Stereophile review...legitimate?

2»

Comments

  • heiney9
    heiney9 Posts: 25,165
    edited April 2010
    How can a review of anything be unbiased? This hobby is subjective and while I will say some of the audio rags have reveiwers that can "paint" a picture of what they are hearing better than others and that can be helpful..............but in the end it's just one person's educated impression of a piece of gear, unless it just completely falls flat on it's face.

    I have bought stuff that I generally agree with multiple reviews and I've bought stuff that didn;t do for me what the reviewer said it would do as far as the final sound. I'd suggest reading multiple reviews of either a line of products or a singular product, but it will never replace a demo with your own ears, in your own room, with your own gear.

    Experimentation is key in this hobby, but some well written reviews can help you narrow your choices.

    H9
    "Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • hearingimpared
    hearingimpared Posts: 21,137
    edited April 2010
    heiney9 wrote: »
    How can a review of anything be unbiased? This hobby is subjective and while I will say some of the audio rags have reveiwers that can "paint" a picture of what they are hearing better than others and that can be helpful..............but in the end it's just one person's educated impression of a piece of gear, unless it just completely falls flat on it's face.

    I have bought stuff that I generally agree with multiple reviews and I've bought stuff that didn;t do for me what the reviewer said it would do as far as the final sound. I'd suggest reading multiple reviews of either a line of products or a singular product, but it will never replace a demo with your own ears, in your own room, with your own gear.

    Experimentation is key in this hobby, but some well written reviews can help you narrow your choices.

    H9

    Not to beat a dead horse but again I give my experience with the VTL 5.5 preamp. . . stellar reviews, everywhere, friends gave me recommendations to buy it, more stellar reviews read on forums, more stellar review read in the rags . . . stellar? NOT IN MY RIG!!!

    So BAM!! it is written below. "So let it be written, let it be so!:D
    Experimentation is key in this hobby, but some well written reviews can help you narrow your choices.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bikezappa
    bikezappa Posts: 2,463
    edited April 2010
    cstmar01 wrote: »
    I just buy the gear I see in the mag and then just stare at it for days to see if I like it or not. Then I take it out and burn it on a huge fire to the audio gods while playing a flute dressed like santa.

    Can we all join you and drink beer and have a party?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Jetmaker737
    Jetmaker737 Posts: 1,047
    edited April 2010
    As far as the OP I agree that changing more than one variable invalidates the review.
    SystemLuxman L-590AXII Integrated Amplifier|KEF Reference 1 Loudspeakers|PS Audio Directream Jr|Sansui TU-9900 Tuner|TEAC A-6100 RtR|Nakamichi RX-202 Cassette
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • hearingimpared
    hearingimpared Posts: 21,137
    edited April 2010
    Jetmaker737 wrote: »
    As far as the OP I agree that changing more than one variable invalidates the review.

    I with both of you on that one.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • hearingimpared
    hearingimpared Posts: 21,137
    edited May 2010
    BlueFox wrote: »
    Yes, and no. Last Friday I replaced the AC cords on my iTransport, DAC, and pre-amp at the same time with Panega AC14 cords. Powered on, and the improvement was apparent. But, did I need all 3, or would just the DAC, for example, been enough? I can say the cords made a positive change, but I can't be more specific as to which area improved.

    Well that makes sense in that those types of tweaks are cumulative. I made a number of tweaks to my speakers and although the changes/improvements were not subtle I had lost the ability to deterimine which tweak made what change.

    Now, for example, if we are talking reviewing an amp, and the cables were changed upstream or down, as well as the source or anything else in the chain then I would have to say the reviewer made a mistake by doing so and IMHO would have to think his review is null and void due to those other changes to components in his reference system.

    BTW if I'm not mistaken I didn't see a link posted to the review in question here.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • markmarc
    markmarc Posts: 2,309
    edited May 2010
    I've never met Art Dudley (and haven't read the review in question), but since he's been around for a long time I'm betting that he's had some experience with Sim amps. In addition, that he got to know that amp's capabilities pretty darn well. Remember most reviews are 3-5 month process, not a long weekend. I can testify you get to know gear, it's strengths and weaknesses. I'm sure that if you email Mr. Dudley, with some very specific questions or ask him in AudioAsylum forum he'll be happy to respond.

    One of the reasons I have four different integrated amplifiers (high end SS Sim i7, class D modded PS Audio C100, tube Vista Audio i34, and the budget SS Rotel RA-1520) is so that I can hit the widest possible readership with some useful information.

    No reviewer expects the reader to buyer directly off of their printed words. The best any of us hope for is that our review intrigues the reader enough to give the product a listen for themselves whether they're actually in the market, or just visiting a dealer for grins.

    I can promise you I haven't gotten rich, I still get up at 5:45 am to teach students, and can be found grading papers at 10pm most nights. Virtually every reviewer in this field has a day job, or writes for many publications in order to make ends meet. The few that don't are independently wealthy (lucky ****).

    The simple fact is that reviewers don't spend time reviewing gear that sucks. They put in requests for gear that they are interested in. When I was actively involved as publisher of A$$A, when a review piece became available (instead of the staffer directly requesting the manufacturer) I shotgunned an email out to the staff, those who were interested replied. No grand conspiracy, just honest curiosity.
    Review Site_ (((AudioPursuit)))
    Founder/Publisher Affordable$$Audio 2006-13.
    Former Staff Member TONEAudio
    2 Ch. System
    Amplifiers: Parasound Halo P6 pre, Vista Audio i34, Peachtree amp500, Adcom GFP-565 GFA-535ii, 545ii, 555ii
    Digital: SimAudio HAD230 DAC, iMac 20in/Amarra,
    Speakers: Paradigm Performa F75, Magnepan .7, Totem Model 1's, ACI Emerald XL, Celestion Si Stands. Totem Dreamcatcher sub
    Analog: Technics SL-J2 w/Pickering 3000D, SimAudio LP5.3 phono pre
    Cable/Wires: Cardas, AudioArt, Shunyata Venom 3
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • hearingimpared
    hearingimpared Posts: 21,137
    edited May 2010
    Great post Mark! I really have enjoyed Art Dudley for many years and didn't' know he was the reviewer in question or did I miss something?

    I particularly like when he does write-ups on his tinkering projects espcially those on turntables. IIRC he's done all kinds of tinkering and upgrades to his Linn Sondek LP 12. I find his views and writing style facinating.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Cpyder
    Cpyder Posts: 514
    edited May 2010
    Jetmaker737 wrote: »
    As far as the OP I agree that changing more than one variable invalidates the review.

    Hooray for science! In order to understand any variable, you must hold the others constant or there's no way to know what variable has what effect. Unless the reviewer was very familiar with the amplifier he borrowed, then no, this review was not conducted properly.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bikezappa
    bikezappa Posts: 2,463
    edited May 2010
    Cpyder wrote: »
    Hooray for science! In order to understand any variable, you must hold the others constant or there's no way to know what variable has what effect. Unless the reviewer was very familiar with the amplifier he borrowed, then no, this review was not conducted properly.

    Forget the "Unless".

    Hooray for science also.

    But some people don't think electronics and mechanics when applied to music reproduction is ruled by science. Like astrology well engineered words can be made to mean anything you want them to be.

    "Trust your ears" is a favorite quote on this forum. And it's true. And a deaf person could also say it also. Who you do you believe? How about educating your ears with some testing and data just to prove to yourself what you think you can hear is true.

    Sorry for the rant.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • hearingimpared
    hearingimpared Posts: 21,137
    edited May 2010
    bikezappa wrote: »
    Forget the "Unless".

    Hooray for science also.

    But some people don't think electronics and mechanics when applied to music reproduction is ruled by science. Like astrology well engineered words can be made to mean anything you want them to be.

    "Trust your ears" is a favorite quote on this forum. And it's true. And a deaf person could also say it also. Who you do you believe? How about educating your ears with some testing and data just to prove to yourself what you think you can hear is true.

    Sorry for the rant.

    Bingo!!! Hooray for BZ!!! I agree with you for once but you did notice I cut the sentence short. The whole point of saying trust your ears is based on the fact that being an audiophile THAT is what you do over time, years even to train your ears to hear all that equipment can do in changing how music sounds, differences in digital presentation vs analog presentation, I could go on and on but you get my drift.

    AS for a using data to prove to yourself anything, I don't. I use data, specs mainly as a guide to the quality of the gear I'm checking out for purchase and to be totally honest may not even check the specs. Some specs like THD meant something back in the 70s & 80s but look at the THD ratinga now. Heck, tube amp THD numbers can be awful compared to their SS counterparts but still sound better or at minimum as good IMHO.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Jetmaker737
    Jetmaker737 Posts: 1,047
    edited May 2010
    Controlling variables is the essence of science, therefore my earlier post. But I think it would be naive to believe that we have instruments to measure all the variables that contribute to the listening experience... specifically due to the hugely uncontrollable variables of human hearing and brain and their ability to react to very subtle stimuli.

    Yes, we use science to design the equipment but the experience of many audiophiles show that there's more going on than Ohm's law and the other applied physics used.
    SystemLuxman L-590AXII Integrated Amplifier|KEF Reference 1 Loudspeakers|PS Audio Directream Jr|Sansui TU-9900 Tuner|TEAC A-6100 RtR|Nakamichi RX-202 Cassette
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • hearingimpared
    hearingimpared Posts: 21,137
    edited May 2010
    Jetmaker737 wrote: »
    Controlling variables is the essence of science, therefore my earlier post. But I think it would be naive to believe that we have instruments to measure all the variables that contribute to the listening experience... specifically due to the hugely uncontrollable variables of human hearing and brain and their ability to react to very subtle stimuli.

    Yes, we use science to design the equipment but the experience of many audiophiles show that there's more going on than Ohm's law and the other applied physics used.

    Yep and don't forget that all important component . . . the room!;)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bikezappa
    bikezappa Posts: 2,463
    edited May 2010
    Jetmaker737 wrote: »
    .Yes, we use science to design the equipment but the experience of many audiophiles show that there's more going on than Ohm's law and the other applied physics used.

    What else do you think is going on if not science?

    Voodoo, astrology, religion, ETs, the scotch you just drank before turning on the equipment, the bad mood you are in after commuting from work to home.

    Who would you rather listen to while watching a football game, a 150 lbs announer who never played football or a veteran hall of famer?

    What qualifications do these so salled critics/reviewers have?
    Has anyone given them a hearing test?
    How do we know they have educated ears?
    Who pays them for the words?

    I am not a reviewer or critic but I am very sceptical of their endless claims/opinions and in some cases BS science they use to try to justify their words.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • markmarc
    markmarc Posts: 2,309
    edited May 2010
    Bikezappa:
    You pose many valuable questions...

    The announcer I want to hear is the one who can best convey the details that are not normally noticed in a game.

    Most reviewers have a combination passion for music and sound reproduction, have experienced a great amount of equipment, and can write with a modicum of skill.

    All the reviewers I know get regular hearing checks and are picky about protecting their hearing.

    Read their writings, when they can describe subtle details of background sounds or discuss something that is supported by testing measurements that tells you something.

    Ahh, the conspiracy theory. Once again with only a couple of exceptions reviewers do not support themselves/families writing reviews. If you look at the big publications you'll find that most reviews are on gear from manufacturers that don't advertise.

    There is no question that good science and quality engineering are needed to build good audio components. But it also requires a passion to want to stir the soul of the listener, because music is truly appreciated and valued when one's emotions are connected to the music. Otherwise it is just sound. I believe legendary designer Nelson Pass has a great quote but I can't find it.

    Their have been several studies using MRI's that show brain function while listening to music, when a song is played that stirs the passion of the subject, the parts of the brain that show stimulation increase tremendously. What this tells us is that the human brain is a combination of science and passion, and to separate one from the other is a foolish exercise.
    Review Site_ (((AudioPursuit)))
    Founder/Publisher Affordable$$Audio 2006-13.
    Former Staff Member TONEAudio
    2 Ch. System
    Amplifiers: Parasound Halo P6 pre, Vista Audio i34, Peachtree amp500, Adcom GFP-565 GFA-535ii, 545ii, 555ii
    Digital: SimAudio HAD230 DAC, iMac 20in/Amarra,
    Speakers: Paradigm Performa F75, Magnepan .7, Totem Model 1's, ACI Emerald XL, Celestion Si Stands. Totem Dreamcatcher sub
    Analog: Technics SL-J2 w/Pickering 3000D, SimAudio LP5.3 phono pre
    Cable/Wires: Cardas, AudioArt, Shunyata Venom 3
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • heiney9
    heiney9 Posts: 25,165
    edited May 2010
    markmarc wrote: »
    I believe legendary designer Nelson Pass has a great quote but I can't find it.


    Check my sig...............it's been there for two years. :)

    I'll copy it for you.

    "Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass
    "Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • heiney9
    heiney9 Posts: 25,165
    edited May 2010
    Zero wrote: »
    At the end of the day, a reviewers job is to create a thorough and honest analysis of a products performance. That's it.

    While I cannot speak for everyone, I feel that if a reviewer can 'hit the nail on the head' with most of his/her reviews ,than I could care less as to what their reference system is or if they have been ordained by some h oly audio deity as being fit to evaluate systems. So long as the reviewer is able to capture the basic fundamentals of a products performance and relay those fundamentals in an intelligible manner, I'm happy. At that point, it's up to me, the reader, to determine whether or not the product that they reviewed is something that I'd care to try out.

    I guess I'm a simple guy. :)

    To play devils advocate that would discount system synergy then. I know you wouldn't discount system synergy. It forms a baseline of the gear used to evaluate the piece of gear in question. Knowing the "reference" system provides another part of the picture and I think it's important in the end.

    H9
    "Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass Pass Labs XA25 | EE Avant Pre | EE Mini Max Supreme DAC | MIT Shotgun S1 | Pangea AC14SE MKII | Legend L600 | BlueSound Node 3 - Tubes add soul!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • markmarc
    markmarc Posts: 2,309
    edited May 2010
    "Appreciation of audio is a completely subjective human experience. Measurements can provide a measure of insight, but are no substitute for human judgment. Why are we looking to reduce a subjective experience to objective criteria anyway? The subtleties of music and audio reproduction are for those who appreciate it. Differentiation by numbers is for those who do not".--Nelson Pass

    THANKS Heiney9
    Review Site_ (((AudioPursuit)))
    Founder/Publisher Affordable$$Audio 2006-13.
    Former Staff Member TONEAudio
    2 Ch. System
    Amplifiers: Parasound Halo P6 pre, Vista Audio i34, Peachtree amp500, Adcom GFP-565 GFA-535ii, 545ii, 555ii
    Digital: SimAudio HAD230 DAC, iMac 20in/Amarra,
    Speakers: Paradigm Performa F75, Magnepan .7, Totem Model 1's, ACI Emerald XL, Celestion Si Stands. Totem Dreamcatcher sub
    Analog: Technics SL-J2 w/Pickering 3000D, SimAudio LP5.3 phono pre
    Cable/Wires: Cardas, AudioArt, Shunyata Venom 3
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Jetmaker737
    Jetmaker737 Posts: 1,047
    edited May 2010
    bikezappa wrote: »
    What else do you think is going on if not science?

    Voodoo, astrology, religion, ETs, the scotch you just drank before turning on the equipment, the bad mood you are in after commuting from work to home.

    Reductionist science, the concept that all knowledge of a particular subject can be had by breaking it down into its known elements and measuring those elements is fundamentally flawed. The first flaw is assuming that the current state of knowledge understands all the influencing elements. The second flaw is that we can adequately measure those elements we do understand. The greatest flaw is ignoring the synergy and interaction of known and unknown elements. Engineers obviously know quite adequately how to design electronic components to reproduce sound. However, the way those various designs interact with human hearing and mind are not well understood and are not measured by the techniques used to define "specs".
    SystemLuxman L-590AXII Integrated Amplifier|KEF Reference 1 Loudspeakers|PS Audio Directream Jr|Sansui TU-9900 Tuner|TEAC A-6100 RtR|Nakamichi RX-202 Cassette
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dorokusai
    dorokusai Posts: 25,577
    edited May 2010
    I've never enjoyed reading reviews very much and they've never played a role in the purchase of anything in regards to audio. I like to collect reviews for the gear purchased afterwards but rarely before.
    CTC BBQ Amplifier, Sonic Frontiers Line3 Pre-Amplifier and Wadia 581 SACD player. Speakers? Always changing but for now, Mission Argonauts I picked up for $50 bucks, mint.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • madmax
    madmax Posts: 12,434
    edited May 2010
    You need to follow and know reviewers to really know what they are saying and what it will mean to you.
    Vinyl, the final frontier...

    Avantgarde horns, 300b tubes, thats the kinda crap I want... :D
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dorokusai
    dorokusai Posts: 25,577
    edited May 2010
    Nah, I'll pass on that pill Chuck. Zoinks!
    CTC BBQ Amplifier, Sonic Frontiers Line3 Pre-Amplifier and Wadia 581 SACD player. Speakers? Always changing but for now, Mission Argonauts I picked up for $50 bucks, mint.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • FTGV
    FTGV Posts: 3,649
    edited May 2010
    BlueFox wrote: »
    I enjoy reading reviews, whether I am interested in the equipment or not. It is simply more information, and information is always a good thing.
    Likewise I enjoy reading about the technical aspects of certain designs.'Some' technically astute reviewers are well versed in audio circuit design and are able to accurately describe the circuit topology of a component. As for the subjective part of reviews, I usually take with a grain of salt as I prefer to use my own ears to form any opinions as to the sound quality of a product.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HHStuart
    HHStuart Posts: 263
    edited May 2010
    cstmar01 wrote: »
    I just buy the gear I see in the mag and then just stare at it for days to see if I like it or not. Then I take it out and burn it on a huge fire to the audio gods while playing a flute dressed like santa.

    It must be hard to dress a flute like Santa. Flutes are pretty thin.
    Front - Polk LSiM 705, Center - Polk LSiM 704c, Rear - Polk LSi 7
    Subwoofer - Epik Legend
    Receiver (as Preamp) - Sony STR-DA3400 ES
    Amplifier - Outlaw 7125
    Television - 58" Samsung Plasma PN58B860
    Blu Ray - OPPO BDP 83
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Flash21
    Flash21 Posts: 316
    edited May 2010
    jaxwired wrote: »
    So I'm rereading the April Stereophile review of the Monitor Audio PL200 speakers by reviewer Robert Deutsch and I notice that for the review he "borrows" a Sim Audio Moon amplifier and new interconnects.

    I personally would never attempt to evaluate an audio product if I also introduced 2 other unknowns into my system at the same time. How would you know if the Amp, Cable, or Speakers were contributing to what you were hearing? This seems to really devalue the review IMO.

    The gold standard for reviewers is to take a "reference" system which they are highly familiar with and introduce one new component to evaluate.

    Thoughts?
    Based on my experiences with system synergy, this would trouble me.
    Steve Carlson
    Von Schweikert VR-33 speakers
    Bel Canto eVo2i integrated amp
    Bel Canto PL-2 universal disc player
    Analysis Plus Oval Nine speaker cables and Copper Oval-In Micro interconnects
    VH Audio Flavor 4 power cables
    Polk Monitor 10B speakers, retired but not forgotten
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cstmar01
    cstmar01 Posts: 4,424
    edited May 2010
    HHStuart wrote: »
    It must be hard to dress a flute like Santa. Flutes are pretty thin.

    sorry I dress like santa. the flute, well I prefer mine dressed like a flute, or a saxophone. yeah a flute wearing a saxophone costume is cool, bet ya never seen that one. well sometimes people think a saprano sax is one but its not. haha
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • hearingimpared
    hearingimpared Posts: 21,137
    edited May 2010
    cstmar01 wrote: »
    sorry I dress like santa. the flute, well I prefer mine dressed like a flute, or a saxophone. yeah a flute wearing a saxophone costume is cool, bet ya never seen that one. well sometimes people think a saprano sax is one but its not. haha

    Of course not! It's a silver or brass colored clarinet!:D
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter