Why are audio reviews so consistently positive?

[NorthStar]

Are most audio products (the vast majority) impeccable, or almost too perfect to be true?
Professional audio reviewers are all very conscientious and dedicated to their important work.
We don't question their integrity, their serious work of art as public servants in the name of true audio information.

So, are most audio products all that good? Very rarely are we reading about flaws and negative attributes.

One same audio product reviewed positively by a reviewer usually received positive accolades by other reviewers as well.
Are they all from the same family of golden ears?

Oh yes, we had few discussions in the past fifty years or so about this. But this is the year 2017 now, and with some new developments on the audio technology front.

Why do you think is that, today? Share what you know, your thoughts, frankly in all honesty in the open.
_____

Here's one reviewer's own short take:

"I like that Stereophile backs their reviews up with measurements AFTER their reviewer has given his own review. Analyze both the subjective and objective data and decide for yourself."

"I always do that myself, and for the very reason you mention; I don't want my eyes influencing what my ears hear. AAMOF, I don't take any measurements until the draft copy is off for proofing. That way I don't even have it to edit.

A few thoughts from the other side of the discussion...

I'm luckier than most. Not only are my reviews just a sideline - meaning my livelihood doesn't depend on them - I have zero pressure to accommodate advertisers. The primary reason I chose the outlet I did was because they were the only organization that agreed to my one demand; that nobody would ever edit/control/decide what I reviewed or what I wrote. To date I've published about 50 different evaluations (not all on HTS) and I have never been asked to change a single word. Everything published under my name has been my evaluation, in its entirety. If I was asked to redact even one sentence I'd decline, and in response would simply walk away from this. I'm not the type that compromises when it means something to me (just ask either of my x-wives ).

Most reviewers get products sent to them by the outlet that publishes their articles, and they generally have little to no input on what they get. In my case, the choices are mine. The sole exception is one time I was 'assigned' a 5.1 system that was going to be a giveaway, and the only reason I accepted it was because the manufacturer asked the website owner for me specifically. But that's it, 1 out of 50. 2% of my total output. I have had numerous manufacturers ask if I would be interested in evaluating a particular product - just last week Dr. Hsu reached out to me and offered his new CCB-8 speakers - but even when approached directly I'm as likely to decline as I am to accept (for the sake of transparency, I did accept the CCB-8 speakers). I'm fortunate in that regard; most others don't get to decide, but I do.

I'm extremely particular about audio, and because of that don't feel there is a perfect product out there. I have found things to complain about in every single article. One time I aborted a review because the subwoofer was so awful it didn't warrant me continuing, and that's what I published. There have been 3 manufacturers who let me know they weren't thrilled with what I wrote. There are probably that many more who no longer return my calls or respond to emails. I'm a pariah of sorts, at least to a few companies anyway. I've often wondered if the fact that I'm not afraid to complain has led to less stuff being available/offered to me. I lost count of how many companies simply ignore my overtures, or jerk me around for weeks (and sometimes months!) on end. To me that's unprofessional. Tell me you're not interested, don't just blow me off or waste my time.

Please don't take any of this as me impugning another reviewer or publishing outlet. I don't know what they're up against or how the game is played on any field other than the one I play on. I imagine it's almost unheard of to have total creative license and complete freedom, but that's the situation I put myself in for a reason. My time is probably drawing near though. I have a few really amazing products still left to do, and then I'll likely hang up my keyboard. In some respects I may be the last of a dying breed. What was it Frank Sinatra used to sing, "I did it my way"? I will finish knowing that was always the case for me." - Jim Wilson
_____

What are your takes? I remember DaveyF started a similar thread a while back, last year.

 

[Rodney Gold]

I asked a local audio rag about why they dont publish negative reviews and their reply was that readers want to read about and buy good stuff , not bad stuff.

 

[NorthStar]

I just don't know what to exactly say to that. :b

 

[the sound of Tao]

Bob,
It's reasonable to suggest that reviewing a component fully and properly can involve up to several months of listening and evaluation.

If a component isn't essentially to your liking in the first place then the scary thought of spending months destroying most of your music listening time with a bit of gear that you simply do not relate to would be fairly unbearable.

I don't believe there is enough money for reviewing in the world to make that kind of torture worthwhile. Most of us do this because we love it. To choose to do something that ruins that would be a crazy commitment. I would suggest most of us would be unlikely to accept anything for the fairly involving task of review if we basically didn't like that gear quite a bit in the first place. I'm sure there's other reasons as well but this would be the big one from my perspective at any rate.

 

[NorthStar]

I understand. There are many variables, complexities, and classes.
When I started this thread I had in mind to provide a link. But instead I only gave one short quote. Because I wanted to know the people's opinions from right here. But then, I already know some, the average.

