|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.162.41.251
In Reply to: RE: REVIEW: Merlin Music Inc. VSM-MXe Speakers posted by rbwalt@verizon.net on January 28, 2008 at 17:25:13
blah,blah,blah,blah. yawn. and not a single word about MUSIC!
Follow Ups:
that fail to acknowledge any limitations. Regardless of performance or price, there are always tradeoffs with every product. Not knowing what they are illustrates a lack of understanding.
rw
.. I usually don't end up flaming a guy who has posted a less than perfect review. The original poster mentionned very honestly he'd worked for Merlin, which he could easily have hidden. I don't have a problem with him, his review, the product or its manufacturer just because his opinion on the product doesn't look like it's out of a magazine.
There is freedom of speech here. The poster was very honest, and that's all there is to it. It's not because he worked for Merlin that he can't express his views about their products (as long as he discloses his past). Pushing your logic a little further, every non-professional review should be forbidden, because anybody who buys a product is by definition biased towards it.
Now it's your right not to trust his opinion, but don't go blasting the guy for being honest and sharing his enthusiasm. This is not Totalitarian Asylum.
I usually don't end up flaming a guy who has posted a less than perfect review.
Nor do I. In fact, this is the first review on which I've commented.
The original poster mentionned very honestly he'd worked for Merlin...
Actually, he merely said he "worked for him [Palkovic] for 10 yrs".
Pushing your logic a little further, every non-professional review should be forbidden, because anybody who buys a product is by definition biased towards it.
That's ridiculous. The Bored does, however, forbid members of "industry" from posting sales information about a product he makes or sells. Can you find another example where an employee of a company (current or former) has posted a review of their own product?
rw
"The Bored does, however, forbid members of "industry" from posting sales information about a product he makes or sells. Can you find another example where an employee of a company (current or former) has posted a review of their own product?"
I wouldn't even have a problem with that, as long as I know who the poster is and what his background is. Then I would apply the proper "filter" to his/her "review".
I think your irritation would be more than justified if the guy had tried to hide he'd worked for Bobby. Since he hasn't, I don't have a problem, he's free to express his point of view IMHO. Yes he likes the speakers and their designer, that doesn't mean his comparison isn't helpful for people who want to upgrade their VSMs.
JB
To address your question, "What kind of review do you expect here?", the answer can be found immediately below this one. So what's different?
1. The reviewer provided background information as to the product, his preferences and "sonic revelations".
2. The reviewer made comparisons to other products, even if not directly competitive models as points of reference.
3. The reviewer actually talked about what he liked about certain musical selections (if you recall, it was the observation by OpenBaffle as to the lack thereof that triggered my response).
4. While the reviewer clearly liked the speaker, he noted a couple of weaknesses. He lives in the real world.
5. He does not work for the company or designer of the product.
In short, I found it to be very well written and immediately useful given the points of reference. Sorry if you found my observations "rude". I consider them constructive criticism.
rw
there are infinite full range choices as well.....and classic top-o-the-line oldies for way, way less.
true, but very few compare in a qualitative sense at any sum you want to mention, imho. this is not a quantity thing but one of refinement and balance. still though it is not for everyone. and i can see what you like best.
best,
b
you build wonderful loudspeakers. i used to call on hi fi sould in St Paul who carried your products back in the 80's. any 10k loudspeakers however (as you said) aren't for everyone.
NT
but those tradeoffs can be very aligned to the reviewer's personal tastes and experience - especially if the reviewer hasn't heard anything "better" or more to his/her tastes. In this particular case, the reviewer may not deem any of the speaker's characteristics to be a tradeoff, especially if he's got it properly setup and in a suitable environment that showcases the speaker's abilities.
personally, the only issue I have with the Merlins is assembling those extremely sharp spiked feet and leveling them properly. If I had them in a larger room I'd add a sub, but the latest lead-free super BAM is an order of magnitude better than the previous version I owned, and there is now excellent depth, weight and "growl" in the bass region. The mids and highs are seamless and totally coherent with the bass. Think QUADs with much more jump factor.
