Who is the best reviewer?

[Gregadd]

...But I think HP's forte is and was his ability to hear and to put in written words what he heard. That was extremely important because for most of us the great equipment ws just a mirage. I lament that he never hired a measurement guy. Some of the writers who worked there were fairly proficient in technical matters.

 

[cjfrbw]

I would have to say the only critic I currently have been reading consistently is Fremer, because of his intricate explorations of vinyl, which is what I mostly listen to.
I like Valin's prose style, he is an excellent writer, however due to issues mentioned frequently, I have no idea if he is describing what he hears or is making it up as he goes along for purposes other than reporting.
Fremer definitely has "ears", and can explain what he hears without getting too prosey. I have a lot of confidence in what Fremer writes, and think many of his articles are models of subjective reviewing. He also regularly listens to live performances.
I can tell that our audio priorities tend to differ, however. Fremer seems to favor absolute dynamics both macro and micro and razor sharp imaging, with a lot of slam. I tend to go with saturated tone and flow. I would probably find his system a bit crispy, and he would probably find mine a bit lethargic. However, to Fremer's credit, I can usually tell if I would like something or not from his reviews, whether he likes it or not.
I also like Jack Roberts of Dagogo, because he reviews the kind of stuff I tend to like and doesn't bathe in pretense of any kind. I also met him and listened to his system a few years ago.

 

[MylesBAstor]

...But I think HP's forte is and was his ability to hear and to put in written words what he heard. That was extremely important because for most of us the great equipment ws just a mirage. I lament that he never hired a measurement guy. Some of the writers who worked there were fairly proficient in technical matters.

PHD for one

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

It's that guy who measures everything first, then listens blind to see if, with bias disengaged, he hears what the measurements imply, and then writes up his subjective impressions of the audible reality right before his ears. What was his name again?

P

 

[owen lawlor]

Why not?

Why would ARC, the most valuable brand in audio electronics, trust him and use him as one of their main marketing arms? Why would MBL want him to review their flagship speakers? ...

I think Valin is a little bit of a 'ho (no offense intended) when it comes to cozy manufacturers relationships, but then again most of these guys are to some degree afflicted with this "problem" depending on your POV. I've found certain things Valin has come up with like "instrumental action" describing the bloom of tube amps (ARC) vs. SS to be quite perceptive however. His reviews used to whip me into a frenzy and have me running off to pick up whatever he was cheerleading in his latest review. Over time, JV's extremely positive consistent over the top writeups became a "signature" just like a flawed component IMO.

 

[caesar]

I think Valin is a little bit of a 'ho (no offense intended) when it comes to cozy manufacturers relationships, but then again most of these guys are to some degree afflicted with this "problem" depending on your POV. I've found certain things Valin has come up with like "instrumental action" describing the bloom of tube amps (ARC) vs. SS to be quite perceptive however. His reviews used to whip me into a frenzy and have me running off to pick up whatever he was cheerleading in his latest review. Over time, JV's extremely positive consistent over the top writeups became a "signature" just like a flawed component IMO.

I agree with you on both points. I totally understand how a reviewer making a modest income in their real job would want to hold on to a great sounding piece of gear for a long, long, long time via positive reviews. There really should be a 3 month limit for these guys to hold on to a piece of gear.

To me, ARC and Magico are just as much of a whore as the reviewer. I think Magico has more business savvy than ARC. The new "all time best" speaker Q5 did not make it to Valin's place but instead made it to Fremer's. The ARC, however, is a lost cause. I guess they are just a bunch engineers who think they understand marketing.

And yes, if Valin reviews something well, I still want to go out and hear it, even he went over the top.

 

[caesar]

I would have to say the only critic I currently have been reading consistently is Fremer, because of his intricate explorations of vinyl, which is what I mostly listen to.
I like Valin's prose style, he is an excellent writer, however due to issues mentioned frequently, I have no idea if he is describing what he hears or is making it up as he goes along for purposes other than reporting.
Fremer definitely has "ears", and can explain what he hears without getting too prosey. I have a lot of confidence in what Fremer writes, and think many of his articles are models of subjective reviewing. He also regularly listens to live performances.
I can tell that our audio priorities tend to differ, however. Fremer seems to favor absolute dynamics both macro and micro and razor sharp imaging, with a lot of slam. I tend to go with saturated tone and flow. I would probably find his system a bit crispy, and he would probably find mine a bit lethargic. However, to Fremer's credit, I can usually tell if I would like something or not from his reviews, whether he likes it or not.
I also like Jack Roberts of Dagogo, because he reviews the kind of stuff I tend to like and doesn't bathe in pretense of any kind. I also met him and listened to his system a few years ago.

