 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
Strange...or... hmmm...conspiracy? There a promise of new review, upcoming, not posted yet, on the 6 moon site of Srajan Estabaniandisan (sorry dude, don't have time to go back and check out the spelling, but hey, didn't you say you invented your new name...well, so did I!)But it's already posted at Hyend Audio...the importer of the gear! Talk about a cozy relationship with a manufacturer and reviewer! Submitting it to the dealer...hey, you don't think the dealer actually wrote it? Nah...couldn't be unethical. Not from Srajan...I just read a lecture by him on the poor ethics of posters at Audio Asylum at Positive Feedback. You know, one of the his Aureola-villes, number 15 or 23 or whatever. (Heh, heh Beavis, I just said aureola...you know, heh, heh, the circle around the nipple.)
OK, what gives? I'm Woodward and Bernsteining you dude! I wanna Pulitzer prize for investigative reporting.
Follow Ups:
...but don't question someone's integrity without knowing all the facts. Go listen to some music.
I thought AA in particular and audio hobby in general was supposed to allow questions, dear shefley, whomever you are...you've magically appeared from nowhere as if...well, a sockpuppet for someone else's defense Hmmm. This is a discussion forum. Question the reviewers...even the dead tree media, e.g. Stereophile, allows questions of reviewers. But not you...move on folks, ignore the unpleasantness, issue a free pass...nor questions allowed.The priesthood of reviewers, their ethics and opinions are supposed to be scrutinized and challenged...the entire enterprise of reviewing, questionable internet postings and dubious ethics have all been rather pointedly, and ofttimes a bit pompously--as if from Mt Olympus--dissected in the writings at Auroville by guess who? Srajan!
So thanks for magically appearing--as if from nowhere--for the defense. And what a defense! When in doubt, don't question anything readers, just ignore. Reduce everything to a 'dislike' of Srajan, issue an ad hominem attack, and demand inquisitive readers with honest inquireies to move on...nothing to see...beat it folks.
The facts are: review, looks like a rave...appears on Srajan's page...his own site, mind you, not the importer's. So there are legitimate questions, even Srajan says it's wrong. But here you are, requesting a coverup, no questions allowed.
I'm not sure where to hook into this thread, so I'll hook in at the beginning. I'm sure Srajan will handle the business about the early posting of an incomplete review, but I'd like to say that from my reviewer's point of view, sending a late draft of a review to the manufacturer is normal business. I send it for fact-checking and to make sure I haven't misrepresented any of the tech aspects of the product. I also invite reactions to anything I've said. I am willing to listen, in advance, to any comments they care to make. I generally run it by a couple of knowledgeable audio friends as well.I do this because I want my blind side covered: to see if I've missed something - sometimes obvious, sometimes not. I want to hear if anyone has had a significantly different experience and if so, why? Different positioning? Different front end, if I'm listening to speakers or electronics. I am enough of a objectivist to believe that audio components ought to sound GENERALLY the same to MOST folks in MOST situations. I very seldom get back any suggestions for reconsiderations of judgments I've offered by manufacturers, I guess because they recognize their piece in my prose and so decide to leave well enough alone. But I do often learn something.
I did have one importer quibble for a few days over a choice of words: he felt my adjective had too negative a connotation in a situation where he felt I was aiming for a description that was more neutral - and, under the circumstances, he preferred to see something at least neutral! I don't mind getting into conversations like this because I trust my instincts not to be manipulated. I also understand that from a manufacturer or importer's point of view, a review can be a very powerful instrument, negative or positive. Reviewers tend to think of their reviews as "studies," but in addition to being that they are also promotional documents. Everything we say is loaded with connotations that can have an impact -- albeit generally short-lived -- in the market. That doesn't mean we should pull punches but it does mean we need to be responsible, especially with our adjectives. We had a long and interesting conversation about whether "unrefined" was a bad word or not: when we considered sugar, he saw that unrefined could be read as natural, undoctored. I asked if he felt his product sounded like white sugar to him. That somewhat molified him but he did come close to insisting that he come to my house (many hundreds of miles) because he didn't believe what I was hearing ("I hear your CD player is brutal.") But he's an exception who I now use just for Audio Tales, like this one. And no, he never came. But I wouldn't have missed this exchange for the world. I actually emerged from it with a somewhat clearer understanding of the component in question - of how one with somewhat different taste than mine might hear it. Whether or not we agreed on exactly what it sounded like, he knew the piece better than I did from having lived with it longer. I found his point of view worth trying to get inside of, ended up incorporating a word or two of his into the review, and like the review the better for it.
I have had extended conversations with several designers and manufacturers, often with my review draft in progress as the focus though not always, and learned a great deal. I tend not to have my mind or judgment changed by these conversations but almost always enlarged. Enlarged by a clearer sense of a designer's intentions. Designers do not always realize their intentions but they are always interesting to know about.
n.t.
...on sharing the final draft with the manufacturer/distributor before publication. As with Bob, I do this to give them an opportunity to catch factual errors in my draft.On occasion, a couple have attempted to argue with my commentary or listening tests, in vain. I have known of my review being used before it was published. It would be silly of them to do so, since the text could subsequently be changed by the editors before publication.