...but those tradeoffs can be very aligned to the reviewer's personal tastes and experience - especially if the reviewer hasn't heard anything "better" or more to his/her tastes.
I think an essential requirement for reviewing (of any sort) is exposure to a range of different choices and an awareness of one's priorities. Since I don't have any experience with the speaker in question, such an unsubstantiated "review" provides little useful information.
rw
Dude, go grind your axe on something productive.
All I hear from you is drivel and bile.
I respect your opinion, just please don't enforce it as law. Respect the individual and the favor will be returned to you.
my point was that you attached "a lack of understanding" to the reviewer instead of to yourself :)
Go hear 'em - that's the only way to validate what's important in this hobby...
we use reviews very differently. I use them to learn information about new products or those outside my experience. Additionally, I find it useful for the reviewer to provide comparisons to competitive products as a point of reference. At least, that is what the three audio reviewers I know do. To not have an understanding of what else is available greatly hinders one's ability to place the review into any kind of perspective.
rw
How I "use" a review depends on the reviewer and the product. If you provide some baseline information (what speakers you like and dislike), maybe I or someone else can help you to compare and contrast the Merlins. Point being that no one has heard everything, and your point of reference will likely be different from mine or the original reviewer in this post. I also rely on comparisons in reviews - but if I'm not intimately familiar with the comparison speakers (i.e. have owned them, heard them, or at the very least read about them in several other reviews), then there's still a void in the final assessment of the speaker under review. I typically purchased used gear to experience it first hand, and if it doesn't suit me, I resell it at little or no loss. I trust my ears more than any reviewer out there, no matter how impressive their pedigree.
My point in this thread is that you can't assume someone has a "lack of understanding" simply because they don't mention other speakers in a review. For all we know, the reviewer may have owned Wilsons, Soundlabs, or Magicos before he bought the Merlins - so you can criticize the lack of comparison data, but not the man's intellect.
DKL
...the reviewer may have owned Wilsons, Soundlabs, or Magicos before he bought the Merlins , then he would clearly know there are some weaknesses. Tell me a $10k speaker that doesn't. Get real.
Similarly, a ten year employee of the designer may not possess the most transparent objectivity of the product! :)
rw
so if I follow your logic...there isn't any
So, we'll just leave it that a (former) employee of Merlin has proclaimed his speaker to be perfect.
rw
e-stat,
rob has not worked for merlin for over ten years since his move to virginia. he chose to be honest and mention the fact that he worked for us. i can see how you would have reacted if he never mentioned this and it was brought to everyone's attention that he had been an employee. "damned if you do and damned if you don't."
thank you for finally being tranparent and letting us know what was eating at you.
best, b
I agreed with another poster that is was a non review. Read the real review below for contrast.
Employees, former or otherwise, conducting a product review? Not appropriate, period. Disclosing the connection doesn't change the obvious conflict of interest. Shoulda' just made a post.
rw
e,
just as you have every right to express your opinion about the review, rob walters, had every right to write the review. he did in fact write a disclaimer in the second sentence of the very first paragraph where he said he was an employee for 10 years. at that point it was up to you whether you read on or not. no one forced you to.
a lot of people may agree that having an ex-employee state his or her feelings of a product is going to provide in most cases, biased opinons. but the vast magority of people knowing that the man in question mentioned this at the out set would want to be given the chance to read it at their own discretion.
i pride myself in being a balanced and fair man. and i am absolutely sure that if 10,000 people were polled, that the vast majority would agree with my take on this and want to read on.
i know robert walters and he is as honest and fair minded as they come. he only wanted to tell others what he was hearing. he also has a magnificent system with much potential for discerning these things.
so i'm afraid, we have to agree to disagree.
best,
b
Either in the lack of any useful comparative data or in the obvious conflict of interest? Such would be prohibited from use with any commercial audio magazine. Aczel was run out on a rail for doing the same thing and immediately lost all credibility.I have every reason to believe yours is a fine product. Regardless, I think you'll find there are others who would immediately dismiss this "review" out of hand given the circumstances.
