with a tale of a dumb audio equipment review:

Rainex?

 

[Ethan Winer]

If you see something in any audio magazine, it has been listened to at a show or at a dealer and someone from the magazine liked it. If you don't see it in an audio magazine, it probably sucks.

Well, logically speaking, not being reviewed is neutral, especially for newer products. In my case as a manufacturer of acoustic treatment, it's very difficult to get a review at all. Just like the general public, most audio magazine writers and editors are totally clueless about acoustics and treatment. The editor of a leading pro audio magazine (Mix) once told me they have a policy of not reviewing any acoustic treatment products because they "respond differently" in different rooms. Say what?! So the microphones and loudspeakers they review in every single issue are not affected by the room they're used in?

--Ethan

 

[Ethan Winer]

... but everything written on the web is gospel. Hmmm... Try and trace the source and there isn't any.

Not sure what your point is, but this thread says it all:

Acoustic ART System?

At this point I'll bow out of bashing Stereophile because I still like to think that at heart they have good intentions. And surely some of the writers are knowledgeable about audio science, such as Kal Rubinson who's the only columnist I read regularly. The only "disgruntlement" (is that a word?) I have is their forum's sticky post that insults me, which they refuse to remove even though banning me from their forum is hardly news six months later. That's not just stupid, it's mean.

--Ethan

 

[caesar]

Well, logically speaking, not being reviewed is neutral, especially for newer products. In my case as a manufacturer of acoustic treatment, it's very difficult to get a review at all. Just like the general public, most audio magazine writers and editors are totally clueless about acoustics and treatment. The editor of a leading pro audio magazine (Mix) once told me they have a policy of not reviewing any acoustic treatment products because they "respond differently" in different rooms. Say what?! So the microphones and loudspeakers they review in every single issue are not affected by the room they're used in?

--Ethan

Mr. Winer,

I was referring to the "subjective" or "observational" audio review magazines only such as Stereophile and the Absolute sound. I am not sure how the rest of the audio industry works or how other industries work.

Question for you - even further off topic, despite the Moderator's plea - (sorry Mr. Moderator, life and conversations take turns and you can't plan everything) - since a large numbers of your customers do purchase equipment based on subjective criteria, why do you interject comments that in one sense could be interpreted as seeing your customers and potential customers as mystics and crazies? I am wondering how much more business you would have if you went under a pen name. Brands are associations. When you associate yourself with a certain position, it has consequences. Burberry has to try fight hard to minimize associations with rowdy and drunk soccer houligans who happen to wear their stuff.

For the record: from personal experience, you do make oustanding products, but I do hear/ perceive differences between different components. Also, if it weren't for the Stereophile review, I would not be your customer.

 

[terryj]

I'm not ethan, but I have my view.

we need more ethans in this world.

Agree or disagree with him, hooray for challenging the mystical side of audio.

I am certain it costs him sales, but OTOH it may bring him sales?

He even has very good writeups for DIY on his products, that surely must cost hiom sales.

Thank you ethan..

 

[Gregadd]

we need more ethans in this world.

Ahem (Throat clearing)

 

[terryj]

we need more ethans in this world.

Ahem (Throat clearing)

and less audio reviewers that go 'OMFG' with a cable swap.

Or people who take marketing copy as gospel, say in relation to audio fuses or cryo.

 

[Gregadd]

I knew that comment was a mistake.

 

[caesar]

I'm not ethan, but I have my view.

we need more ethans in this world.

Agree or disagree with him, hooray for challenging the mystical side of audio.

I am certain it costs him sales, but OTOH it may bring him sales?

He even has very good writeups for DIY on his products, that surely must cost hiom sales.

Thank you ethan..

Terryj,

I am in no way for censorship of any Mr. Winer's comments. I do like to hear his point of view, although I disagree with it. I also enjoy using his products, as I mentioned above.

However, as someone with a strong business background, I question his business judgment and I wonder why he posts these ideas under his name instead of using a moniker.

 

[terryj]

hi caesar, terry will do, why so formal?? haha

Do you disagree with all his points of view, or just some?? If you agree with some, were they positions you already held? and the contrary of course.

I too will look forward to ethans own response on the business question. I mean some would question the wisdom of even giving away freely the diy knowledge to build your own traps, that will essentially do the same job.

Maybe, he is simply passionate enough about room treatment that he is happy even for people to make their own? As long as they have treatment.

Nelson Pass does similar no?

Hey, maybe the field is small enough to be expanding enough so enough say 'I can't/can't be bothered making my own', so he gets business that way. (Was that enough enoughs??)

Or, the more people who urge others to not overlook the room, whether they have diy or commercial treatment (like me, diy and I urge others to get treatment) helps expand the field for he and the likes of glenn?

