Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

---

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Critic's Corner ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

RE: By their fruits ye shall know them... .

Posted by stehno (M) on December 13, 2014 at 02:53:01

In Reply to: By their fruits ye shall know them... . posted by John Marks on December 10, 2014 at 09:12:02:

John Marks said, "I think that audio reviewers should be judged by the usefulness of their writing. Period.

I'm finding John Marks response rather provactive and not in a good way.

Many of us realize that this is the age of the Communicator. A charismatic writer or speaker who can put an audience in a trance just listing to them or reading their writings. An observer asks, "what is he writing about?" and the reader says, "Shhhh, I just like the way he writes." Even if he not saying one bloomin' thing. He's just writing.

I see Marks response as a potentially poor response. Marks should know as well as anybody that some-to-many reviewers became reviewers solely because the editor had a need and thought they had a gift for writing and not for their discernment or their well-trained ears. And if a magazine hires such a one and develops a following, who cares if he really knows what he's hearing or talking about?

I suppose if one considers all aspects of this industry merely as forms of entertainment only, Mark's philosophy might suffice. However, many of us know that the magazines treat this industry as a business first and foremost. However, we also know there are many mfg'ers and consumers dollars at stake for this to be for entertainment only.

Now I'm not saying that Marks is implying this, but his philosophy and response would be an excellent one if a magazine's purpose were to keep enthusiasts dumbed down, i.e. keep the reader less informed and less educated than the reviewer as this would make for greater number of followers and hence easier sales.

However, in the 21st century many businessmen have taken the philosophy that the end justifies the means. Hence, without hesitaiton I would go so far as to suggest that the philosophy of judging a reviewer's usefulness solely by their writings could potentially be an ongoing strategy by industry leaders. Either knowingly or unknowingly.

For example, many of us know at least one fellow enthusiast who couldn't punch their way out of a musical bag if their life depended on it. I know several and I also know some reviewers who are no better. In the forums I think I've encountered many. There are also many who have completely abandoned their "untrustworthy" ears in favor of measurements to define SOTA-level playback systems today. Thus abandoning the absolute sound as the Holy Grail and instead have made measurements the new Holy Grail. Which I suppose is a great strategy if one wanted to be a paper tiger in the forums but does nothing for their playback system's level of musicality.

In other words, in this very thread, I don't recall anybody yet mentioning that a reviewer should as a minimum requirement, possess some basic ability to audibly discern what he is hearing.

I'm not surprisd but it is sad.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

VH Audio

---

[ Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]

---

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

---