Good luck with the mixed messages you send to the buying public.
rw
DKL - A comparison to an earlier version of itself does not a review make. Ever read Stereophile? The Absolute Sound? Tone? etc., etc.Did you expect a comparison to the a pair of B&W 802's? Maybe some Gallo 3.1's?
SOMETHING OTHER THAN ITSELF! Take your pick. Or others. Now you're beginning to understand the role of a review !
Ozzy - It's really no better than me saying I like speaker A instead of speaker B. Who cares? Do you?
If I know the reasons driving the preference, then the answer could be yes. My initial comment was dittoing that of another - this is a joke.
Bobby - i did not write the review or ask him to do one
True, but your "damned if you do, damned if you don't" comment suggests condoning what on the surface is bogus. Good luck!
Waddya say we drop this whole thing guys? Jeez.
rw
e,
as long as you keep saying nonsense and taking things out of context, i will respond.
DKL - A comparison to an earlier version of itself does not a review make. Ever read Stereophile? The Absolute Sound? Tone? etc., etc.
michael fremmer of stereophile reviewed the vsm m to the vsm mx and super bam in january of 2007. do you ever read stereophile?
Bobby - i did not write the review or ask him to do one
True, but your "damned if you do, damned if you don't" comment suggests condoning what on the surface is bogus. Good luck!
wrong again but very imaginative! "damned if you do and damed if you don't" was in reference to rob, who told the truth about his being a past employee and was getting shit on for it.
Waddya say we drop this whole thing guys? Jeez. by e
dropping it is a good idea as this is going no where.
best,
b
Guess you failed to notice. :)
rw
and yet he made no comparison to them. what's your point? he only referenced them because they too chose to keep the same model in production rather than change every year (Wilson and Vandersteen) or use the same tweeter - thought implemented differently (Rockport) - not a word comparing the sound of these speakers to the Merlins.
guess you saw them in print and that was good enough...
you're just digging yourself into a deeper ditch of desperation :)
d,
agreed, not one word of any comparison in sound to other mentioned products...period.
he keeps twisting the facts to suit his statements.
he is making himself look foolish as i pointed out earlier.
fremmer's review was a review on the vsm millennium compared to the mx. what the original product had become if you will.
and that was exactly what rob was doing comparing the vsm mx to the mxe.
e-stat is familiar enough with the product and my reputation and i take exception to some of the things he said about me and rob and his implications.
he should step back and read all this very carefully again and again until it makes sense to him. or, just drop it until he digs an even bigger hole.
best, b
Amen Brother Bobby, Amen :)
D
First of all, this is a follow up to a previous full review in which he most certainly compared the sound to other products and used musical references. Begin by reading at page 1 before you jump to page 8.Within the follow up, however, he pointed out that the Merlin uses a variation of the same ScanSpeak 854506 woofer used by the Wilson WATT. Later, he points out that the Dynaudio Esotar D330A tweeter is also used in the Rockport Antares. Then he observes that the Merlin faces "serious competition" to the Vandersteen Quatro.
Gee, some might consider these to be valuable points of reference.
Back to your rant!
rw
"First of all, this is a follow up to a previous full review in which he most certainly compared the sound to other products and used musical references." I commented on the review you specifically referenced in your last post, so try keeping apples to apples
"Begin by reading at page 1 before you jump to page 8."
