Who is the best reviewer?

[Alan Sircom]

Neither those who make exquisitenor those who like it or buy it will ever claim that it tracks time better. If asked, they would unanimously say that it is merely "good enough" as a watch, and the rest is jewelry. Makers of audio candy will not concede as much, and neither will your magazine.

Before it got gummed up with bits of fallen ceiling, my mechanical watch routinely lost just over a minute a week, an error of roughly one part in 10,080. A better mechanical, a quartz or one of those watches that references itself against atomic clocks would return an even better figure. A loudspeaker that could deliver the same level of accuracy would be universally praised as being several orders of magnitude better than anything currently made.

Worse still, if you were to compare the sound of a real orchestra against a recording of the same, you are losing a significant amount of information, even before you factor in errors intrinsic to the audio replay end of the chain.

We still have a long way to go before 'good enough'. Fortunately, some are not content with today's 'good enough' and keep trying to improve their lot. Otherwise, we'd still be relying on sundials.

 

[fishnchips]

We still have a long way to go before 'good enough'

Strange. One could never guess this by reading your magazine.

 

[Alan Sircom]

Strange. One could never guess this by reading your magazine.

Really? You've read reviews that say that a component delivers a perfect simulation of the live event?

A recording can be a remarkable simulation of the live event, or it can be wholly invented studio creation. That recording played on good equipment can bring the sounds to life, they can stop you in your tracks, you can sit enrapt and enthralled by the passion of the musicians and the composer. You can wonder at the expansive, detailed and dynamic sound too.

But you still cannot recreate the concert hall in your living room. You can get some way toward this, and the better the equipment gets, the closer it gets to this recreation, but we are still far from perfect recreation of the live event.

 

[fishnchips]

I download the "Guides'" you publish online with "TAS". Kindly point out sentences or phrases therein that describe specific sonic flaws in the equipment you, er, host.

 

[caesar]

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.

Assuming Mr. Bedworth is correct about his assessment of the product and it is much better relative to the competition, if a guy is 65 years old, has no debts and has $5M, $10M, or more in the bank, whats wrong with spending $70K of it on a DAC? You can't take it with you.

 

[caesar]

Sorry to devolve the thread in this fashion but I need to vent some ..
Great Audio doesn't have to be a "fantasy" ... And it is not more always money in GEAR that brings great performance. You would be surprised how many modest systems outperform stupendously expensive ones. I read somewhere that a great speaker in a bad room is the same as driving a Porsche on ice and complaining about the poor handling ... Ask the question how many of these great speakers re in a great.for the purpose environments .. Funny that the marketing brochures of such gears rarely if ever show them in a suitable environment .. It is more Architectural Digest than we , audiophiles, would care to admit ...
One can with a relatively modest sum assemble a great system if one pays attention to the fundamentals ... We have been led to believe that the performance of these mega-systems is throughly unapproachable .. Well it is not always so ... it is rarely so .... And that is where the reviewers should blow a new air in High End Audio not going nicely with the more moeny more performance mantra .. They know it is not the case they may have persuaded themselves of such but deep inside ... they know the truth ...

Frantz, I agree with you in principle. But the reality is that even the "non-fantasy" products like the ones you mentioned (Magnepan, Logan, Revel, etc.) are getting better- every 5 years or so, and are not "cheap" by any means.

As for magazines, they are in the business of selling their issues. If Valin or Harley or Fremer published pictures of their rooms in the magazine, those issues will not move off the shelves. Instead, they glamorize the really expensive products, which really jump out at us readers, but in reality very few people buy. And we have these "best" products coming out every few months.

Audiophiles are hooked. Personally, I really can't wait for Valin's review of the Magico Q5 speaker. I think he will be outdoing Meg Ryan in the famous scene.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-bsf2x-aeE

 

[Alan Sircom]

I download the "Guides'" you publish online with "TAS". Kindly point out sentences or phrases therein that describe specific sonic flaws in the equipment you, er, host.

I am not sure if you fail to understand, or are choosing to misunderstand. The result is the same.

Car reviewers didn't spend the time before air-bags and ABS criticizing cars for not having air bags and ABS, but that didn't stop them from recognizing there was a need for a safer automobile. You seem to think audio reviews should be negative because products fail to attain a level of performance that is beyond current technology. Sorry, but I cannot criticize 2011's products for not attaining 2061's specifications.

Your reaction to our 'Guides' highlights a more disturbing trend for the journalist, that goes far beyond audio. The fact that you omitted the word "Buyer's" from the term "Buyer's Guides" is telling. A "Buyer's Guide" (as the name suggests) is a guide intended for prospective buyers of a particular product category. Reviews that would ultimately conclude "don't buy it" wouldn't make the cut. If I have space for, say, five high-end preamps in a Buyer's Guide of amplifiers, I am more likely to select the five that readers might want to buy rather than waste space on something they definitely wouldn't.