Great analysis of Fremer. Although I am not into vinyl for space and musical taste reasons, I enjoy Fremer's reviews immensely. He has a superb way of analyzing a piece of gear and using very creative analogies to make these very abstract elements of a sonic signature more concrete.

I do wonder how much power he has to push gear, however. I know he has some kind of a relationship with Musical Fidelity. However, when I tried to find a dealer to heat the big Atlas amps he raved about I could not even find a distributor in the US, let alone a dealer who can let me hear them.

 

[caesar]

Stereo Times’ Clement Perry moves a lot of gear.

Any evidence of that? Any specific evidence such as before and after numbers for a piece of gear reviewed?

I rarely read Stereo Times because they seem to review very fringe brands. (Now this stuff could be great, but why are the other audio experts not all over this gear if it is so great?)

I also think it is kind of pathetic that they push so many tweaks. Does a person with a $5K amp and $5K or $10K speakers need the Bybee speaker bullets. They made a tiny, tiny difference in my very resolving, very expensive, high end system. However, a typical audiophile would benefit much more spending that $4K on some bass traps to improve the room, a speaker upgrade, or an electronics upgrade.

 

[caesar]

Dear Caesar: In answer to your first question: who is the best reviewer?, I have some wide thoughts about:

IMHO many of us can agree that audio magazynes were and are a must inside the AHEE and for the AHEE grow up.
Magazynes like Stereo Review, Audio, High Fidelity, Stereophile, TAS, HiFi+, FI, IAR, HiFi News, HiFi Choice and the like were and are a critical and very important AHEE tool for all of us.

At the same time reviewers as B.King, L.Archibald, J.G.Holt,HP, T.Cordesman, REG,RH, J.Atkinson, V.Pisha, T.Norton, B.Whyte, J.Hirsh, L.Feldman, L.Klein, W.Livingstone, S.Briggs and the like were and are a precious AHEE tool for our each one advance in the audio learning ladder curve.

With out those magazynes/reviewers maybe the HE can't even exist. In the same importance level I can think on the audio HE distributors/dealers all over the world.

Sayed all that now on the reviewer stand alone subject:

first than all a professional reviwer has a extremely high responsability in almost all audio industry areas/members, some of them sometimes do not fullfill those responsabilities, sometimes by ignorance ( a person that is unaware on some subject. ) of those responsabilities sometimes because is " commercial " biased or because is ignorant on the subject ( any ) that is under review.

second IMHO a reviewer is like a teacher's School/University: a person with the right and deepest knowledge/skills and tools with no other compromise that TEACH, from with/whom all of us " goes " to learn.

from these points of view: which today reviewers fullfill about in their today or last 5 years reviews? can any one name it? in whom can we trust?, I can say a hard task to do it.
Yes, IMHO exist that very especial kind of reviewer and maybe you can count with the fingers of one of your hands and maybe our one hand fingers exceed.

If you read magazynes just for fun/entertainment or to look new products advertasing then any reviewer is a good one but if you are a discerning audiophile that want to learn and through that learning grow up and improve the quality performance of your home audio system for improve your music enjoyment then not all reviewers can help you and several of them even " help " you for you give steps back.

You can say what ever about HP and I respect your opinion but as reviewer I learn from him not exactly what to do but what not to do reading what he do, examples: he made a shootout cartridge review whit Lyra Titan, Clearaudio Insider, XV-1, myaby and I can't remember if was there any other cartridge ( I own or owned all those cartridges. ).
Well HP decide and made the review loading all cartridges at 47K!!!! and the review was full of " inconsistences " that really preclude a fair cartridge comparison.
For an audio " newbie " those " inconsistencies " along that " crazy " loading means nothing and he will remmeber for the future which of those cartridges was the " winner " and maybe he buy it because of that.

For we all discerning and experienced audio people we know that the HPO review was totally wrong that goes against the reviewer main targets that I mentioned and where the only thing we can rescue is: what not to do.

Other example could be the HP non-sense/knowledge to handle/play the big NOLA/Alon woofer towers ( reflex/ported design. ) with tube electronics whit amps having a high output impedance.
In what way HP coul teach any one of us? how we can learn from HP " ignorance " other that know what not to do?

and maybe you could remember that Stereophile review on a four tube chassis ampliifers with a tag of 350K where the amplifiers frequency response measurements shows 10-12dbs deviations and the reviewer " can't " heard it: do you belive that??????!!!!

and we don't have to go far away to show some wrong/bad examples ( we are full of them ) on reviewers " teaching " job, here in this forum we can read not a review but something more " intimate " and important: a reviewer advise that IMHO can't help in the right way, the " advise " was posted by MylesBastor reviewer in charge::
http://www.whatsbestforum.com/showthread.php?939-Dyna-20X-1.0-mv-Loading-Options

other reviewers that has the right knolwedge and tools are heavy " commercial biased/oriented " and don't say it what we need or what can help us but what is " convenient " for them. I remember the Stereophile Mónaco TT review full of that and in TAS the Walker vs Kuzma review in the same way.

