Critic's Corner

Posted by bjh (A) on May 11, 2008 at 17:14:29

In Reply to: RE: When awarding the "Absolute", I see nothing wrong with awarding a prototype posted by Bambi B on May 11, 2008 at 09:54:57

Indeed as you articulated there are risks involved with releasing a prototype for critical review. Moreover in terms of commercial value (we'll assume the explode and burn scenario didn't play out) I can't see that the recommendation is anywhere near an ideal situation for the manufacturer nor potential retailers.

The most obvious manifestation of this is that consumers *can't* rush out and buy on the tail of the positive recommendation. And even supposing eventual commercial release the prospect buyer would seem naturally inclined to be cautious, e.g. were changes made in design and/or parts quality for costs savings and/or the requirements of production fabrication?

---

I also would also content that the strong assumption present in much of the criticism voiced, namely that a critical review publication must primarily act as consumer advocate, i.e. with reviewers acting the role of "proxy purchaser/customer" as one put it, is to my mind seriously misguided. Even at Stereophile reviewers for the most take on components that they have already formed positive impressions of, e.g. those they've been exposed to at trade shows, products from manufactures whose prior offering have pleased them, and so on. Yet the spectrum of sonic preference across the industry is indeed very broad as any reasonably seasoned audiophile can't but be fully aware.

Suppose (at some hypothetical magazine) the products identified as being potentially superior samples of their kind... and after all most reviewers and editors that visit these pages have been forthcoming in suggesting they have little interest in reviewing mediocre to say nothing of inferior products (nor should they)... were simply handed out for review to the corps on a next available (or whatever) basis. The resulting reviews would have little value because they would reflect the personal preferences to some considerable extent rather than evaluation of the products as representatives of their kind. Such a practice might please the crowd always baying for negative reviews (silly misguided folks) but as to real value there would be little.

However the salient point of all this is not that the publications should implement any such practices, goodness forbid!, but rather that even their more sensible practices don't endow then as particularly good consumer advocates. Of course they are in certain limited senses (build quality, reliability, etc.) yet the broad sonic landscape with the legions of fans for the various flavors necessarily limits the degree to which they effectively fill such a role.

Constant reinforcement, and indeed parpoting of this message is something that an organization should and can do to aid the readership. If one goes with the word of a reviewer then intense study of the reviewer's preferences is strongly advised. Such a process, actually sampling components to gauge against the word, will give the audiophile what he/she truly needs, valuable experience, and I would think in most case will also lead him/her to the conclusion that the audio mags shouldn't be treated as consurer advocates, certainly not primarily so.

Everything matters, don't forget to tweak your placebos!

Edits: 05/11/08   05/11/08   05/11/08

• Wow. -t - Bruce Kendall 19:16:47 05/12/08 (0)

Post a Followup:

---

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Critic's Corner ]
[ Comment ] [ Edit ] [ Delete ] [ Copyright Warning! Click for Details ]

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2008, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---