Or maybe, just maybe, those that are most likely to consider room treatment are less likely to consider cables or other 'fringe' improvements...so it does him good to be known as he is....it could be the most cunning business plan ever conceived!!

 

[Ron Party]

Despite my plea, I read disrespect, not only to this site but to one of our special guests. Ethan's business model is way beyond the subject matter of this thread. If you don't like it, start your own business. If you don't like his products, don't buy them. Now move along if you've got nothing to contribute to the OT.

 

[caesar]

Despite my plea, I read disrespect, not only to this site but to one of our special guests. Ethan's business model is way beyond the subject matter of this thread. If you don't like it, start your own business. ... Now move along if you've got nothing to contribute to the OT.

Don't take yourself so seriously. If you want a great and dynamic site, let people act spontaneously and zig and zag as conversation happens in real life. Moscow style of government died a while ago, but it looks like it is coming back. However, if you want a less spontaneous, less rich, and more boring site, force people to stay on topic.

If you want to ban me, go ahead. You got the power. I just hope that you and every moderator on this site acts consistently and bans everyone who strays off topic.

 

[caesar]

hi caesar, terry will do, why so formal?? haha

Do you disagree with all his points of view, or just some?? If you agree with some, were they positions you already held? and the contrary of course.

I too will look forward to ethans own response on the business question. I mean some would question the wisdom of even giving away freely the diy knowledge to build your own traps, that will essentially do the same job.

Maybe, he is simply passionate enough about room treatment that he is happy even for people to make their own? As long as they have treatment.

Nelson Pass does similar no?

Hey, maybe the field is small enough to be expanding enough so enough say 'I can't/can't be bothered making my own', so he gets business that way. (Was that enough enoughs??)

Or, the more people who urge others to not overlook the room, whether they have diy or commercial treatment (like me, diy and I urge others to get treatment) helps expand the field for he and the likes of glenn?

Or maybe, just maybe, those that are most likely to consider room treatment are less likely to consider cables or other 'fringe' improvements...so it does him good to be known as he is....it could be the most cunning business plan ever conceived!!

Terry,

As I said, I like Ethan. I like his contributions. I own and enjoy his products. I am passionate about room treatments also - it is the best upgrade one can make for the money. If you read my other post on improving the reviewing process, I would like all reviewers to post pictures of their rooms.

However, to minimize audio to a few measurements and to discount human hearing is a major mistake, in my opionion. The human mind is vast and very poorly understood. When one closes their mind, potential discoveries and innovations cannot come about.

Now I have a feeling this is my last post on this site as the Dictator...hmm... Moderator will put my neck in the guillotine... Just looking at the picture next to his name will give me nightmares tonight.

 

[terryj]

maybe you're right Ron, that some could see disrespect in my post.

just to be clear, I very much respect and thank ethan for all his 'work'.

And I also think you're right, I should not have pursued that topic at all. (I have seen him often 'called' on many a forum, guess I was trying to give the viewpoint of those of us who appreciate what he has done, but will not address that subject again).

 

[terryj]

Terry, ahh, that's better..thanks.

This 'territory' I don't mind dabbling in tho, so it is not in contradiction to my last post. (I actually LIKE that pic haha)

Agree with the parts I have cut out (except the bit about the pic!)

However, to minimize audio to a few measurements and to discount human hearing is a major mistake, in my opionion. The human mind is vast and very poorly understood. When one closes their mind, potential discoveries and innovations cannot come about.

A couple of points immediately spring to mind.

How do you KNOW that audio cannot be reduced to a few measurements??

Ok, let's say that is meant to be a provocative statement. One which you deny.

Do you feel it is enough to simply say 'It is wrong'? Or, for the sake of proving that it is wrong you need to provide, well, proof?

If you feel it is 'enough' to say it is wrong, then logically, it is 'enough' for ethan to say 'it is right'.

then we get into the usual audio forum dust up. yawn.

Show us (as a counter to ethans claims) the measurements in audio that do NOT fall under his categories. Do I need to make it clear that I am not necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with ethan? Just that a 'you are wrong' is insufficient. Show us how he is wrong.

The human mind is vast and very poorly understood.

Who is going to argue with that?

BUT, it is where you go from there that has the potential problems. You cannot (logically) go from one 'fact' and simply use it as a proof for something else. The two do not necessarily follow.

As a counter to your point, (and I do feel there is far more in this that I agree with ethan about) it could be argued very strongly that, in terms of audio, we do know quite a lot about the mind and how we can be affected by it. In other words, he is on far more solid ground that you are willing to admit.

The last quick thought I have is, exactly WHICH 'group' is it that has actually closed their minds??

