Home Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

Here's the Reality (Let the Readers Decide)

Below is the actual article concerning this issue posted on my website. Decide yourself whether the "statistics" present a "problem" or not.

As also can be seen, despite Atkinson's deliberately misleading assertion, there is more than one "scenario" in which I do NOT use a "bell curve".

The bottom line is obvious to anyone with an independent and mature mind; in no area of serious reviewing, no matter what prior precautions are taken, is it reasonably and LEGITIMATELY possible to find 60+ CONSECUTIVE "anythings" that are worthy of "recommendation" to your readers.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

A helpful member of Vinyl Asylum posted a revelatory and devastating message on March 28, 2003 (Message 198755). This is the relevant part:

"(Stereophile) went through 18 straight issues in 2001 and 2002 wherein every component they reviewed (yes, every last one) made (their) recommended components (list). In 1989, 70% earned recommendation. I wrote them a letter on this which was never published."


An Analysis of this Important Revelation

I have checked out the number of reviews in 2001 and 2002. The smallest number for any "18 straight issues" was 60. The highest was 69. Let's give Stereophile a real "break", and go with "only" 60 (the minimum). So, what are the odds of 60 components, in a row, being honestly "recommended"?

That depends on the odds of any single component honestly making the RCL. First, using traditional and scientific "Bell Curves", only around 10% (10/100) of audio components (or any "consumer product") are defined as being "excellent". Accordingly, that would mean that if chosen randomly, the odds of 60 consecutive components being "excellent" would be the number "10" to the power of "60" (that is 10 with 60 zeros!).

That's an impossibly (and damningly) large number, which ends any doubt. However, let's now assume that the sample of reviewed components was NOT "random". In short, we're going to give John Atkinson every possible benefit of the doubt. Here are two more "scenarios":


Scenario 1

Let's give John Atkinson a second real "break". We will assume that Atkinson is a true "genius" at "prejudging" components, so only the models with the best chance to make the RCL were reviewed. Accordingly, we will concede that Atkinson has the capability to eliminate 80% of the initial pool of 100 beforehand. Thus, only 20 (100-80) components are still left in the pool, instead of 100, thus greatly increasing the success rate.

This means that 80 of the initial 90 "non-excellent" audio components are now removed from the pool (that's 88.9% of them). (Actually, in "real-life", I know of no audiophile, no matter how experienced, including myself, with this much audio foresight.) Still, this unprecedented ability will now increase the odds of success all the way up to 10/20 or 50%, instead of (the purely random) 10% (10/100).

So, to summarize, we're going from the initial "success rate" of 10% to 50%, just like "flipping a coin". Now, what are the odds of honestly flipping a coin "heads" or "tails" 60 times in a row:


More than 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 to 1

That's One Quintillion; or a Billion Billion. This is also an astronomical number which is beyond any practical use in the human world.

In short, it's Impossible, even if Atkinson is a genius, to have 60 consecutive components recommended when the process is honest.


Scenario 2

Let's give John Atkinson a third real "break". In fact, we're going to go beyond even being "open minded". Let's now assume that Atkinson is even above a genius, and is actually a (secret) "Superhuman", with powers of foresight far greater than anyone who has ever lived on this earth (like "Clark Kent"). We will increase the 50% success rate even further: Up to 75%. So...

What are the odds now of 60 consecutive components honestly making the RCL with even a "Superhuman" prejudging the components and a success rate of 75%?


More than 31,000,000 to 1

Accordingly, "the bottom line" concerning the Stereophile RCL is simple, obvious and incontestable:


The Stereophile Recommended Component List is a Total Fraud



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


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.