Valin's new MSB Reference dac & transport review, AS Product Year Award

[DaveyF]

One could think that at some point in time, due to the never-ending hyperbole laden reviews, that the public would catch on and deem the reviewer...and the periodical that he reviews for, as irrelevant and pointless. Thereby, relegating the periodical and its writers to nothing more than a 'has been' platform. This is exactly what I believe will happen with the likes of 'The Absolute Sound' and 'Stereophile' if they continue on the path of completely non-discriminatory reviews and hyperbole rants...simply due to the desire to appease their advertiser/manufacturer and not their consumer base. Naturally, all IMHO!

 

[spiritofmusic]

Davey, these reviewers are like politicians. They feel they know best, think that people actually pay attention to them, and that their words have an effect.

All that matters is that their advertisers buy into this.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

roasting familiar print reviewers has become a frequent WBF pastime. yawn. when i started this thread i expected some of the response to be like this. from the normal members who like to express these views. double yawn.

to me the best approach is to lower your expectations when reading a print review, so at worst you are not disappointed, and maybe you get more than that. i, for one, am glad Stereophile and Absolute Sound do their thing. i'm occasionally somewhat delighted, and otherwise unharmed by them. i do think the hobby is served by them in many ways.....and i appreciate the efforts that go into these reviews.

 

[Ron Resnick]

One could think that at some point in time, due to the never-ending hyperbole laden reviews, that the public would catch on and deem the reviewer...and the periodical that he reviews for, as irrelevant and pointless. Thereby, relegating the periodical and its writers to nothing more than a 'has been' platform. This is exactly what I believe will happen with the likes of 'The Absolute Sound' and 'Stereophile' if they continue on the path of completely non-discriminatory reviews and hyperbole rants...simply due to the desire to appease their advertiser/manufacturer and not their consumer base. Naturally, all IMHO!

Davey, respectfully, I think you’re painting with too broad a brush. I don’t think it’s fair to condemn reviewers en masse on a publication by publication basis.

There are many reviewers whose reviews and writing and work I don’t personally care for. Sometimes I don’t care for the fact that they don’t dig deep and do the hard work to conduct comparative auditions and to write the reviews comparing and contrasting the component under review with similar, competing components.

Sometimes I don’t care for a reviewer’s writing style if it is littered with platitudes and clichés, rather than with intelligible, useful, descriptive information.

Sometimes I don’t care for a reviewer if I know that he or she accepts equipment on a “long-term loan” basis, ignoring the obvious and inherent conflict of interest such an arrangement presents. (Reviewers can purchase equipment they review at “accommodation pricing,” meaning typically at dealer cost. I don’t see any problem with that because it means it means they are putting their own money where their mouths are.)

For me, personally, of the few, particular reviewers (not the entire universe of reviewers at Stereophile and the absolute sound) whose work I have followed for many years that leaves Michael Fremer of Stereophile and Don Saltzman of the absolute sound. Both of them take the time to engage in the laborious process of conducting comparative auditions and of comparing and contrasting the sonic and operational attributes of the component under review with one or more competing components.

I find that both of them write in a clear, intelligible and straightforward, and non-hyperbolic, style.

Finally, both reviewers, as a matter of policy, refuse to accept equipment on long-term loans after the review is completed. (Michael Fremer has said explicitly that the only components he accepts on a long-term loan basis are cables.)

 

[DaveyF]

Guys, can you point to any reviews in the last few years in either periodical that is discriminatory enough wherein the reviewer states something like this: I listened to the product under review and I feel that it generally isn't that much different than product A..., or B or ?- and for the extreme price difference asked by the manufacturer.. simply isn't a value.

MF did state he had some misgivings in regards to this issue with the LARGE price increase of the Van Den Hul cartridge that he recently reviewed vs. the prior similar model, but backed away from his point with the usual hyperbole.



MF is IMO actually a rather good example of what I am referring to...when did he get to hear/review a more expensive piece of gear and not truly have admiration for it??? He seems to be one of the folks that has no problem justifying the ongoing upwards pricing spiral. Accepting long term loans is IMO, not anything that ANY reviewer needs to request or accept. I think in the past, on this forum, we have debated this very question. ( I believe it was in a thread i started! )

Ron, I did state reviewer...and by extension the periodical he reviews for. I did NOT state that ALL reviewers have this tact. Unfortunately, IMO, the two periodicals that I mention have the worst offenders. There are several 'less well known' reviewers and online portals/periodicals that do indeed have more discriminatory...and shall we say 'neutral' reviewers. I happen to personally know and respect a few of those folks.