I can't speak for Srjan, but Adam Dragon at Highend Audio Imports is a true gentleman and a man of his word from my experiences with him. There may well be a reasonable explanation for the early appearance of the review. Hell, I have seen excerpts from a $phile review appear in an ad in the same issue the actual review debuts. How long in advance does that mean the manufacturer got his hands on the copy?Oz
> I have seen excerpts from a $phile review appear in an ad in the > same issue the actual review debuts.
We take strenuous steps to prevent this happening, and to the
best of my knowledge has never happened. When did this occur?
Who was the manufacturer? Are you sure it was Stereophile?
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Not sure what you're referring to. I've penned the intro/company history page of said review but then sent the unit back because it had developed distortion due, apparently, to one of the meters being intermittent. That preliminary page I sent to Bluenote for fact-checking. No subsequent pages have been written yet, and customary protocol sends the finalized review for a manufacturer's reply upon completion, once the raw facts (history, technical descriptions and specs) have already been confirmed. That way, if a manufacturer doesn't reply, I can publish the review assured that the important data were signed off on early in the game.If this preliminary first page has already been linked to, that's entirely without my knowledge and I'd appreciate a link to check it out.
Cheers, Mr. Investigator Dude.
Srajan
Hello, My name is Adam Dragon from HiEnd Audio Imports. I am the importer for Bluenote. Srajan had sent me the introductory page of the review to check his explanations of the company history as well as descriptions of the technical parameters of the Demidoff amp under review. He had gotten it right but I still appreciated the oportunity to go over it. For some reason, I was under the impression that this page had already been made live on the 6moons site, as a indicator of things to come. This is why I put the link on my site. I apologize for the confusion, and if I have caused Srajan any problems through my ignorance.Best Regards,
Adam Dragon
HiEnd Audio Imports
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/bluenote/demidoff.htmlThat's a scandal...I'm shocked. Shocked!
Conspiracy alert!Adam Dragon has indeed linked to the introductory page submitted for fact checking. I just found it. That's highly unusual and wasn't authorized.
Implied rave? Whoa. Conspiracy theory running at an all-time high? All I know thus far is that the amp performed stunningly well into my hornspeakers until it developed the distortion that had me send it back. I just killed the hidden URL and will contact Adam to find out what he was thinking - or not thinking.
As far as being shocked? By all means feel that way. Submitting advance copy for fact checking is standard protocol. As I explained earlier, I like to do it before I get to the actual performance descriptions so I don't have to rely on a fact-check sign off when I'm ready to publish. The manufacturer, for whatever reason, might be slow responding (some take vacations). When you're more or less the only content provider keen on regular updates, conserving time to get on to the next project is important.
What *is* completely non-standard? To send readers to a review that hasn't developed past the intro and says nothing about how the unit sounds like. This hasn't happened before and I'm not sure why Adam did it.
Cheers,
Srajan
Wonder if you and your selenial colleagues are still dazzled and entranced by the "harmonious treble effulgence" of that crud-dud amp you recently reviewed -- hence the boo-boo.Yes, some take vacations. And for some others nothing but a sabbatical would do ;-)
Regards,
og
How the heck could that happen? How does he have access to your site? That's what makes it sound strange, and the unethical part, such as there is, comes from only having a single page posted, where one would definitely believe the machine is the next great thing. That, and the fact that he hasn't exactly hacked into your site, or has he, to make the 'review' appear on your 'stationary'--with all the colorful 6moons graphics, etc. that we've grown to love. Oh, and just a general statement...could you audition on more conventional cone speaker, or even electrostats, instead of Avantgardes? Eager to hear your responses on above. And, yes, Colin gets a junior grade Pulitzer for spotting, no?
Hi Celluloid.How could it happen? Simple. I upload anything I write immediately onto my server in case my computer at home crashes. That way I can reverse FTP what already lives on my server in an as yet unpublished URL.
In the case of fact-check copies, I send manufacturers the hidden URL. It's the only way to show 'em the copy. I *never* write to Word or some other kind of writing program, always directly into GoLive which is my html program. The hidden URL is the same one I use once the review gets active. The only diff? The official review is linked to from my audio review pages, the "under works" files aren't.
Adam simply "published" the URL, replete with all the graphics I had already laid out on the page. No need to "hack" into the site at all. He just knew where to look since I told him. Again, why the hell he published it is beyond me. You're right, it's just an intro with a preliminary "this is gonna be great" remark. I left him a message tho.
Re: reviewing "regular" speakers, yep, them's a-coming. The DUOS happen to me my reference speaks, i.e. they're what I own, what I'm used to and what constitutes a known quantity. However, future reviews of "normal" dynamic designs are pending. I'm with you - horns aren't for everyone. Neither are tubes. I'm trying to keep a good mix of price points and designs - always accounting for what's available and what my room can support.
Also, if I *know* I'm gonna hate something because it isn't my cuppa tea, I'm not requesting it. It's a drag to waste bad ink and it does nobody a favor. However, once something shows up, it gets reviewed, whether I totally dig it or not. I try to be fair, and in truth, hardly anything shows up these days that is outright bad. But sometimes a component doesn't perform or I don't get it - like the recent Musicalizer. Then I have to say so while leaving room that it might perform very differently elswhere. Just the usual reviewer's considerations, you know?
Anyhow, I hope it's clear now how this thang happened. Once the amp returns, I'll finalize the review. We'll see whether the initial impressions hold up. They were certainly very promising, especially seeing I'm a known tube hound and have speakers that are brutally revealing.
Cheers,
Srajan
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
