Frantz, he said quite plainly that he strives to be useful to himself.Doesn't that diminish his/her worth? his/her usefulness?
Frantz, he said quite plainly that he strives to be useful to himself.Doesn't that diminish his/her worth? his/her usefulness?
Alan
IF there is one thing I would say about your last post it is honest ..yet the reviewer job is not that. In all aspects of life there exist a few people who can be seen as critics. The term tend to take a negative connotation as the criticism often involves a fair amount of showing far the item under review is from the ideal. Ideal being here implicit or explicit. It can change through times but it remain a central tenet of the review/critic.
Let's now, get back to High End Audio reviewing. What should be the role of the reviewer? I understand that it is in his/her interest to advance his /her industry? but should he simply be subservient the lowest common denominator i-e selling wares? Regardless of their worth with respect to his/her perception of the ideal. Shouldn't the reviewer at times takes a stand to investigate how gears approaches the reviewer personal version of The Ideal? When it becomes simply an affair of pushing wares, should the reviewer be part of this loop? Is it his/her role? Doesn't that diminish his/her worth? his/her usefulness?
This just made me google pictures of yours. I have no more questions.So long as no one gets killed, the best way to keep in business is to do lots of business.
Agrred with most of your point .. Don't you think that creating value is requisite? So Price has to be part of that equation as well shouldn't it? Price commensurate with performance?
This just made me google pictures of yours. I have no more questions.
Infraction issued. My first one on WBF . Do not make personal remarks.This just made me google pictures of yours. I have no more questions.
Aw, c'mon, don't be so cruel! After all, "as long as no one gets killed", all is well, right? Alan said so!One more of that nature will be your last for ongoing violation of TOS
Alan, I for one really enjoy reading your posts here at WBF and sincerely hope you continue to share with us your observations and knowledge. I'm glad you take the high road with your posts.Guys,
I have a thick skin (scaly and green too... I think I was an alligator in a past life). Don't be hard on the guy. If he has good things to contribute, that's to the good. If he has a chip on his shoulder (pun intended) about reviewers, he's not the first and won't be the last.
I really don't have an issue with this. Besides, there's nothing he could throw at me that I haven't heard a thousand times.
(...) This can be difficult at times, because often the only time you make contact with the readers is when they are furious about you saying bad things about their pet product... often even when you didn't.
\
Although I have stated a few posts above I am immune to reviews, I have gone now through three enthusiastic independent reviews of the Classe CA M600 that state that this amplifier belongs to the state of the art in amplifiers - impressive score! Should I offer myself to review it?
If something has fidelity doesn't that mean that it reproduces the sound as is? i-e "sumptuousness" included ... Call me literal but this is to me wordplay not a trial at describing the sound (or lack) of an amplifier By the way by all accounts the Classe is a good amp ...something that stereo systems often sacrifice in the pursuit of fidelity
Are you speaking as someone who would pay 70K for this product? If not, you really cannot make such a statement. This product and this statement is what is wrong with Hi-end audio and why people feel so negatively about reviewers.
I enjoy a nice subjective review, poetic or not, and I have been guilty of crass poetics myself. I do not claim to be hyper rational, because my enjoyments would be few.
I read published reviews first as entertainment, second as information and third as indicators of trends, seldom as buying guides.
The British article on the solid state amp that set off the recent controversies did step over the bounds of criticism into the realm of flogging.
There was the thread on epiphanies a while ago here. Really, do critics experience epiphanies every couple of months and epiphanies of epiphanies a couple of times a year?
Especially with solid state amps, the epiphanies seem a bit over wrought.
After 40 years, I have listened to some of the solid state epiphanies. I will marvel at the freshness and clarity of the highs, be astounded by the quicksilver dynamics, be terrified by the tight, powerful bass and amazed by the huge two dimensional imaging. Then, after about ten minutes, they will sound like aural equivalent of chewing on aluminum foil, I just don't want to listen any more.
Tubes keep me involved, and I don't want to waste my time anymore on another solid state epiphany that will wind up as somebody's expensive door stop/ boat anchor in a year or so. It is not possible to be a "popular" critic without being tolerant of diverse technologies and using speakers with passive crossovers so you can review everything that comes through the door.
Mature critics shouldn't really be engaging in "epiphany salesmanship", it really does not wash well and is probably the source of much ire and spleen in the hyper rational types, it annoys me too.