Whiner's Woad

Posted by stark (A) on May 02, 2006 at 16:50:43

In Reply to: Re: Do you really pay attention to this guy? posted by Arthur Salvatore on May 2, 2006 at 08:22:28:

As mentioned in posts above, Arthur Salvatore's site has a large section devoted to well made recordings. The point in having a very resolving system is not to be able to hear the recording flaws of every record you put on it. There is no other place to find such a list certainly not one that is freely available.

Also, Arthur takes the trouble to explain his own priorities in audio very carefully and he openly states that these priorities are not shared by everyone. He is always careful to say that when he recommends a component, it is because of its performace with respect to his own priorities. How many professional reviewers do this? Reading MF it seems like whatever he prefers is simply the best full stop. There is no question that whatever MF likes you should like too, because he likes "the best" (c.f. Fred's comment below re validation).

Even components that Arthur recommends, he criticizes often severely. He says why the component doesn't live up to his ideal, and often why it doesn't have certain properties that other people appreciate, even if he doesn't rate it so highly. Again, most reviews are not critical at all and go out of their way to say positive things almost all the time. If they were doing their job correctly, they would make criticisms with every other statement, in order to give the reader an idea of the limitations as well as the desirable qualities of the product under review. Too many reviews are best described by the phrase "puff piece". Of course, manufacturers might not give review samples to writers who are known to say negative things in their reviews half the time...

Arthur, please don't waste your time expanding your "reviewing the reviewers" section! You have more interesting things to do. MF's vulgar diatribes on your site and Romy's are enough to discredit him in my eyes.

-stark