Home General Asylum

General audio topics that don't fit into specific categories.

You know what they say about assumptions...

>But you were a reviewer in a totally different age in a publication that, for all intents and purposes, no longer exists. Ancient history just doesn't hack it.>

My last article was printed about 6 years ago. I'm not sure that was a different era.

If you have actual evidence that the magazines are putting pressure on the reviewers to skew their writing in a positive manner in this era, please present it. Otherwise, it's just your paranoid fantasies getting the beter of you.

>(Time, perhaps, to change the letter after your name?)>

When I registered on AA a few years ago, I did it as just another audiophile. They recognized my name and required me to have the (R) after my name. Not my choice.

>These days almost all speaker reviews (and most are on webzines) become exercises in creative writing to say in 5000 words or more nothing really beyond "I like this speaker.>

Sorry, I don't read the webzines. I consider the print reviewers to be 'paid, professional journalists' and I expect them to hold to a pretty high standard. And the first tenet of a good review is to entertaian the reader.

Anyone can write a review on the web.

>Look at the review of the Wilson Maxx 2 that measures so poorly, for example. Without measurements the TAS review hardly gives any information or insight, of any kind, at all.>

I'm not sure the Stereophile review correlates very well with the measurements, so what difference would measurements of the speaker make in TAS?

Have you heard these speakers? A neighbor had the original MAXXs driven by top of the line Krell equipment and they sounded pretty amazing.

>...though I have heard some very bad speakers.>

Did you read good reviews of those 'bad' speakers?


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


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups


You can not post to an archived thread.