It's the same with audio reviewers; we have various classes.

And it's a long time affair, comin' out of ages. It's a dealer's relationship too for many.

So many products, from all price levels, and from various performance, construction, reliability, operation, ...

Each person has his own targeted interest; and his own flexibility. The average member here is quite flexible; he is an explorer on the higher levels of performance. But many more, I included, won't have the opportunity to explore the higher planes. Not because they don't have the desire but because life's circumstances have traced a different destiny, and jobs and finances are only two reasons among a vast ocean joining others across the whole globe.

Anyway, it's the flip side of the coin, the underside, the hidden truth that goes with that love, that passion I'd like to explore. ...The drive.
We live in a fast world, in a new economy, in newer technologies; trying to marry the old and the new, to adapt and to improve satisfaction of living, listening, emotionally involved in the sounds of the music we love and learn to love day after day after day, with all the breakdowns, the laments, the periods of stagnancy, ecstasy, cries and joys.

It's a high privilege to have access to the best. And the people building the machines @ the service of better audio performance from the better quality music recordings are privileged too in their passion of love and labor. The pro audio reviewers acknowledge that fervent dedication, that passionate love, that temptress of the castle, the desire of richness on all senses.

We all have a vision on everything in life, audio resolution included. When comparing between audio products from the same category, which audio reviewers other than us spend as much and with realistic objectivity and dedication as the money we ourselves spend into it? It's an open question.

I'd like to hear from all classes, from all price brackets and means. I could have started another thread about the latest discovery in the universe, the latest galaxy and its comportment with her surroundings. But I did not because it doesn't attract discussions, audio does. And I cannot go low because it won't fly high enough. There's a balance, and it's right here, in our own orbit. Yes DaveyF started a similar thread before, and there were others too; on the subject of audio reviewers giving raved reviews, mostly raved reviews because no one wants to read unfavorable ones, like Rodney said.
{And like Rodney said; nobody really wants to read negative reviews, even if some of the audio products reviewed are inferior and still gathering positive comments.}

I'm really starting to think that we're all alone in our audio evolution. And as long that our fascination is still alive when the music is playing, we'll never die, even when departed. We won't take our music with us, it's the music that will take us with her. If audio reviewers have that type of philosophy with them, and with all their years of experience, we're in good hands.

The sound of music, uninterrupted, quiet and present. I am waiting for the next audio review praising the new revolution in audio performance...I feel it's comin'. Do you feel it too?

 

[Rodney Gold]

Every one is a reviewer these days

 

[microstrip]

Unfortunately most reviews are mainly centered on a single piece of equipment, expecting magic from it. 99% of the time a negative review implies that the reviewer was not able to create a system that could play with such component, or just that the equipment was not compatible with his too narrow preferences. In such cases IMHO it is better not publishing it. A piece of equipment is not an independent entity, such as a book or an artistic work.

 

[microstrip]

Every one is a reviewer these days

We should separate reviews from reports. Even good reviewers most of the time just write reports.

 

[SCAudiophile]

We should separate reviews from reports. Even good reviewers most of the time just write reports.

Agreed and they often border on musings...true deep-dive reviews are infrequently occurring to say the least.

 

[the sound of Tao]

Unfortunately most reviews are mainly centered on a single piece of equipment, expecting magic from it. 99% of the time a negative review implies that the reviewer was not able to create a system that could play with such component, or just that the equipment was not compatible with his too narrow preferences. In such cases IMHO it is better not publishing it. A piece of equipment is not an independent entity, such as a book or an artistic work.

Great post microstrip... and underlines just how much system building is ultimately make or break in this pursuit.

That said the notion of being able to holistically identify and characterise the essential nature of a component illludes so many reviews that are so often seemingly limited to a breakdown of subjective qualities over trying to define a holistic quality or character for the gear. This is the highest level of subjective assessment imo... just saying that something is better (preferred) than something else is really just the start of the qualitative journey.

 

[bonzo75]

Unfortunately most reviews are mainly centered on a single piece of equipment, expecting magic from it. 99% of the time a negative review implies that the reviewer was not able to create a system that could play with such component, or just that the equipment was not compatible with his too narrow preferences. In such cases IMHO it is better not publishing it. A piece of equipment is not an independent entity, such as a book or an artistic work.

Which is why Zero Distortion provides views of the same component in different systems where it is already set up

Speakers get reported in different rooms with different amps, amps get compared with different amps in different systems, and so on....if the same amp exhibits the same attributes in all systems and this gets confirmed by others - then, if in all ponds and lakes it talks like a duck, and walks like a duck...

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Bad reviews would likely dry up the availability of future review samples.