 

[PeterA]

One could think that at some point in time, due to the never-ending hyperbole laden reviews, that the public would catch on and deem the reviewer...and the periodical that he reviews for, as irrelevant and pointless. Thereby, relegating the periodical and its writers to nothing more than a 'has been' platform. This is exactly what I believe will happen with the likes of 'The Absolute Sound' and 'Stereophile' if they continue on the path of completely non-discriminatory reviews and hyperbole rants...simply due to the desire to appease their advertiser/manufacturer and not their consumer base. Naturally, all IMHO!

It is my opinion too, Davey, except for three nice things about the magazines: 1. the physical object and leafing through the pages is nice when sitting and having a cup of tea by the fireside, 2. the full page ads are beautiful and make one lust after the shiny new gear, and 3. the better reviewers do often describe some technical information that one can not find in the forums. Valin is particularly good at this with some speakers and turntables. The interviews with Alon Wolf are also interesting.

But I agree with you about the usefulness to the reader trying to decide between two competing components. Car magazines are much more helpful in that sense. In the end, we all test drive cars before we buy them, though. We should try to do the same with audio components. Easier said than done, I know.

 

[microstrip]

(...) For me, personally, of the few, particular reviewers (not the entire universe of reviewers at Stereophile and the absolute sound) whose work I have followed for many years that leaves Michael Fremer of Stereophile and Don Saltzman of the absolute sound. Both of them take the time to engage in the laborious process of conducting comparative auditions and of comparing and contrasting the sonic and operational attributes of the component under review with one or more competing components.

I find that both of them write in a clear, intelligible and straightforward, and non-hyperbolic, style.
(...)

Ron,

Are we addressing the same Don Saltzman? Most of the time Don Saltzman does not carry comparisons - the five more recent reviews that are accessible at the TAS site only show a particular small comment on a comparison with his own pair of VTL750's - IMHO a meaningless comparison with a great, but very old and colored amplifier.

BTW, except for the analog source, did you ever carry a direct comparison of the equipment you are getting with other similar equipment?

 

[KeithR]

Guys, can you point to any reviews in the last few years in either periodical that is discriminatory enough wherein the reviewer states something like this: I listened to the product under review and I feel that it generally isn't that much different than product A..., or B or ?- and for the extreme price difference asked by the manufacturer.. simply isn't a value.

MF did state he had some misgivings in regards to this issue with the LARGE price increase of the Van Den Hul cartridge that he recently reviewed vs. the prior similar model, but backed away from his point with the usual hyperbole.



MF is IMO actually a rather good example of what I am referring to...when did he get to hear/review a more expensive piece of gear and not truly have admiration for it??? He seems to be one of the folks that has no problem justifying the ongoing upwards pricing spiral.

Well, he just said the SP10r with OMA plinth was the only setup that could replace his Continuum since 2005. Total price: 20k

 

[microstrip]

Well, he just said the SP10r with OMA plinth was the only setup that could replace his Continuum since 2005. Total price: 20k

Can you provide a link to this statement or more information?

 

[DaveyF]

Well, he just said the SP10r with OMA plinth was the only setup that could replace his Continuum since 2005. Total price: 20k

So long as it included the new SAT arm....at what, an additional $48K...LOL!

 

[Ron Resnick]

Ron,

Are we addressing the same Don Saltzman? Most of the time Don Saltzman does not carry comparisons - the five more recent reviews that are accessible at the TAS site only show a particular small comment on a comparison with his own pair of VTL750's - IMHO a meaningless comparison with a great, but very old and colored amplifier.

BTW, except for the analog source, did you ever carry a direct comparison of the equipment you are getting with other similar equipment?

I disagree with your comment about Don’s reviews.

No, I did not. From your post I see I must have missed these comparative audition opportunities.

Please let me know where I can listen side-by-side in the same system to Gryphon Pendragons versus Genesis Technologies Primes, reconditioned Apogee Full Ranges versus MartinLogan Neoliths, and Rockport Techologies Arrakis versus VSA Ultra 11s.

 

[microstrip]

I disagree with your comment about Don’s reviews.

I posted public accessible evidence of my point on his reviews, can you do the same for yours?

No, I did not. From your post I see I must have missed these comparative audition opportunities.

Please let me know where I can listen side-by-side in the same system to Gryphon Pendragons versus Genesis Technologies Primes, reconditioned Apogee Full Ranges versus MartinLogan Neoliths, and Rockport Techologies Arrakis versus VSA Ultra 11s.

I was addressing mainly the electronics - speakers and vinyl are usually considered different enough be a simple choice affair. Also IMHO listening to such different speakers with the same electronics is meaningless.

My point is that we need to have some real long time experience comparing components in our systems to understand the limitations of short time A/B comparisons of electronics.

 

[Ron Resnick]

. . .

My point is that we need to have some real long time experience comparing components in our systems to understand the limitations of short time A/B comparisons of electronics.

