In Reply to: Without the ability to purchase at accomodation prices...few would be willing to do it... posted by Enophile on March 8, 2007 at 19:48:04:
>>That would be as bad for the industry as anything I can think of...it would lead to a situation where the gear chosen for review could based on personal desire (avarice) rather than chosing amongst representative samples of the marketplace's products.The feeling I get from Stereophile's reviewers is that this is not the case.<<
Indeed. And I doubt it's the case for very many others. Fact is, that characterization (in the first paragraph seems to me not to make a lot of sense. There may be people out there who like one thing in particular and desire it to the exclusion of all else. But when I consider the situation of most audio reviewers I know about, that's just not where they're coming from. Fact is, if there's one particular thing they really want, they probably already have it. The appeal of this gig--at least in principle--is that you get to try a lot of different stuff.
I would argue, though, that it's good for readers when a reviewer specializes to some extent. There's too much stuff out there to become an expert in everything. And (since you're an "enophile") it doesn't make sense to have a reviewer who hates Cal sauvignon blanc reviewing Cal sauvignon blanc. There are lots of different "tastes" out there and if you're going to take a stab at covering the range of available products, you want (at least potentially) sympathetic reviewers. If you assume that there are (eg) good SETs and not-so-good SETs, you don't want a reviewer who's going to condemn SET's in general.
What's the most fun for reviewers is also, I think, what's best for readers: to have clearly stated and well-defined tastes, to work mostly in that realm, but to branch out and explore other things that complement your core interests.
But, to me, the idea that my desire for JUST ONE THING would blind me to all else is completely alien. Frankly, I'd love it if my tastes were that simple--I'd just go ahead and buy that thing and be done with it. Since I use the modest proceeds of my audio writing mainly to support my audio habit (thank god I'm not addicted to heroin; not much of a market for heroin-writing these days...), I wouldn't need to do this anymore. It's precisely BECAUSE I want to try new stuff that I do this. Different writers have different reasons, but I bet this one is pretty common.
Jim Austin
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- False dichotomy - Jim Austin 04:05:08 03/09/07 (22)
- Re: False dichotomy - bjh 04:47:32 03/09/07 (21)
- Who ever claimed... - Jim Austin 07:37:29 03/09/07 (19)
- Re: Who ever claimed... - bjh 08:57:41 03/09/07 (2)
- Re: Who ever claimed... - Jim Austin 11:23:00 03/09/07 (1)
- Accommodation pricing is available to online journals... - David W. Robinson 13:36:51 03/09/07 (0)
- consistant equipment swapping is the goal? - jdouglas51 08:44:17 03/09/07 (2)
- Not sure I get your point. - Jim Austin 08:53:42 03/09/07 (1)
- Re: Not sure I get your point. - jdouglas51 09:13:36 03/09/07 (0)
- P.S. - Jim Austin 07:43:52 03/09/07 (12)
- the view as an insider - jdouglas51 08:56:18 03/09/07 (11)
- Re: the view as an insider - Jim Austin 09:15:15 03/09/07 (10)
- Re: the view as an insider - bjh 09:25:01 03/09/07 (9)
- Not that I've ever been tempted, but... - Jim Austin 09:30:03 03/09/07 (8)
- Re: Not that I've ever been tempted, but... - jdouglas51 10:09:28 03/09/07 (6)
- Maybe I'm missing this... - robert young 13:24:12 03/10/07 (2)
- the distributuon chain - jdouglas51 06:44:44 03/11/07 (1)
- The cost of doing business... - robert young 11:21:10 03/11/07 (0)
- That's a fair point... - Jim Austin 10:23:09 03/09/07 (2)
- Re: That's a fair point... - Charles Hansen 13:52:00 03/09/07 (1)
- Yep, that's them. - Jim Austin 14:01:48 03/09/07 (0)
- "I'm afraid I don't get your implication. "... I feign surprise. nt - bjh 09:54:38 03/09/07 (0)
- exactly - jdouglas51 05:36:39 03/09/07 (0)