In short, more balanced reviews can only happen when people relearn how to process writing with a sense of balance. We write 'accentuate the positive' reviews today because it seems so many people are intensely hyper-critical of the merest suggestion of an implication of a negative comment that we risk destroying good products by simply describing them in neutral tones. I have found myself writing increasingly up-beat reviews of products because of wild over-reaction to what I have written, or even jumping to conclusions based on what I haven't written. If I write 'refined' people read it as 'dull', if I write 'refined, yet still exciting' they read it as 'inconsistent' and if I write 'an exceptionally elegant and polished performance, but without sacrificing an enlivened and entertaining presentation in the process' then - and seemingly only then - do they read it as 'refined'. If I don't mention it at all, then it's 'unrefined'. And if I described something as 'unrefined', then it gets read as 'sounds like someone emptying a bucketful of teaspoons down a fire-escape' or 'only suitable for burning'.

Personally, I'd prefer doing without the purple prose and instead go back to the more balanced reports I used to write a dozen or so years ago, but as people are so ready to read their own message into someone else's words today (even to the point of looking at two words and only seeing one of them), that seems unlikely.

 

[fishnchips]

Personally, I'd prefer doing without the purple prose

but since you have to make a living, you forego the "critical" part of being a critic and go for the easy part, i.e. the paycheck. Thank you, this is as close to a "guilty" plea as I could ever hope for.

 

[FrantzM]

Assuming Mr. Bedworth is correct about his assessment of the product and it is much better relative to the competition, if a guy is 65 years old, has no debts and has $5M, $10M, or more in the bank, whats wrong with spending $70K of it on a DAC? You can't take it with you.

There is nothing wrong in spending whatever amount one wants, is able or wish .. It's the person money and he/she does with it what he/she wants ... No! The heart of the matter is the implication that because of its price due apparently to the use of those "expensive" DACS (still don't know which these are or how expensive ) the product is superior and a statement. No! the product should stand on its own performance, its own merit. There is no reason why it has to be superior because of the cost of its parts .. That type of hyperbole is also to me what is wrong about our hobby. Has the poster compared this DAC to others costing less? Now suddenly comes the non-sense of price class in basically what is a computer gear an area where prices falls as we type them ? Huh!
To come back to my car analogy ... The BMW M3 one of my favorite car will run circles around most Ferrari, Yes the Ferraris will always cost more but no car fanatics will tell me the Ferrari is better because of the hands-mounted engine or its expensive paint job at Pinifarina or its mystique winning formula 1 or Le Mans where Ferrari has been sharing the winning with really pedestrian brands like Honda... ...Honda!!??? or Renault ... Cars similar to Ferrari are luxury and their performance is not what sells them .. So I am repeating myself .. is that what the high End Audio has become? and should that be what a reviewer should strive to push? How does one become a very good reviewer then? Can we name a great reviewer of utterly subjective areas like Fashion or Jewelry? Do they even exist?

 

[Alan Sircom]

but since you have to make a living, you forego the "critical" part of being a critic and go for the easy part, i.e. the paycheck. Thank you, this is as close to a "guilty" plea as I could ever hope for.

If I tried editorializing on that scale, I'd fire myself. You need to learn to read what people say, not what you think they said or want them to say.

 

[fishnchips]

The heart of the matter is the implication that because of its price due apparently to the use of those "expensive" DACS (still don't know which these are or how expensive ) the product is superior and a statement. No! the product should stand on its own performance, its own merit

Very well put. By the way, what's the audio equivalent of F1? A recording studio that records the world's major orchestras and opera singers, maybe? If so, I sincerely doubt that Deutsche Grammophon would ever be impressed by a DAC in a slick triangular box and on feet made of gold, even Rheingold.

 

[Orb]

No, just wannabes out for a quick buck. Cable sound varies, and this depends on many variables: length, gauge, metallurgy, physical assembly, shielding, choice and placement of dielectrics, crimping and solder, and what not. Some of these variables carry a cost penalty, some do not. This does not affect price. Price is fixed on perceived value, "fake good" reviews, market expectations, and an overwhelming desire for big markups and profit. No matter how you toss it, price is not one of these sound-related variables.

And just to add, this is also compounded by who actually manufacturers-engineered the cable in the 1st place, so perception of value vs price these days is even more cynical and in most cases I would agree.
The downside is for the cable manufacturers who do actually engineer develop their own cable along with the manufacturing process, I find it painful that there are cable companies who can charge similar prices as those and yet rely on a mass producing cable manufacturer-"generic" cable, but I digress.

Relating to perception-review, again for cables this seems incredibly difficult to do when the majority of us would have difficulties telling differences in a short-medium comparison test.
That said I have experienced long term preferences for specific cables and it is not necessarily the price, but I could not describe the differences in a way like they do in reviews.
So I do think there are differences and this can come out in longer preference tests and maybe relates to tolerences-thresholds, and due to it affecting my listening behaviour I have ended up with "high end" cables but at what would be deemed the cheaper end of that price scale, still expensive though compared to the generic type cables available from mass market cable manufacturers (bell-canare-etc).

So I must admit I am somewhat dubious of most cable reviews (not all), but maybe this highlights one area that differentiates audiophiles doing comparisons-auditions to that of good reviewers; they only do their articles and reviews after having the product for couple to several months and also having a good stable-long term reference system to integrate and compare the products.
This may explain some of the discrepencies between what a reviewer reports and the general audio listener-auditioner.
However this is probably only valid for the very good reviewers, and thats another debate on what defines a good reviewer (methodological-analyticial approach with bias restricting process-approach at a minimum).

Cheers
Orb

 

[fishnchips]

the very good reviewers

A very good reviewer would try to sort things out. Isolate each variable and determine what works best. What do most reviewers do? They say "Cable A is very nice" and then "Cable B is very nice". When in a particularly feisty mood, they may go out on a limb and say "Cable B is very nice, but in a different sort of way than Cable A is".

 

[fishnchips]

If I tried editorializing on that scale, I'd fire myself

This is very nice.

You need to learn to read what people say, not what you think they said or want them to say.

This is also very nice, but in a different sort of way.

 

[Alan Sircom]

So I am repeating myself .. is that what the high End Audio has become? and should that be what a reviewer should strive to push?

In some circles, yes. A lot of High-End Audio is sold as luxury goods to luxury goods purchasers. To some, the fact it makes a sound is a bonus... it's sold as a status symbol first and foremost. While not everyone is the same, I suspect that the new Sonus Faber Amati Futura sounds like someone took the positive yet disparate elements of the three speakers in the Homage range and rolled them into one box is icing on the cake for many buyers, next to the new super-glossy piano finish and the mirror finish chrome top, feet and rear fins.

That might sit uncomfortably for traditional audiophiles, who want sound to be paramount and the looks to be a very much secondary consideration. However, it seems that this is the way of things now. Audio sells in big numbers to those who want to display their new found wealth in BRIC economies not saddled with trillion-dollar debts. And fortunately, these status brands frequently buy up useful partners, providing injections of cash in an increasingly tough financial climate.

Has it really ever been any different, apart from many of the dealers in these regions at least being honest enough to drop the pretense of sound quality being uppermost? How many Wall Street guys in the 1980s really bought a pair of Apogees on the basis of a series of careful listening tests to find the ideal system for their listening tastes? I don't remember seeing job adverts saying "Commodities Trader wanted. Must be an audiophile." They would be the same people who would never consider driving around in a Honda or Renault, even if the company won a string of F1 championships.

Here's the thing. Let's say you like the sound of a system that uses equipment and components from a range of good, well-engineered products that work together well. There may well be a couple of distributors in far-flung places who essentially sell your favored components as virtually off-the-shelf systems to young execs in big businesses in the area. The young exec has an easy and very visible way of expressing his or her (but usually his) status within the business, through a series of improvements, upgrades and expansions to that system. And believe me, they show it; I've sat next to such people on flights to Asia, and they have pictures of their hi-fi in their wallet alongside images of their wives, girlfriends and kids. He or she (but usually he) will also know not to have ideas above their station and upgrade too fast. The bonus for you is that while you are saving up to invest or upgrade, which might take five or 10 years, this regular thru-put of status-seeking execs will help keep the company in R&D costs, new product lines and in business. The products still do what you want them to do, but in the meantime, the business doesn't fold thanks to people who perhaps might not love music as much as you do, but do put money in the company's bank balance.

So long as no one gets killed, the best way to keep in business is to do lots of business.

 

[fishnchips]

the best way to keep in business is to do lots of business.

You are stating your guiding principles very clearly.

 

[FrantzM]

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?

 

[Alan Sircom]

You are stating your guiding principles very clearly.

Thank you.

The lack of business acumen demonstrated by many vanity brands is one of many things hobbling audio, IMO. Even a hobby needs to have its professionals. Audio engineers should stop thinking their EE skills can automatically translate into building a good business, distributors should act like professionals rather than 17th Century French Dandies, dealers should stop treating customers like they were some kind of yeast infection and magazines should stop being so scared of losing readers or advertisers that they lose readers and advertisers. If we respectively don't do these things, the hobby will be a footnote to Dr Dre and Steve Jobs in the places it began.

All of this takes money, however. And only vanity brands have money right now. Even so, commerce is not a dirty word.

 

[FrantzM]

Thank you.

The lack of business acumen demonstrated by many vanity brands is one of many things hobbling audio, IMO. Even a hobby needs to have its professionals. Audio engineers should stop thinking their EE skills can automatically translate into building a good business, distributors should act like professionals rather than 17th Century French Dandies, dealers should stop treating customers like they were some kind of yeast infection and magazines should stop being so scared of losing readers or advertisers that they lose readers and advertisers. If we respectively don't do these things, the hobby will be a footnote to Dr Dre and Steve Jobs in the places it began.

All of this takes money, however. And only vanity brands have money right now. Even so, commerce is not a dirty word.

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?

 

[Bruce B]

Price commensurate with performance?

I think you hit the nail on the head with this one. I think High-end audio is the one hobby that suffers the most from this. If there is something that comes along where its performance exceeds its price point, no one takes it seriously.
The same can be said about outrageously priced equipment, in that no one wants to say anything bad about it and everyone thinks up excuses to justify its existence.