I have just posted a comment about audio reviews in another thread and I think it will be of interest to know the reasons why we read audio reviews. Entertainment, advise on buying decisions or just to keep informed of the audio world can be some of the reasons but surely not all of them.
I also read all reviews on a pool of competing components i am contemplating seriously...to get initial impressions on my "top 4-5"...since auditioning 20 units is usually darn near impossible. Once i have selected my top choice thru an actual live audition, i usually keep all the reviews on the piece i buy...and go back to them over time. what i find is that there are usually 3-4 minor comments i overlooked in the initial reading which actually mean something to me after i have lived with the component...sensitivity to impedances, or cables, or something that at the time was not a major factor in the purchase...but can become very important once you've bought it and are in the fine tuning/voicing stage of getting the unit to settle into the system.
Absolutely...i bought the Zanden DAC which STereophile said terrible things about in terms of measurements (though they did love the sound qualitatively)...i also own the Gryphon Antileon which many reviews loved, but again which Stereophile smashed...one of the worst reviews i have ever read...trashed the earlier generation of the amp i bought. again, i read every review and over the course of 10+ reviews, i ended up coming to initial conclusions and narrowed the field down, and then went from there to live auditions.
I also found that i have read and re-read the reviews on the Zanden transport more recently...and find myself getting closer and closer to adding that to the shortlist of Next Purchase. there are slews of reviews professional and amateur on the Transport. i know many here would cringe to hear that...but i am not about convenience...and given the collapse in transport pricing, i am just biding my time to buy one in the next year or so. And then i will wait until servers, et al mature as a technology...as well as the music in high res becomes more universally available.
Absolutely...i bought the Zanden DAC which STereophile said terrible things about in terms of measurements (though they did love the sound qualitatively)...i also own the Gryphon Antileon which many reviews loved, but again which Stereophile smashed...one of the worst reviews i have ever read...trashed the earlier generation of the amp i bought. again, i read every review and over the course of 10+ reviews, i ended up coming to initial conclusions and narrowed the field down, and then went from there to live auditions.
My main reason for reading them is to learn. Second is to see if I can find something wrong about their technical assessment so that I can write an article for this forum .
Good point Davey. Prices are seldom if ever listed in the websites of manufacturers. Often times the quickest way to find the prices is by looking for the reviews online. So add that to my 3 reasons.......price finding.
I have gotten devilishly good at ferreting out the truth. I read only reviews of components and music I am interested in buying. I hope to find owner reviews and professional reviews. I knew a professional reviewer and he did all he could to get out the truth of the matter.
I can't remember the last time I read a review I wasn't referred to, so I read them when someone tells me of a review about a product I'm already interested in, or when someone points me to a review that is particularly amusing.
Since there are no bad reviews, if something appears in a magazine, it has some strong virtues. I don't read them closely at first, but I use them to narrow down the field of what to audition. I may scan the "Sound Section" of the review to get a general sense of the sonic signature to determine if that is something I am interested in, taking note in comparisons made to gear I may be familiar with.
Once I audition, I read several of the reviews of the product more carefully.
This aspect is quite relevant. Unless you know previous work of the reviewer, his preferences, system and methodology it is very difficult to extract any useful information from the review. I approach the reviews by Martin Colloms in a completely different way of those of Anthony H. Cordesman.
This aspect is quite relevant. Unless you know previous work of the reviewer, his preferences, system and methodology it is very difficult to extract any useful information from the review. I approach the reviews by Martin Colloms in a completely different way of those of Anthony H. Cordesman.
Should it be a mystery to be unraveled or something that is explained by the reviewer, as part of his objectively to communicate most effectively? I would prefer the latter. And most people don't follow reviewers like they follow celebrities on TMZ.
My main reason for reading them is to learn. Second is to see if I can find something wrong about their technical assessment so that I can write an article for this forum .
