Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
Why do hifi reveiwers do this The'll give a four-five star review for something that isn't quite worth the money compared to somehting else.
Not just in the youtube link below. But elsewhere too. I remeber reading a review for a pair of expensive speakers that haflway through the man admitted the speakers weren't much better than the cheaper pair he'd reviwed earlier. Yet he gave it a Rave review.
If it doesent sound good on my amplifier, I'd take it back and find something more suitible for the sound of my amp. same thing with source
components. Bad sounding CD player either gets returned, or its cheap it gets binned.
Expensive DACS and cables. never. More than 1000.00 for a DAC that hant been proven to be any better than the built in DAC in your receiver is too much of a gamble.
"I remeber[sic] reading a review for a pair of expensive speakers that haflway[sic] through the man admitted the speakers weren't much better than the cheaper pair he'd reviwed[sic] earlier. Yet he gave it a Rave review."
If he liked them both, and the criteria he was using was "best sounding" not "best value" then I don't see the issue.
Which speakers was he talking about, though, and do you have a link to the review? If this review does indeed exist and is in a mainline magazine, you may have read what you wanted to in it (You implied that the price somehow made the speaker he reviewed sound bad).
"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad"
I thought he described the sonic deficiencies quite well. "It's a real shame after all the promise of its design and specifications the DAC Magic Plus is a little disappointing, it was articulate, detailed and supple but lacks the refinement and weight of a DAC in its price class. With the wrong partnering equipment its presentation can be uncomfortably bright. A trait that doesn't goes away with burn-in....its brittle sound is its undoing."
It got 4 out of 5 stars, it would have gotten 5 out of 5 stars because of its amazing features, including the ability to play 24/192 computer files and upsampling to 24/384. It lost a star because of its sound making it ONLY be suitable dull sounding systems.
Usually, if something is a particularly good value, they'll say so. As in "The Grundage 8000 will leave a lot of makers of expensive preamps in a panic." A bad value, well, you have to read between the lines. As in "The Grundage 9000, while not inexpensive, is worth consideration by listeners who are attracted by its unusual appearance and don't require the final word in imaging or transparency."
Raymond, buddy, pal...
Before you graduate from college, please take a course or two in spelling and grammar. Your writing is awful. I "get it" that people often type fast and don't care about details when posting on Internet forums, but frankly, if you have a good grasp of the written language, it's hard to make as many mistakes as you do. Some of your posts, such as the one above, are painful to read. Consider studying more, and posting less.
Also, given your interest in audio, you should take at least a Physics 101 type of class. I'm serious. You'll learn a lot about how things work, which will help you to see through some of the hearsay and myths in the audio world.
Getting back to your question... I think if you read reviews (in general) more carefully, the reviewer typically cites multiple pluses and minuses (usually more pluses than minuses, though), and so paints a picture of how one speaker is different from another, as well as possibly being better for one's taste or room or music preference (edit: or budget). And let's not forget that being a reviewer may or may not be a lucrative line of work. Some make a good living, jet here and there and dine well with industry folks, pay their own health insurance, save for retirement, etc.; while others have taxpayer-subsidized telephone service because their income is so low.
So, they walk a fine line between saying "this product isn't worth the price" and "this is a good choice" and "this is a good choice but it's too expensive" and "this product needs some re-thinking" and "this product reminds me of sixties "hi-fi", etc. After all, if they say anything remotely derogatory, they could get sued.
I too find it irritating when posters to AA don't take the time to spell check their posts and at least read over what they have written and see if it comprehensible or at least coherent. I realize that not everyone is going to use proper grammar but I don't think it wouldn't be asking too much to at least make a perfunctory effort to edit their comments before posting.
Take a Physics 101 class? I assume you're joking. I'm confident that this forum would loose a good 99% of its member if that were a requirement including me.
Jay it would help allot if we were allowed to edit our posts after putting them up, which is common on the rest of the web. And if you don't care for the spelling why not throw in a spell checker. You should not have to go back to school to buy stereo equipment or post to a forum. It is the ideas that are important not grammar or spelling.