 

[treitz3]

Spot on John.

Tom

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Bad reviews would likely dry up the availability of future review samples.

Not likely to be significant in the long run. OTOH, living with stuff that you don't enjoy is no way to live.

 

[Joe Whip]

True, but pointing out the bad stuff can help others save their money and not waste their time.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

I don't think that any (or most) of the gear being reviewed by the major mags or websites are truly bad to begin with.

 

[Al M.]

I don't think that any (or most) of the gear being reviewed by the major mags or websites are truly bad to begin with.

My feeling is that a lot of the equipment is far too expensive for its performance. There is tons of good stuff out there, but I also think that a good chunk of High End is just a scam.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

My feeling is that a lot of the equipment is far too expensive for its performance. There is tons of good stuff out there, but I also think that a good chunk of High End is just a scam.

I agree about some of the pricing, but that doesn't make it bad. I'm not sure I want to use the word scam, but some products IMO defy common sense or logic no matter how well the marketing guys lay it out on paper.

 

[caesar]

If you ever want to understand why any human beings do anything, consider what they find painful and pleasurable. Also look very closely at incentives, as people do what they are incentivized to do. In fact, incentives are so powerful, I have seen studies of relatives dying in December or January, based on whether the Estate Tax was being changed, either higher or lower, in a given year. If putting grandma down a few days earlier, in December, or a few days later in January, can add a few million to one’s account, why aren’t audio reviewers dealing with megabuck speakers and cables not susceptible? Not saying there are no mensches in high end audio, but unfortunately I have not met any mother Theresa's in this hobby either. There definitely are conflicts of interest between fans and reviewers…

Due to incentives of reviewers, they just end up serving as marketing representatives of the brands and don't care about the needs of the audio fans. If someone is a fan of magico or Wilson, his positive reviews of their favorite brand bring him more free samples of the product which he can hold on to for 3-24+ months. Consider that long term loan as a marketing expense for the manufacturer...

It also helps bring eyeballs to the reviewers' publications.... Additionally, you can also see guys live valin openly bashing Wilson as “colored”. Furthermore, you also don't see magico guys talking about YG, or vice versa. YG recently had a rollout of their 15 year anniversary speakers, and no magico reviewers wrote about it - too chicken to lose those privileges.

And as the reviewers market their favorite product and result in product sales to the manufacturers, it allows the manufacturers to invest the proceeds from the sales into r&d for future products. As examples, publicity from the niche magico q5 allowed them to release the much more widely accepted S series... And publicity generated from Raidho has allowed that company to fix up most of the flaws from their initial products (popping and boomy bass; technical fixes along with stuffing the ports with socks and underwear seems to do the job), and release a new even better class of products, Raidho C -> Raidho D...

The reviewers, as a reward for their marketing efforts, are then are able to get that next set of products in house, and the cycle continues ...

Borrowing from biology, the manufacturers and reviewers have a symbiotic relationship, but the fans, unfortunately, are left out...definitely a conflict of interest

 

[caesar]

For a specific analysis of positioning a product as “BEST”, involving a "famous reviewer" Robert Harley and the dude who is a "digital authority figure", the “Computer Audiophile” (note that both have SEVERELY analytical taste), check out this "marketing case study" of the Berkeley reference dac:

http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showt...C-DSD-Debunked&p=339348&viewfull=1#post339348

....

This DAC got a lot of buzz a while back, and then went silent. Any normal audiophiles heard this DAC? Do these DACs actually exist or is this a rare case audio vapor-ware? These dacs are very hard to come by for some reason. I know many audiophiles like custom drivers (guilty here, myself), but are the Berkeley boys mining their own aluminum and silicon?

Also, very interesting marketing strategy for this DAC. High end audio, and especially computer audio, are very confusing. And when people are confused, they look to other factors such as price, scarcity, friend recommendation, or industry authority figures. So it’s worth checking out the marketing strategy for Berkeley and its competitors.

Some have claimed that Berkeley Ref is better than dCS. Yet you don’t see dcs dropping their prices. DCS’s strategy is to be the most expensive, implying it is the best. Scarcity and exclusivity is a very good marketing strategy. With the lack of beitzim on the part of reviewers to compare dCS to the upstarts, Dcs is not shaking in their boots because of Berkeley or anyone else.

Lampizator, on the other hand, has built up a quite a following from regular audiophiles who love their product. And in a confused and (seemingly purposefully) f*cked up situation such as computer audio, many folks look at a large number of passionate fans, who are just like themselves (vs. elites), and as a result, purchase the Lampizators. There is also a big social aspect to this hobby, and Lampizator is profiting from it. Talking about gear is similar to re-experiencing it. (How many times do people re-tell great vacation stories, even after many years?) Based on the internet chatter and buzz, audiophiles can try a Lampizator in their system. Many will buy it and start yapping about it to their friends and online… folks on the forums talk about these DACs because they get extra enjoyment of discussing shared experiences of products they own or are familiar with. (The technical term for this phenomenon is “social proof”.) Whether people realize it or on, Popularity happens to be a HUGE signal for quality in our hobby, and Lampizator is a winner here.

