How long does it take to develop into a talented reviewer that other audiophil trust?

[MylesBAstor]

I trust Ethan Winer. (Not actually a reviewer.)

I trust Doug Self. (Not actually a reviewer.)

I trust Peter Aczel. (Actually a reviewer.)

Basically I 'trust' information sources according to their provenance, as laid out by Stuart Brand in 'The Media Lab.' That means, on the basis of what I know about them, most of which is garnered from reading what they wrote.

That's the way it is for most people, isn't it? Just... some people don't know how to critically evaluate what they read for reliability (evidently, given that there are so many reviewers in employment that I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw them.)

How do you get the trust of audiophiles? Easy, be an audiophile, they're unmistakeable. I say easy, but in my case it'll never happen, I'm just not capable of it.

w

Even though Aczel publicly misled his readers about owning an interest in a speaker that he reviewed as well as releasing a never published review of an amplifer, he is trustworth>?>?>? Spare us.

 

[rbbert]

...The reviewer who has a Rega Planar 3 in his system. It's not that it won't play records okay, but is he really the guy to review high-end turntables?
The reviewer who said on an open forum that anything more than $300 is too much for a phono stage. Really, now.
The reviewer who posted photos of his system, complete with uncovered massive glass windows directly behind it.

OTOH, this information gives you a good context in which to place their reviews

 

[jiannone]

In my opinion, the age of a central authority is over. The forum has ended the reign of the magazine reviewer for better or worse. Decentralization and collaboration are how winners are picked these days. Community organized meet-ups and shootouts are the best means to pick which products to place at the top of one's wishlist. Respected forum members become respectable because of their presence in the community, and the individuals that constitute that community are left to make up their own minds in a collaborative way. A single person's opinion matters less than the collective opinions of a group at a shootout.

How long does it take to develop as a trusted reviewer? It depends on the forums that reviewer frequents and his willingness to participate.

 

[andromedaaudio]

I trust only politicians
Why is the focus so much on trust , mags are besides info also for entertainment aren't they ?

 

[Ronm1]

I trust only politicians

Especially if lots of $$ are involved. Fair play for constituents are assured.

 

[rbbert]

I trust only politicians
Why is the focus so much on trust , mags are besides info also for entertainment aren't they ?

+1. So for me Stereophile's price (@$0.90 - $1 per issue) is about as high as I am willing to go. If TAS priced itself near there, I'd subscribe.

 

[Alan Sircom]

Ah Yes indeed--if only the Industry had a writer like the late great L.J.K. Setright of UK Motoring Reviewing fame

BD

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L._J._K._Setright

Many of us in the UK audio writing fraternity knew Lenny Setright, because he wrote for Audiophile magazine in the 1990s and Hi-Fi World in the last two or three years of his life. He was nicknamed 'Linny Setright' in the trade, because of his undying, rabid love for the Linn system he used.

 

[microstrip]

+1. So for me Stereophile's price (@$0.90 - $1 per issue) is about as high as I am willing to go. If TAS priced itself near there, I'd subscribe.

TAS in pdf downloadable version will cost you $12 for 10 issues. http://www.nextnewsstand.com/history/
I prefer a lot the pdf's to the damned Zinio reader.

 

[Ethan Winer]

Is that the reason why you don't trust any of them, given your bias towards measurement oriented analysis, versus reviews that are based on "listening" to the actual product?

Well, my "not trust anyone" comment was half in jest. As Alan said, it's reasonable to accept the danger of a falling tree without investigating someone's credentials. But many / most hi-fi reviews do not understand the frailty of their own hearing, and many / most don't understand the most basic principles of audio science. I can appreciate an attractive woman with a great hair style who dresses well, but I'd never offer myself as a fashion consultant, for example.

--Ethan

 

[Revel Salon 2]

TAS in pdf downloadable version will cost you $12 for 10 issues. http://www.nextnewsstand.com/history/
I prefer a lot the pdf's to the damned Zinio reader.

I agree with you 100% !! the TAS PDF is easy to use....the ZInio is a PITA...slow and always need to adjust the zoom,too wide...I won't renew my Stereophile
subscription even at 10$ a year...it gets to the newstand 2 weeks before the downloadable version !! on top of that the next month all the previous reviews
are free to read on their web site !!

 

[audioblazer]

Trusting a reviewer ? Do we really need to trust a reviewer ? That depends on your reason for reading a review. To me , I look at reviews as an introduction to the audio stuff which are so widespread that you wouldn't have a chance to listen to most of the stuff you like. However I will take reviewers reviews more seriously if they fulfill the following criteria
1. Own their own stuff rather than having a long term loan for most of their gears
2. List what they have & their room details . I couldn't understd reviewers having atrocious rooms without much room treatment & writing that the speakers lack bass defination or image poorly when his room is open to the kitchen on the left & he has a small room yet reviewing megasize speakers
3. Calling a spade , a spade . Some reviewers have my respect in this area particularly Michael Fremer . Over past few years he has been brutal with Grand Prix Monaco TT, bryston amps, not so favourable review of MBL & most recently he really tanked Thales Simplicity . Come on reviewers , not every gears u review is somehow better than the prev " best I have heard ". Of course commercial considerations require you to be polite but no negativity at all in all your reviews? Highly unlikely & that makes you lose your credibility .

With the above criteria my favourite reviewers are Michael Fremer ( even though I can't understand how he can place XLF 19inches from the front wall & still sound good . What happen to the depth of the soundstage ? ) and Mike Milonowski of 6 moons especially his detailed review of The Room ( his room )

 

[microstrip]

(...) With the above criteria my favourite reviewers are Michael Fremer ( even though I can't understand how he can place XLF 19inches from the front wall & still sound good . What happen to the depth of the soundstage ? ) (...)

Audioblazer,

You posted a very interesting observation. I have listened to systems where speakers are along the long wall and very close to it having great depth. Effectively, why shouldn't a speaker close to a back wall create depth of soundstage if the recording has preserved it? I remember once reading that a Philip Newell designed room with in-wall speakers had a fantastic soundstage with great depth. I have to say I was astonished - it is why I remember of it!

 

[Peter Breuninger]

Trusting a reviewer ? Do we really need to trust a reviewer ? That depends on your reason for reading a review. To me , I look at reviews as an introduction to the audio stuff which are so widespread that you wouldn't have a chance to listen to most of the stuff you like. However I will take reviewers reviews more seriously if they fulfill the following criteria
1. Own their own stuff rather than having a long term loan for most of their gears
2. List what they have & their room details . I couldn't understd reviewers having atrocious rooms without much room treatment & writing that the speakers lack bass defination or image poorly when his room is open to the kitchen on the left & he has a small room yet reviewing megasize speakers
3. Calling a spade , a spade . Some reviewers have my respect in this area particularly Michael Fremer . Over past few years he has been brutal with Grand Prix Monaco TT, bryston amps, not so favourable review of MBL & most recently he really tanked Thales Simplicity . Come on reviewers , not every gears u review is somehow better than the prev " best I have heard ". Of course commercial considerations require you to be polite but no negativity at all in all your reviews? Highly unlikely & that makes you lose your credibility .

With the above criteria my favourite reviewers are Michael Fremer ( even though I can't understand how he can place XLF 19inches from the front wall & still sound good . What happen to the depth of the soundstage ? ) and Mike Milonowski of 6 moons especially his detailed review of The Room ( his room )

Mike also reviews for AVShowrooms

 

[Ethan Winer]

2. List what they have & their room details . I couldn't understd reviewers having atrocious rooms without much room treatment & writing that the speakers lack bass defination or image poorly when his room is open to the kitchen on the left & he has a small room yet reviewing megasize speakers

Totally. I praised Stereophile in my recent AES Damn Lies video for listing each reviewer's associated equipment and their acoustic considerations or lack thereof.

--Ethan

 

[rblnr]

I think trust in a reviewer comes from a few things in no order:

- credibility of the publication he/she writes for
- gut reaction to the reviewer's integrity and candor, this includes disclosure of system/room/preferences, as well as writing style and content. So many say so little of substance and precision, and don't provide comparisons to competing components, particularly in the US.
- you feel that the reviewer's description of a component's sound matches your own. This happens a few times, and trust develops. There are a few I feel this with, some others, I honestly don't know what they're talking about and understand what their SQ values are.

Generally, trust does not emerge until a few months after you retire or die. You then have about a year of trust, then periodic moments of being remembered as a trusted resource.

Awesome!

 

[marty]

And the question is... how do you post a thread that will be locked asap.

GREAT post Peter!! Very funny.

 

[wakibaki]

Even though Aczel publicly misled his readers about owning an interest in a speaker that he reviewed as well as releasing a never published review of an amplifer, he is trustworth>?>?>? Spare us.

None of that is known to me. What's the provenance of your 'information'?

I've read some of what you've written, spare me.

w

 

[Kal Rubinson]

None of that is known to me. What's the provenance of your 'information'?

I do remember some of the events and they confirm Myles' statement. I do not wish to recount it but, I'll bet, it can be Googled.

 

[XV-1]

I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on Tone Audio. Specifically how they can give the VPI Direct turntable product of 2013 based in what seemed to be a afternoons listening at VPI, not in his own system. It is not as if Jeff has not heard competing tables in his system.

To me it came across as one large advertorial which did not favours for Tone Audio or VPI.

Being the first publication to review the VPI direct seemed to be more important.

Or is this the new way to review gear ?



Cheers

 

[ack]

Tone? I consider it mostly a lifestyle ezine with good music coverage, though the reviewing roster has improved in the last year or two; in the past, reviews reminded me of this guy http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-best-speaker-cable/