“Except for analog source” means you included loudspeakers in your question.

Don has compared VTL amplifiers with various ARC amplifiers over long periods of time.

 

[KeithR]

So long as it included the new SAT arm....at what, an additional $48K...LOL!

He uses an SAT arm on the Continuum though.

He also did a proper compare with the Schroeder.

 

[microstrip]

“Except for analog source” means you included loudspeakers in your question.

Don has compared VTL amplifiers with various ARC amplifiers over long periods of time.

As I told you I consider that no one would compare loudspeakers in A/B conditions, it is why I did not explicitly address them.

Yes, Don did it very long ago, but I am not addressing these vintage reviews - are you getting MB750's again? BTW, this are his recent words (2017) "I was also able to compare the 300s with my VTL 750s, admittedly amps engineered and built years ago and not representative of the latest in design or technology. " Surely he finds the 300s are more transparent, have quieter background and are more 3D than the 750's ...

IMHO high-end electronics evolved in a way it makes more difficult and dangerous direct A/B comparisons - sources are much cleaner and the characteristic coloration of each brand was significantly reduced, making the global perceived sound quality must more dependent on the system synergy.

 

[sujay]

Frankly, I am somewhere in the middle on this issue. I think with the multitude of reviewers and consequently reviews, one starts getting a diffused impression of who is good and who is not. Like in ever other field, we will have good examples of both. By now at least I am very clear that there are no absolutes and no definitives in this hobby. Hence, one needs to be matured about one’s opinions instead of simply trashing ( or otherwise commending) a magazine or reviewer and ranting away like they have been rubbed the wrong way by one of the reviewers. I don’t see reviews (and reviewers) any more or less biased than the opinions of some members on this forum, who also have a vested interest because they either own the brand or have used it in the past or are enamored of it for any reason, whatsoever. And by the way, I am not counting myself out!
For me, over a period of time, I have zeroed in on a few reviewers from Soundstage, Stereophile/Analog Planet, 6 Moons, Dagogo, etc whose opinion I value and I stick to reading their views.
I don’t necessarily make buying decisions based on reviews but use them as a valuable reference and data point. I disagree that all reviewers are unscrupulous and compromised. To the point that someone raised about comparisons, I have come across several reviewers make extensive comparisons, for instance, on Soundstage, one reviewer comprehensively compared his Rockport Atria (own) to the Paradigm Persona 7 and the Tidal Piano G2, finally ending up buying the Tidal ( I think). Yes, most reviewers enjoy accommodation pricing but some of them do declare that. Further, irrespective of whether they enjoy accommodation pricing or not, why would they end up buying it unless at some level they really like it in their system?
As a concluding remark, reviews of specific components are highly subjective in a statement much as they are dependent on the rest of the components in the chain. It will be naive to assume that a component will give its best regardless of the system it is part of.

Cheers

 

[tima]

Perhaps you guys are reading the wrong reviewers.

Product comparisons and contrasts require at least two products, ideally in roughly similiar price tiers. It is rare, near impossible to borrow a piece of gear from a different manufacturer for the purpose of comparing the product under review with his. Effectively the reviewer is doing two sonic coverages - that adds a lot of time to the review period and usually manufacturers do not like not to loan equipment for more than three months. Quite a few manufacturers no longer have 'review instances' sitting around - it's more likely for me to get a new unit straight out of the box. That can mean 100-600 hrs of break-in - not that much fun to do that for two separate units, when only one is the review subject and the other is for compare/contrast only.

So a review comparison is often done against the reviewer's own gear which again ideally is reasonably current - making the best of it as regards two products being close in cost and effectiveness though not necessarily sonics. Often my comparisons are between a new model and either the prior model of the same, or the model next tier down in the same manufacturers lineup. It is rare not to do a compare/contrast.

Tpp many reviews in print and on-line magazines regurgitate maufacturer product descriptions published on their Web sites or product literature. There is real concern about intellectual property theft; that's one reason you'll get surface level info about a product. But most people don't want to read Web site information re-written by a reviewer. A good reviewer, imo, will go the extra step to get behind the marketing words to understand the technology(ies) and materials in play. Imo, it is worthwhile to get a sense of which functions and features make a genuine difference and which may sound exciting but don't really make that much difference to operation and sound. If you're willing to come to grips with a piece of gear sometimes manufacturers open up with insight or inside information they allow published. Imo, that is as important as the reviewer's opinion on sonics.

At this point I get to chose what I write about and I won't review something that in advance I know is flawed or problematic or a poor match in my system or that I simply don't want to hear. Only once have I run across a product I really did not care for and I simply sent it back and did not review it.

 

[caesar]

roasting familiar print reviewers has become a frequent WBF pastime. yawn. when i started this thread i expected some of the response to be like this. from the normal members who like to express these views. double yawn.

to me the best approach is to lower your expectations when reading a print review, so at worst you are not disappointed, and maybe you get more than that. i, for one, am glad Stereophile and Absolute Sound do their thing. i'm occasionally somewhat delighted, and otherwise unharmed by them. i do think the hobby is served by them in many ways.....and i appreciate the efforts that go into these reviews.

Mike, I am not sure what you expected. Just because Valin , Michael Jordan and Steven Spielberg of Audio reviewers, likes something we should all like it too?



We analyzed this review based on its substance and merits. It’s critical, but fair. Al, above, put it most succinctly - it’s a worthless review. Spirit, rightly, called it “so 2000”.



Valin, the Michael Jordan and Steven Spielberg of audio reviewers , committed more turnovers than scoring points in the game and has released battlefield earth here and the hills have eyes 2.



As with most reviews that are short on substance but high on hype and award-giving, I see this piece as more than usual of a marketing piece , rather than something that one can learn from.



Leaving the idiocy of the wi-fi hookup aside, it’s also all about valin. What has made him extremely successful as a writer in his previous work is that he explained how the gear he’s passionate about can make the fans’ listening experience more “real”. In his prior excellent work , it’s all about the experience of the fans!



Instead, what we have here is:

1. Msb has helped valin unify his vinyl and digital, and makes his listening more whole. Ok that’s nice Jonathan. As Spirit put it well, many of us have had that since early 2000. Sorry, we Can’t empathize with that.
2. Msb is an expensive , luxury dac that gives people a position of status and power and position. Sure , but so do other brands as well, such as dcs, Aries cerat, Audio note, metronome, totaldac, etc., that many of us already listen to.
3. Realize that great digital is different from vinyl. Again, we knew that.

So , no, valin is not the Great tour guide/ wise Yoda here . No empathy expressed for the reader. No authority demonstrated.



No one in the world other than his mom and his wife really cares about Valin’s problems; they only care about their own...



But then he also leaves a gap. MSB Select may fill that gap in the future, or maybe an even more scarce and exclusive “emerald and diamond “ dac. Stay tuned! Or not! (But the experienced all know that it will be different.)

 

[caesar]

Furthermore, taking this to a higher level, (and not talking about Vain, specifically here, as he actually frequently compares products to help people navigate the purchasing process to hone in on what to audition.) because honest and quality information is so hard to come by in this hobby, so many of these awuful reviewers tip the scales towards the flavors they like.



In effect, the game is rigged. First, there are so few data points for those searching for information about what to purchase. And second, due to “authority” status of reviewers pushing their favorite tastes, while sucking the air out of everything else. This manipulation is very disturbing. it hurts audio purchasers / fans and smaller/ new brands trying to break in, and less well-known brands alike. Sometimes, it’s a success, of course, take the latest Magico models. but many times the hyped up drek gets the sales , and they come out with more of the similar.



This is because it’s very challenging to assess quality or match to one’s preferences from a shiny picture or a glowing, hyper-up description from some biased mother fuyer. If we had more information, fans would be able to determine the real value of the products, and thus would be happier, but then, reviewers and bigger brands would be less powerful.



So We need to have proper checks and balances on these muther fukkers. It’s a new environment and reviewers are under review to help balance the manipulation of audio products toward their tastes.



And, furthermore, since in the end this is all about Marketing , of course, marketing a field has many different components. In addition to discussion of perceived quality of products, the element of associations is in play as well here.



There are mental connections between a brand, people, and emotions. When the brand and another thought occur together in anyone’s mind, they neurologically connect and are likely to be thought of together in the future.



When people think about a brand, they also think about the logo, the memories of past product interactions, how the brand has made him feel, and the influencers who endorsed it. With Nike it is shoes, swoosh, sweat, athletes that endorse them, etc. With Wilson, it’s stereophile...



These associations may turn people to or away from the brand. so brands must be strategic about how these associations affect brand equity.



In this case Msb has chosen to associate itself with the valin brand , the tas brand and with the Harley brand, and this further pushes the associations to reviewers, in general . All those neurons Fire together. And these associations Aren’t always positive. So here we are...



And shining a bright light on all of this is a great thing!

 

[Elliot G.]

Michael Jordan PLEEEEEEZE he is not the GOAT not even close to the GOAT. He may be an excellent writer and reviewer but don't insult MJ!!!
BY the way the GOAT in audio is by a large margin Harry Pearson. HP is the reason , the foundation, the language and the soul of what HE audio is about. JV may be Kobe or LeBron but never never never MJ.
Caesar I love your enthusiasm but this my friend is sacrilege.