I have to say that to all those people/reviewers I have a lot of respect like a persons and my respect to each one of them like reviewers is at the same level that his each one respect to me when I read their reviews.

I hope that in a near very near future some of those knowledge reviewers take again the " emotion " of HE item no-compromise reviews and the full EMOTION that teaching true TEACHING can give and help to all the audio industry:AHEE. Today IMHO we are wrong on that important/capital/critical whole subject.

Yes, of course that many good things that we learn we learned through those same magazynes and reviewers but my point is that today they are far away of that " old " precise and right " road ": Reviewers please come back again!

Last but no less important is that IMHO we all are reviewers, with the difference that we pay in full by our each one audio toys and that we have no compromises but our each one music enjoyment.
At least each one of us have in our mind ( non-write. ) the full review of our home audio system and maybe a review in our mind/brain too of two or three friend's home audio systems.
As a fact IMHO each time we change an audio link/item we made a self review on it. That no one publish it in a magazyne does not means is a review and sometimes even better that a " professional " one.
When we give our opinion through a post or through a phone call or face to face to other person based on our audio item experiences what we really made is a very " brief " item review but at the end a review.

IMHO and in many ways several/many audiophiles are at the same level and even better than professional reviewers.

I recognize in this and other forums people that not only are better " reviewers " but with higher knowledge and tools that the majority of the professional reviewer out there: I applaud all the audiophiles " embarrassing/engaged " with the MUSIC and nothing but the MUSIC, good for them!!!!

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

Great post. I agree with a lot of it. However, I disagree with one thing. The professional reviewers are experts. They hear a lot of stuff. As you say, the best reviews teach us something. (I am not saying that experts, can't be wrong, however!)

I love it when regular people post their impressions of gear. If one posts their preferred sonic signature with that impression, it can be very helpful to a person living in a middle of no-where trying to make a decision on a piece of gear. I think all of the lurkers should register and contribute. However, when us amateurs post impressions, they should be taken with a grain of salt. (There is a thread right now in the ML forum where people, based on hearsay instead of listening, believe electrostats do not work well with OTL amps, which is just pure horse ****.) Listening to a piece of gear for 60 minutes somewhere is different than having it in your home and putting it through its paces for a month or two.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

It's that guy who measures everything first, then listens blind to see if, with bias disengaged, he hears what the measurements imply, and then writes up his subjective impressions of the audible reality right before his ears. What was his name again?

P

I believe this is somewhat backwards. Given the almost infinite human capacity for bias and self-delusion, wouldn't it be better if the procedure began with extended listening (and note-taking), followed by careful measurements and then, only at the end, another period of listening?

 

[brianherlihy]

To me, ARC and Magico are just as much of a whore as the reviewer. I think Magico has more business savvy than ARC. The new "all time best" speaker Q5 did not make it to Valin's place but instead made it to Fremer's. The ARC, however, is a lost cause. I guess they are just a bunch engineers who think they understand marketing.

i have to say, i think Magico was smart with this move to Fremer (qualification - i have Magico but am not necessarily an Alon Wolf cheerleader)...but i think Alon knew that JV was drinking the cool aid and people were sick of it, so he went to Fremer. like Alon or not, he has made some aggressive marketing moves that have paid off for him especially when we consider how relatively new he is to the market.

 

[RBFC]

I believe this is somewhat backwards. Given the almost infinite human capacity for bias and self-delusion, wouldn't it be better if the procedure began with extended listening (and note-taking), followed by careful measurements and then, only at the end, another period of listening?

I must agree. When you can understand how the measurements correlate to what you've heard, then confirm the audible effects of deviations from "perfect" measurements by repeat listening, you might actually become a better listener.

Lee

 

[silviajulieta]

Great post. I agree with a lot of it. However, I disagree with one thing. The professional reviewers are experts. They hear a lot of stuff. As you say, the best reviews teach us something. (I am not saying that experts, can't be wrong, however!)

I love it when regular people post their impressions of gear. If one posts their preferred sonic signature with that impression, it can be very helpful to a person living in a middle of no-where trying to make a decision on a piece of gear. I think all of the lurkers should register and contribute. However, when us amateurs post impressions, they should be taken with a grain of salt. (There is a thread right now in the ML forum where people, based on hearsay instead of listening, believe electrostats do not work well with OTL amps, which is just pure horse ****.) Listening to a piece of gear for 60 minutes somewhere is different than having it in your home and putting it through its paces for a month or two.

Dear Caesar: +++++++ " I disagree with one thing. The professional reviewers are experts. " +++++++

I agree that some of them are experts and not because ( sole ) they heard a " lot of stuff " but because some of them has the in deep right knowledge.
IMHO only a few of them are really experts and only a few of them can honor the word " expert ".

Btw, many audiophiles are real experts too. I don't know you but maybe you are an expert.

In audio IMHO the word " expert " not necessarly means: professional reviewers or audio dealers or even manufacturers. The word is a " heavy " one and some audio industry professionals are experts in the same way that some/several audiophiles are experts too.

In this regard my position is that the difference between the " professionals " and we ( mere mortals ) " amateurs " ( like you name us. ) is mainly that they receive money for what they do ( a job ) and we did not and that's all.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

 

[MylesBAstor]

Dear Caesar: +++++++ " I disagree with one thing. The professional reviewers are experts. " +++++++

I agree that some of them are experts and not because ( sole ) they heard a " lot of stuff " but because some of them has the in deep right knowledge.
IMHO only a few of them are really experts and only a few of them can honor the word " expert ".

Btw, many audiophiles are real experts too. I don't know you but maybe you are an expert.

In audio IMHO the word " expert " not necessarly means: professional reviewers or audio dealers or even manufacturers. The word is a " heavy " one and some audio industry professionals are experts in the same way that some/several audiophiles are experts too.

In this regard my position is that the difference between the " professionals " and we ( mere mortals ) " amateurs " ( like you name us. ) is mainly that they receive money for what they do ( a job ) and we did not and that's all.

Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul.

You're forgetting one important thing. Everyone who wants to be a reviewer doesn't become a reviewer. Do you think John Atkinson takes on board every schmo that wants to write for Stereophile? Do you think that HP took on everyone in the heydey of TAS? Do you think that the publisher/editors of magazines don't screen and check the credentials of their writers? If you don't, then you're mistaken.

And you've already noted the differences between reviewers and hobbiests:

I agree that some of them are experts and not because ( sole ) they heard a " lot of stuff " but because some of them has the in deep right knowledge.

Hearing what's around is quite important and don't underestimate the value!!! , Or as we say, there's a big difference between fans and people who actually run the ballclubs.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I believe this is somewhat backwards. Given the almost infinite human capacity for bias and self-delusion, wouldn't it be better if the procedure began with extended listening (and note-taking), followed by careful measurements and then, only at the end, another period of listening?

If he listens blind, I don't think it matters. Measure before, measure after. Listen blind. No it won't be statistical, but it will remove the obvious opportunity for expectation bias.

P

 

[mep]

It's that guy who measures everything first, then listens blind to see if, with bias disengaged, he hears what the measurements imply, and then writes up his subjective impressions of the audible reality right before his ears. What was his name again?

PP, are you trying to dig up Julian Hirsch from his grave? I think he always measured first and listened second but everything sounded the same anyway. I don't know if JH was blind, but everyone assumed he was deaf.

 

[Steve Williams]

Makes sense to me.

 

[MylesBAstor]

It's that guy who measures everything first, then listens blind to see if, with bias disengaged, he hears what the measurements imply, and then writes up his subjective impressions of the audible reality right before his ears. What was his name again?

PP, are you trying to dig up Julian Hirsch from his grave? I think he always measured first and listened second but everything sounded the same anyway. I don't know if JH was blind, but everyone assumed he was deaf.

I don't think Julian actually ever listened He just made sure it didn't blow up and worked as described. I think the same went for Len Feldman and Larry Klein (who actually had ears back in the early '60s but he jumped the shark later on. His recommended recordings list in the '60s was damn accurate with choices from DGG [Carmina Burana with Jochum], Mercury [Balaika Favorites], Connoisseur Society, Capitol [Shostakovitch's 11th with Stokowski, etc.), etc.

Funny, never ever saw Julian at a concert in NY and I've met quite a few at Carnegie over the years though did have the opportunity to meet him at a NY Audio Society meeting in Queens in the '90s! We'll (my friends and I who went) will never forget that experience to the day we die

 

[MylesBAstor]

Makes sense to me.

What makes sense Steve?

 

[Steve Williams]

What makes sense Steve?

PPs comment to Kal