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Perhaps Ethan expresses his point of view freely and strongly, even knowing it is counter to much audiophile conventional wisdom and risks offending potential customers, because he has integrity.

P

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I once saw a review from a respected on-line resource, in which they had subjectively (no measurements were featured that hadn't been supplied by the manufacturer) evaluated the qualities of an amplifier (and declared it fabulous!). They had managed this by listening to music playing back through very expensive if unconventional single-driver, floor-standing speakers, in a space in which the floor was bare ceramic tile, the walls behind and to stage right of the speakers were glass, and the space was wide open into the next room on stage left.

They reported a deep and luxurious sound stage and incredible resolution of small details. They may as well have been listening to a Bose radio in a shower stall. The results would have been no less shocking.

P

 

[Ethan Winer]

Oh wow, now look what I did.

since a large numbers of your customers do purchase equipment based on subjective criteria, why do you interject comments that in one sense could be interpreted as seeing your customers and potential customers as mystics and crazies? I am wondering how much more business you would have if you went under a pen name ... I do hear/ perceive differences between different components. Also, if it weren't for the Stereophile review, I would not be your customer.

Maybe, he is simply passionate enough about room treatment that he is happy even for people to make their own? As long as they have treatment ... so it does him good to be known as he is....it could be the most cunning business plan ever conceived!!

Perhaps Ethan expresses his point of view freely and strongly, even knowing it is counter to much audiophile conventional wisdom and risks offending potential customers, because he has integrity.

My partner hates that I write about audio matters that offend some people. In my utopian naivety I keep hoping my explanations will be compelling enough to change a few minds. Audio is no different than any other belief system, and no amount of logic will sway some people. I do post out of integrity to my own "beliefs," if you will. I could just as easily sell replacement AC outlet covers for $100, and maybe I'd earn a better living. I know all the lines such vendors use, and I'm sure I'd be convincing. But I could never bring myself to sell something I don't believe in. Which indeed is why I continue to maintain my personal web site with DIY acoustic treatment plans, and continue to post acoustic advice for people who will never be a customer. I believe in the value of acoustic treatment so much that I'd rather see someone DIY, or even buy from a competitor, than go without.

From a business perspective I probably should hide behind a screen name when posting about non-acoustic stuff. But it's way too late for that. In forums other than here at What's Best I disable my sig when posting about audio unrelated to acoustics. At one forum I use either my "Truth Justice and Science" sig or my RealTraps sig, as appropriate. But everyone knows who I am. I don't mind people disagreeing with my opinions, as long as they can offer an explanation better than "Ahem (Throat clearing)." I don't even mind mild rudeness. But I do get PO'd when people who dislike what I say about the science of audio go out of their way to insult my company. Or post "You're a moron and I'll tell everyone not to buy your products" etc. As with my Stereophile Forum comment above, that's not just stupid, it's mean.

I try very hard not to insult people! But some people are offended anyway. Placebo effect and expectation bias are well known, and I've experienced that myself many times. So I don't understand why some people are so adamant that it can't happen to them. They read my gentle explanations as to why they might think they heard a change after demagnetizing their LP records, and take that as a personal attack.

I like his contributions. I own and enjoy his products. I am passionate about room treatments also - it is the best upgrade one can make for the money. If you read my other post on improving the reviewing process, I would like all reviewers to post pictures of their rooms. However, to minimize audio to a few measurements and to discount human hearing is a major mistake, in my opionion. The human mind is vast and very poorly understood.

As skeptics often say, just because we don't know everything doesn't mean we know nothing. And this is surely the case with audio measurement and perception. I've been touting "only four parameters" for a few years now. It's common for someone to say that's crazy. But every single time I ask what more there might be, nobody ever has an answer. Further, as I always explain, a null test will reveal all differences between a device's input and output. If there were more to audio fidelity than those four parameters, it would have been revealed in a null test long ago.

listening to music ... in a space in which the floor was bare ceramic tile, the walls behind and to stage right of the speakers were glass, and the space was wide open into the next room on stage left. They reported a deep and luxurious sound stage and incredible resolution of small details. They may as well have been listening to a Bose radio in a shower stall. The results would have been no less shocking.

No kidding. I'm constantly amazed by hi-fi type reviewers who go on endlessly about this speaker or that's imaging, but when you look at their equipment list you see cable elevators and "resonance control" devices, and boutique wires, with not one item that affects acoustics. Without absorption at the reflection points, these people have no clue as to what good imaging even sounds like. Oops, I did it again.

Finally, I do not write so much to change the minds of believers, but to help those who genuinely want to know the truth. Too often someone who's unhappy with their system will ask in a forum what they should do or buy next. These are the people I mostly write for.

--Ethan