Berkeley, on the other hand, has chosen a different route. Looking at their website, they seem to have sent their product to a couple of “experts” who have called the Berkeley Reference “The Best”. These elite experts did not bother comparing the Berkeley to any other product in their writings, so it seems like they are appealing to the dumbf*ck audiophile, who has no self-confidence, and assuring this loser audiophile to just purchase the product based on their recommendation. The Berkeley site has posted reviews by Robert Harley and some dude who calls himself the Computer Audiophile. Harley, apparently is a very good businessman. Harley’s taste runs from grossly coloured to severely analytical. Gotta please those advertisers and gear manufacturers! However, Harley can’t really be trusted by the audio fan. He reviewed Magico and called it “best”, but seems to have forgotten to test it properly with rock music. Even Valin, the man who MADE Magico into a powerhouse brand has admitted, after a DECADE of haranguing TAS readers that magico is the “best”, that magico is not for rock n’ roll. … So on Harley’s advice, busy, productive folks travel long miles, spend travel money, and rearrange their tight schedules to be sorely disappointed with Harley’s recommendations. Additionally, just a few months prior to his Berk Ref is “best” Review, Harley called dCS Vivaldi the “Best”. And why didn’t he publish the Berk Ref review first? Undoubtedly, some high rollers purchased their dCSs before he proclaimed that Berk Ref is the “best”. Yet in his Berkeley Reference review, he failed to compare the 2 products. How’s that for spitting that green/ yellow sticky stuff in the face of the audio fans?

The other industry elite who has called Berkeley the “BEST” is a computer geek who calls himself the Computer Audiophile. I am using the term geek in the most respectful way here, as in “geeks rule the world”. And this computer audiophile dude deserves a lot credit for being at the forefront of computer audio.

But whereas this dude is probably good at setting up servers and networks, where does he get the credibility to have a great ear to evaluate the musical performance that the piece of gear should deliver and put the listener in a state of flow? Most likely he has spent more time evaluating power supplies and Ethernet cables than he has listening to real, live music. Obviously, the gear manufacturers see him as an expert who can influence audiophiles, but his reviewing and writing skills, compared to the more talented reviewers, are more ...hmm…Beavus and Butthead rather than Hamlet.

… Er…Er.. this DAC got great details. He he he… loved that song… uh huh, uh huh, .. The songs on this DAC are so good, I jumped and now I gotta take a big dump. Uh huh huh

Just kidding, of course. As I mentioned, when so many reviewers are just good bullsh*itters who are serving as marketing reps for the manufacturers and are trading their long tales for a long term loan or discount on gear that suits their preferences, the Computer Audiophile dude has actually improved the lives of many in this hobby.

But the reality is that the computer geek’s work is pretty worthless to the audio fan, except to the clueless dumbf*ck audiophile who lacks self-confidence and needs reassurance from an “expert”. Without comparisons in his writings, if one were to remove the review titles or references to brands he is talking about, even he would not be able to tell apart PCM DAC A vs. PCM DAC B he wrote about. It’s all just abstract BS - "great bass", "great soundstage", etc. (Ditto for Harley.) Thus, the first step this dude should take is to realize that his proclamations of “best “ are insulting to the fan and, instead, should start comparing products he has been fortunate to receive from the manufacturers. No one cares what he thinks is best. Instead, audio fans care about if they will think it is good enough to spend their hard-earned money on. Despite what our engineering minded friends say, audio products are experience goods. Their quality can’t be judged without hearing them and comparing them. Who cares what a famous reviewer likes? The consumer’s taste will not likely match his. Without comparisons, reviewers are just marketing their favorites instead of working for the consumer. But that’s their economic incentive. ( I don’t want to give the impression that ALL reviewers don’t care about the audio fans. Most are good guys, especially the ones contributing to this site. Also, the Stereophile guys usually do their best to throw in a comparison.)


Coming back to Berk Ref, supposedly, it is very good on PCM. And who doesn’t want to find a great deal, assuming it’s not just bogus claims? And it does have scarcity going for it along with insulting recommendations by a cripple of industry elites. But because of manufacturing issues with this product and seemingly purposeful evasion, confusion, and obfuscation by some of the industry elites who have heard it, and due to mis-aligned incentives between the reviews and fans, no one seems to know much about how good it is.

....