Sumflow, a godzillion years ago when I was in high school I remember some kids rationalizing their poor use of English by claiming "it was the idea that counts, not the spelling or grammar". I was probably amongst that crowd since I was not a great student nor terribly proficient writer.
The fact is our ideas, messages, opinions, etc. when delivered through writing or speech do count and tells a lot about us as thinkers and how seriously our ideas should be taken. I can't speak for anyone else but if I have to mull over a poorly written post then I'm less likely to to put much stock in its content.
Spell check is a correction function that comes with most if not all PCs and Mac computers. There is really no excuse for misspelled words other than laziness.
Editing a post is a no brainer. Edit your post in the message box before sending it.
As a side note, if you want to see examples of well written posts yet have very different writing styles then read those submitted by Teresa and Elizabeth. One is more scholarly view point and the other more humorous but both clearly take the time to present their ideas in a manner that grabs your attention and makes you think.
Fair point. Do you think you might be overcompensating for a miss spent youth.
Jay I use a spell checker, but I recognize that many people use english as a second language. I do not want any of them to NOT post there ideas over something so trivial as elementary school rules. By the way this morning I found that we can edit out posts, but it would be easier if we could do it from here.
The amazing thing about the United States is how so many people, whole states, whole areas of the country cannot speak and spell good english but I can understand them anyway.
~~~Our lunacies have been infringed..
I think this is the first time I've ever heard anyone arguing for the merits of poor English.
Ah yes Dr Sumflow, since you brought it to my attention I'm certain that my "miss spent youth" strongly contributes to my preference for using proper English. BTW, I haven't a clue what you're talking about nor do you but I suspect you might be suggesting that there could have been some traumatic events in my childhood that led to my respect for using good grammar and comprehensible sentences with a healthy dose of common sense thrown in the mix. Yep, the culprit was called Report Cards, college and graduate school that took a dim, and I'm sure an unfair view of participants who had trouble writing a legible sentence. So unfair, wasn't it.
I see that you are also championing the cause of immigrants who are struggling to learn English.
How noble of you. For some reason I still think those who speak English as a second language have the same need to make themselves understood as much as anyone else.
I really have no more to say about this so I will now politely go on to an audio related topic.
"while others have taxpayer-subsidized telephone service because their income is so low."
That would be me, however I have a disability and am unable to work.
Reviewing is a hobby and at most a part-time job, so a reviewers financial status depends on how well their "real" job pays. I am very slow at everything I do including writing however I estimate I make about a dollar an hour on my reviewing. Perhaps I spend too much time listening, I know others can write faster than I can. It often takes me an hour to write and correct the spelling and grammar of a simple short post, so the writing stage of an article can take me many days versus maybe hours for a normal person. However even with all the obstacles I love to write.
Writers do get perks, sometimes free music discs, borrowing equipment for a full month at no cost (the manufacturer pays shipping both ways) and free admission to trade shows although we do have to pay for transportation to get there and a hotel room if we stay more than one day.
The only writers that make a good living I believe are those who have high traffic websites and make money on the advertising.
Teresa, you are easily one of the finest writers on this forum as well as other audio related forums including your own Web Site. I for one much appreciate your contributions and have learned much from you.
That's a pretty tough metric - but every one has to have their criteria and their budgets. If you are happy with the sound you are getting, you have reached a space I haven't yet reached without such limitations - congratulations!
"Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it in a fruit salad"
... that you are not only cheap, but also pretty much clueless when it comes to anything audio-related that's worth more than a pair of socks. I mean, it shows in your posts, but you're not admitting it.
Why should they?
Where it's already been beaten over and over?
There may be a hidden clue in the second word of his "Subject".
I lifted this from Wiki:
> > > > The id is responsible for our basic drives, "knows no judgements of value: no good and evil, no morality...Instinctual cathexes seeking discharge..... < < < <
Post a Followup:
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: