|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
|
|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
In Reply to: Re: Give it a rest, Mr. Garvin posted by jamesgarvin on May 2, 2007 at 15:08:43:
>I initially object because you, and now Mr. Hansen, argue that this
>not a reasonable interpretation on my part.
I believe that part of your ongoing problem, Mr. Garvin, is that
you do not comprehend what others write. I did _not_ say that your
interpretation was unreasonable; instead, while I agreed that it was
reasonable, I repeatedly pointed out that it was wrong.
>Be that as it may, you have explained that Wes never had the
>speakers in his possession. I accept that now, and did when you
>first wrote it.
So has it been such a live issue for you since then? Why did you
write about the "mystery," with the negative connotations that
carries?
>What I did not accept was that Wes Philips, which, based upon his
>writings, seems an honorable man who writes what he means, is
>honest, and would not intentionally mislead anyone to believe he
>would review the speakers, when, in fact, he had no such committment
>and authorization to do so.
Because at the time he wrote, it seemed likely that review samples
would be forthcoming. For reasons unknown, that didn't happen. This
happens more often that you would think. As Charlie Hansen explained
to you, manufacturers can change their mind for any number of
reasons. Reviewers, too, change their mind, following new information.
It is riduculous for you to impugn people's integrity because not
everything they honestly believe is going to happen does happen.
>I earn a living in which people can take to the bank representations
>I make, and I presume Wes has the same principle.
Good for you. Magazine publishing is inevitably more untidy than
whatever field you work in, because of the large number of unrelated
things that all have to happen in a timely manner for an issue to be
published. As manufacturers with whom I deal will testify, they can't
be sure that a promised review will appear in the expected issue
until they see it in print. People get sick or get called on jury
duty. I have been sitting on a promised review of an Ayre
preamplifier for months now because we have been giving Ayre
significant coverage in recent issues and I want there to be some
space before the next Ayre review appears. I have been working on a
speaker review that was originally scheduled to appear in our June
issue. At the last minute I held it over to July so I could put the
product on that issue's cover because my original choice for the July
cover failed to materialize in time.
In addition, the fact that issue sizes must be quantized in
increments of 8 pages means that at least one review scheduled to
appear in a specific issue gets bounced back a month, which in turn
pushes back that writer's next review committment by a month.
As I said, "untidy." None of this means that we lack integrity, only
that in Donald Rumsfield's infamous phrase, "stuff happens."
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Give it a rest, Mr. Garvin - John Atkinson 07:21:00 05/03/07 (3)
- Re: Give it a rest, Mr. Garvin - jamesgarvin 11:07:12 05/03/07 (2)
- Re: Give it a rest, Mr. Garvin - John Atkinson 11:23:52 05/03/07 (1)
- I am convinced that this is Mr. Garvin's first - Bruce Kendall 11:36:03 05/03/07 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