I have read both reviews several times over the years - you however made the crazy leap in logic that because he mentioned other speakers at the beginning of the followup (you know, the one you referenced) he was comparing their sound quality (he did not)
"Within the follow up, however, he pointed out that the Merlin uses a variation of the same ScanSpeak 854506 woofer used by the Wilson WATT. Later, he points out that the Dynaudio Esotar D330A tweeter is also used in the Rockport Antares. Then he observes that the Merlin faces "serious competition" to the Vandersteen Quatro." Yes that is certainly riveting information, particularly since he specifically wrote that the tweeter is implemented differently in the Merlin, and the woofer is another variation. What do you discern from those facts in terms of comparing the sound of those various speakers? Yeah same here - very little. Yep the Quatro is a well reviewed speaker - but again no comparison was written between the two speakers. Again, "mentioning" something is not the same as "comparing" something.
I only joined this thread because you (and others) disparaged a well meaning reviewer/contributor - not to suffer through someone's dialectical breakdown, so I'm off to listen to my wonderful, magical Merlin VSM-MXes and will leave you to your own devices.
DKL
Conclusions
When he set out to design and build the VSM Millennium, Merlin Music Systems designer Bobby Palkovic told me, one of his goals was to build a "device that controls its destiny"—in other words, a well-damped speaker that would be able to successfully react to a wide variety of acoustic environments. While my room is probably somewhat overdamped compared to the average listening room, and the VSM is designed to be overdamped, the combination yielded outstanding performance. A more lively room might offer somewhat better bass, but I have no complaints about what I heard during the month the VSM Millenniums resided in my listening room. The VSM is a highly evolved speaker capable of successfully handling every kind of music. It combined the tactile thrills of the Amati Homage with the linearity and detail of the Avanti III. That's a winning combo in any music-lover's book.
This latest and, probably, last iteration of the VSM—Palkovic told me he's "closed the development book" as of last July—is a graceful-sounding speaker that should offer any audio or music enthusiast years of listening pleasure, regardless of musical or sonic tastes. It impressed me whether playing softly or scaling the SPL heights, though it did its best at medium volume levels, where its tonal and dynamic balances were most effective.
Some speakers can play louder without strain and/or go deeper, but in terms of overall balance, the VSM Millennium's strengths would be hard to beat at any price. $8150/pair is a lot to pay for a two-way speaker, but with the BAM included, the VSM delivers everything but the very deepest bass in a sleek, compact package. This is one music-lover's speaker you need to hear, however much you're prepared to spend. The brand name doesn't lie: The Merlins are...
You'll have to finish that sentence yourself. I can't bring myself to use the m word.
geo,
i would like to thank you for posting this, fremmer's vsm m conclusion. i have not read it in a while.
vsm m pricing actually took effect in the end on 1999. and as i told you a few weeks ago, we were trying to lift the prices so we could make a fair profit over what was made on our early offernings (where no profit was made at all to get a foot hold). that being said, if you do the math and see that a 3.5 time mark up is from $1000 to $3500, this price increase reflects an additional $1000 in material cost and overhead. have we had this increase? hell yes and then some! between the cost of the euro almost doubling and everything else going up, my last price increase of january 1, 2008 or 10% just put us back at 3.5 time mark up. consider the difference in my cost and the associated mark up to the dealer, neither the dealer or merlin is making any more on the product. costs are costs and that is a realistic point of view. i certainly appreciate they sell for more but i need to stay in business.
right now (not knowing what will become avaiable in technolgy) i think the vsm is far beyond what i ever expected it to be, at the pinnacle of its performance if you will. i have nothing else planned and may start on another project before i get too old. :-)
best,
b
I liked the favorable comparisons made by Fremer. At the time of the review, I think I still owned my VSM SE. The $3,150 increase does not really seem out of line given it has been 6 years. This thread has meandered along way from E-Stat's initial observation which I believe was that a review should at least make some comparison to what may be logical alternative products. Fremer seemed to do that at least in his conclusion. I did not go through the whole article. The audio business is tough. Many names have come and gone because it is not easy. I have a customer that manufactures cables, interconnects, power conditioners,power transformers and other audio related stuff some of which is OEM for speaker manufacturers. It is a well known name. The cables and audio stuff are only a small part of the business and we talk audio all the time. I do know that audio isn't easy given changing taste / lifestyles.
i agree geo.
the vsm m was the same price in late 99 and early 2000. the fremmer review was done in 2001. so its not like we just keep putting the prices up every so often. with it now being 2008, the elapsed time has seen a lot of things change, none of which i can control.
my reference was to the vsm mx follow up review where fremmer made no comparisons in sound what so ever. both dkl and i, said this many times.
rob's review was primarily a commentery of the mx to the mxe. a consumer does not have a great many things to compare to like a published reviewer would have. so he did what he able to do and discuss the difference in his two vsms. if e-stat did not like his appraoch he did not have to read rob's comments. let alone infer the crap he did about me and rob.
but he does not know me, does he?
anyway...thanks geo.
best, b
e,
as long as you keep saying nonsense and taking things out of context, i will respond.
DKL - A comparison to an earlier version of itself does not a review make. Ever read Stereophile? The Absolute Sound? Tone? etc., etc.
michael fremmer of stereophile reviewed the vsm m to the vsm mx and super bam in january of 2007. do you ever read stereophile?
Bobby - i did not write the review or ask him to do one
True, but your "damned if you do, damned if you don't" comment suggests condoning what on the surface is bogus. Good luck!
wrong again but very imaginative! "damned if you do and damed if you don't" was in reference to rob, who told the truth about his being a past employee and was getting shit on for it.
Waddya say we drop this whole thing guys? Jeez. by e
dropping it is a good idea as this is going no where.
best,
b
E - the point has been clarified several times that the review DID include comparitive data, and in essence the BEST and only pertinent data was used! For crying out loud, go back and re-read the initial review! This was a review of the newest version of the speaker in question compared to the older version - how could you make any other comparison?? Did you expect a comparison to the a pair of B&W 802's? Maybe some Gallo 3.1's? How would a reviewer corrolate iterative product improvements between wholly different manufacturers? Your argument had no essence in the beginning and repeating it does not give it any validity. At this point I trust you realize you're only talking to the hand. Worst misunderstanding I've seen in this forum in quite a while - and this is my last word on it.
Bobby - you're a patient man...
Dennis (DKL)
Ok, now let's think about this for a minute. The "review" in question is hardly a real review. It's really no better than me saying I like speaker A instead of speaker B. Who cares? Do you? Hardly.
I agree with your potential conflict of interest concern. But c'mon. Who is taking this guy's "review" seriously anyway? You? Me?
Oz
e, i did not write the review or ask him to do one. what he wrote was motivated by what he was feeling at the time because of "his" findings.
you seem to have the two of us mixed up.
i know him and his character and he is not dishonest or irrational.
and i am totally familiar with the axcel situtatioin and there is no similiarity unless you twist this in some way to make it fit for yourself.
a reviewer who writes for a publication is under different scrutiny, surely.
this was a man who voiced his own personal opinion with a disclamer and it was not published in a magazine or on a webzine but in a chatroom.
and i send very specific messages to the public. one of stability, hard work and honor. a little bit of reading on your part and you would know this. maybe you do alread?
and last of all, there may be some who feel as you do. i can see that but not everyone does or will. perhaps you should remember that before you make accusations that make you look unreasonable.
best,
b
Well, actually he never said that :)
What he really wrote was a comparison between two different speaker systems (must include the new lead-free BAM and lead-free BAM power cord in the equation), explaining the delta between them in terms most audiophiles can understand.
He never described the newer version as "perfect" - but chose " more refined " and similar terms to describe the many improvements as compared to his previous speaker system.
The fact that he found no faults or "tradeoffs" to his previous system should not be a surprise. Occasionally, a manufacturer does develop a new product that actually is inferior to a previous model, but Merlin has a documented record of providing new-found excellence in every iteration of their VSM and TSM speaker systems.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: