So much "buzz" is created by the online review craze. The numbers just keep growing and manufacturers are more than eager to send their products to these video reviewers. Speakers, amplifiers, accessories, pretty much everything "audio" and with good reason- sites like The Audiophiliac, Thomas & Stereo, Z Reviews, Zero Fidelity, HiViNyws, New Record Day etc. have lots of viewers and subscribers. The online review is taking the place of an actual in-person demonstration for many audio consumers. But can you trust them completely or is everything really that good? When a reviewer stays positive about a product and avoids negative criticism - or veils that criticism subjectively- it is good for business. If they find something that they really don't like- will they avoid mentioning it for fear of manufactures shying away from sending them samples for review? I know this has been covered about print media, but not online video media. It just seems like "everything" sounds good, and we all know that can't be.
I don’t trust online reviews for much more than a high level overview of how the product is built and what features there are. Descriptions on how something sounds is so subject to personal biases (I have enough of my own, I don’t need yours too), preferences, the review system, financial interests, etc. that it becomes useless very quickly.
Since I’m new to this I just read the specs and let SH forum provide the insight, by members, on describing the qualities of a component.
FWIW. I’ve seen a pretty good numbers of not so favorable reviews from HiViNyws and he usually buys the components with his own money. He negatively reviewed a phono stage very popular in this website some time ago, and some folks went bananas. Peace, Tony
Exactly. I read for what a piece of equipment does or doesn’t do. Over time I’ll find which writers share my biases or have opposite views, and take that into consideration as well. Very similar to music reviewers.
I think Steve seems more honest in his YouTube videos than he does in his CNET and Stereophile reviews. Ron seems too easily bowled over by new gear right out the gate. His reviews have gotten better as he's gained experience. I noticed he now has sponsors, and ads on the NewRecordDay site, which will make me less inclined to trust his future assessments. I like Sean's reviewing style and his assertion that no piece of gear is "perfect." He also admits to having some biases. Ian seems to readily lambaste gear (especially cartridges) in short time. I question whether he takes the time to maximize setup and synergy for each example - doubtful in my mind. Thomas is my favorite. It's obvious that he strives for honesty ans is very open-minded. I like the diversity of his reviews/experiences.
As an experiment, take a few reviews - at random, from any source - and just edit them to remove the intro, the personal anecdotes, the music being played, and any and all subjective terms or descriptors and you will probably realize how little most of they are to be trusted. They boil down to rehashed ad copy and fluff. Furthermore, how valuable is a review of a product that is tested in a completely different component chain in a completely different environment? Oh, that $130 phono preamp impressed you when it was hooked up between your $50,000 TT and your $80,000 speakers? I should hope so! I still read and enjoy those reviews and I am not calling all reviewers shills - no way - but as a general rule anybody who refuses (or refutes) ABX testing is immediately relegated to the 'for entertainment purposes only' category in my books. And you gotta remember that anybody that reviews product for a living lives off those products. Bad reviews = no advertising = no money. Would a manufacturer who got one bad review send another product in to the same guy? There are some reviews that actually (sometimes physically) break down a product and test it, showing graphs and actual performance. Such reviews can sometimes be useful in terms of identifying either total scams OR good value, but in terms of an objective assessment of sound, what could you really expect anyway? I find it hard enough to do an A/B test in my own home and actually describe the differences, even though I might obviously prefer A to B. I can't imagine reading some dude's impressions, knowing he's paid to make everything look good anyway, and conclude that 'crisp, controlled and elegant mids' would sound better in my setup at home than 'refined lows with a sparkling top-end'. I research obsessively, but the only impression I really value is the average response across multiple users in forums like this. If most people spending their own hard-earned money seem to agree that a product is good, it's a safe bet that it's good, and vice versa. How it actually sounds will only be determined once you set it up. There's also something to be said for older products that are still highly valued and well regarded on the used market as an indication of quality and reliability.
I purposely seek out negative reviews of things to try to find some sort nuggets of truth and balance. Crowdsourcing the forums for opinions is invaluable as well. Best way to get a full picture of something is to absorb the info en masse and parse it out as best you can.
I enjoy audio reviews like I enjoy reading travel reviews on in-flight magazines. They sound like fun places to visit, probably very nice, and I am diverted from my monotony until I arrive wherever I was heading. I trust them about as much, too. Another way to look at it: Audio reviews in the major publications are like pornography—the setting and characters may have slight variations here and there, but you can count on the same basic thing happening every time. It’s not reality, and YMMV if you try to recreate the same scene at home.
How much do you trust online reviewers ? I don’t trust them ! The only reason I take a look at the reviews is because of the photographs and the technical specifications (like how many inputs, is there a toslink or a digital coaxial output, ...).
The audio reviews I connect the most with come from people who have relatively static reference systems, and mention their reference systems in the review. With the Stereophile crew for instance, I generally know what they like and dislike, and how my tastes do and don't align with theirs. Without reference points like this, reviews in the modern tradition aren't especially useful.
I just love the reviewers that hide behind nonexistent financial difficulties to explain why they would not purchase the review sample.
