Why aren't there more honest and objective reviewers like ASR and Amir?

[Robin L]

I'm American and enjoy stewing beef heart. Unbelievably healthy and inexpensive.

I'm American and enjoy Captain Beefheart stewing:

 

[RayDunzl]

Since Captain Beefheart showed up, you may as well get the background for the name:


From The Real Frank Zappa Book - by Frank Zappa with Peter Occhiogrosso


"I spent more time with Don (Captain Beefheart) Van Vliet when I was in high school than after he got into 'show business.'

He dropped out during his senior year, because his Dad, who was a Helms Bread truck driver, had a heart attack and 'Vliet' (as he was known then) took over his route for a while -- but most of the time he just stayed home from school.

His girlfriend, Laurie, lived in the house with him, along with his Mom (Sue), his Dad (Glen), Aunt Ione and Uncle Alan. Granny Annie lived across the street.

The way Don got his 'stage name' was, Uncle Alan had a habit of exposing himself to Laurie. He'd piss with the bathroom door open and, if she was walking by, mumble about his appendage -- something along the lines of: "Ahh, what a beauty! It looks just like a big, fine beef heart."

 

[Dialectic]

What do you put in it ? Do you really stew it or bake it ?

I stew it in a slow cooker with a little beef broth, minced garlic and shallots, salt and pepper, potatoes, carrots, and celery, and the usual mishmash of herbs and spices that tend to go in conventional beef stew. Beef heart needs to stew a long time on the 'low' setting to eliminate excessive chewiness.

 

[North_Sky]

Anyone here eating the balls of bulls?

 

[bidn]

What a refreshing change it is to come here after reading the diatribe on other reviewing websites which always give favourable reviews no matter what they review or how bad it really is. There is never any detailed measurements or objective testing on the products and they always sing their praises. Its like the actual review is being lead by the vendor of the equipment.

Its as though they are being paid to review it in that way so they can continue to receive money for so called sponsorship's, when in actual fact it is just regurgitated manufacturer advertising blurbs for products that don't cut the mustard like what PS Audio has been exposed for by Amir. When he does expose this he cops crap which is totally unjustified when measurements DON'T LIE.

Im sure many people have bought products that have been reviewed by websites such as stereo***au and others only to come here and find out how crappy they really are. At least comments here are NOT CENSORED or members banned for having an opinion. If something is bad it should be called.

Very important question, exposing the corruption at the core of the money-rotten audiophile world.

On Head-Fi I came across people seeking help because they had problems with headphones they have bought from professional reviewers, who in turn had gotten them for free in exchange of a positive, praising reviesw, without invoice nor right to warranty.
I have seen some big reviewing sites from times to times sell (without invoice nor warranty) the many headphones they received for free from the manufacturers. I reckoned how much worth per month one these sites (at the time it had 3 professional reviewers) was receiving for free in IEMs (In Ear Monitors), headphones, DACs, and amps : between € 20 000 and 30 000 a month, ... and because they receive them as free presents, no taxes apply... and I wonder if they declare to the tax income the money they make by selling these very expensive stuff they receive for free.
Contrast this with the very few honest reviewers, .e.g. Tyll Hertsen, who used to send back the devices, unless keeping them for comparative reference, never selling them , and daring to write negative things.

I also read interesting stuff on fora in other languages, e.g. retired people who had worked in audio magazines, explaining that they were dependent from the money generated by the manufacturers' advertisements: they were not able to include the negative aspects of an item reviewed because then the manufacturers would cut the adds and the money coming with them, and the magazine manager-editor would get mad and censor anything negative, even if true and very important.

ASR is fantastically honest and other-worldly scientific because Amir is not only an engineer (most reviewers are fully incompetent re. technology and science, just able to write some nice literary or commercial stuff), but because he is also retired, not dependent on the money from the manufacturers. There are even no adds on his site!
I am not old to be able to compare over a long time, but, in my limited, short experience, this site is by far, by very very far the best the audio world has ever known.

 

[Thomas savage]

Anyone here eating the balls of bulls?

I eat balls every time I log on.

 

[Victor Martell]

I'm American and enjoy stewing beef heart. Unbelievably healthy and inexpensive.

Indeed - kind of forgot all the instances I know of U.S.A. non-muscle dishes - how 'bout some rocky mountain oysters?

As a previous poster indicated, it could be more of an affluence and/or cultural upbringing thing instead of a regional (or national!) thing.. well - back to reviews...

So - objective reviews... well - I used to actually pay money for Peter Aczel's "Audio Critic" - it was refreshing. As I mentioned before (in a post that I deleted in a huff, because it was being ignored - yes, kind of on the spectrum, so very sensitive) the problem I believe is is that the audiophile press intention is not journalistic, but industry advocacy instead.

v

 

[dkinric]

This thread is weird

 

[Dialectic]

This thread is weird

You don't like organ meat or Captain Beefheart?

On the subject of organ meat, today I received a marketing email from St. John Restaurant. I very much hope that they can continue to survive the pandemic.

 

[North_Sky]

I eat balls every time I log on.

Thomas, I meant to ask you; what did you replace Jesus with in your new avatar?
Jesus of Siberia I recognized right away, but that new avatar I can't quite make it.
...A road supplemented by trees on each side...and an arm pointing ahead?

 

[North_Sky]

This thread is weird

The thread bizarre yes, people yes more. What's on the menu, beef stew?

 

[Thomas savage]

Thomas, I meant to ask you; what did you replace Jesus with in your new avatar?
Jesus of Siberia I recognized right away, but that new avatar I can't quite make it.
...A road supplemented by trees on each side...and an arm pointing ahead?

If you click on it you should be able to make it bigger , it's a beautiful picture a member took of his dog who has sadly died so as a tribute I made it my avatar.

It's a amazing photograph !

 

[Wombat]

Little demand.

 

[noiseangel]

Very important question, exposing the corruption at the core of the money-rotten audiophile world.

On Head-Fi I came across people seeking help because they had problems with headphones they have bought from professional reviewers, who in turn had gotten them for free in exchange of a positive, praising reviesw, without invoice nor right to warranty.
I have seen some big reviewing sites from times to times sell (without invoice nor warranty) the many headphones they received for free from the manufacturers. I reckoned how much worth per month one these sites (at the time it had 3 professional reviewers) was receiving for free in IEMs (In Ear Monitors), headphones, DACs, and amps : between € 20 000 and 30 000 a month, ... and because they receive them as free presents, no taxes apply... and I wonder if they declare to the tax income the money they make by selling these very expensive stuff they receive for free.
Contrast this with the very few honest reviewers, .e.g. Tyll Hertsen, who used to send back the devices, unless keeping them for comparative reference, never selling them , and daring to write negative things.

I also read interesting stuff on fora in other languages, e.g. retired people who had worked in audio magazines, explaining that they were dependent from the money generated by the manufacturers' advertisements: they were not able to include the negative aspects of an item reviewed because then the manufacturers would cut the adds and the money coming with them, and the magazine manager-editor would get mad and censor anything negative, even if true and very important.

ASR is fantastically honest and other-worldly scientific because Amir is not only an engineer (most reviewers are fully incompetent re. technology and science, just able to write some nice literary or commercial stuff), but because he is also retired, not dependent on the money from the manufacturers. There are even no adds on his site!
I am not old to be able to compare over a long time, but, in my limited, short experience, this site is by far, by very very far the best the audio world has ever known.

Stereo***au is a prime example of this. There is never a bad review about anything no matter how bad the product really is by any of these guys, some claim they are journalists but none of them have a technical blood cell in their bodies. If you read their "REVIEWS", you can clearly see its just a clever re-arrangement of the manufacturers advertising blurb, they don't review they write. They never get half of the equipment they do an article on. Stereo**ile and MF/JA and their cohort are another prime example. Imagine reviewing a 200k Magico, being honest and saying the midrange is "not quite right". Which to me it isn't, I heard them RMAF and I would rather have the little cast iron speaker for 1900. There goes Magico as a source of car and mortgage repayments They all rely on advertising dollars. Another good example is an Australian magazine. They got caught out being given cars to declare a particular vehicle as "Car of the Year". The car was a dogs breakfast.

Reviewers credibility to me is like carbon monoxide poisoning. Long after you have been removed from the poison the effects linger for a long time. Its like Drs. If they made everyone better they wouldn't have a job, so they don't make you better. They just prescribe a pill, come back and see me in a week by which time it has either cleared by itself or you have a terminal illness and are going to die in which case they cant help you anyway. Either way they got you to take some pills for a week or 2, much like audio reviewers. They sold a couple of cables for their advertisers, what do they care.

I was in a VERY HIGH END HiFi shop in Melbourne and there was a guy listening to a valve amp, waiting 30 minutes for it to warm up. I asked what speakers, music source etc he owned. He didn't own anything he was judging the amplifier on. I asked how are you going to judge if its any good on your system? He goes I read the review from Stereo***au. I read the review while he was listening. There was nothing about the reviewer actually listening to the amp, it was all advertising BS, shiny case, glowing valves to keep you warm on a cold night and all that crap. It wasn't a review at all but there was advertising for the amps on the stereo***au website. Then I found a proper technical review for the amp. It measured like a Kenwood Mixmaster and the audio review was less than flattering. I showed it to him and he changed his mind about buying it. It was 14k of rubbish.

Amir does a great job of pointing out the technical competency of the design, which is ultimately also about the engineering and technical competency of the designers themselves. How it sounds is up to you. Not some sociopaths who run magazines and websites who never have a bad word to say about anything. But they almost never own anything they review and when they do you can almost guarantee they never paid for it.

 

[egellings]

I miss Peter Aczel's The Audio Critic. He took no prisoners!

 

[Harmonie]

Ok let's use this thread as general topic

Relax .. I'm joking

 

[noiseangel]

I miss Peter Aczel's The Audio Critic. He took no prisoners!

And didn't they hate him for it?

My love of Amir's reviews outweighs the hatred of him by the many manufacturers who make the substandard equipment and get called out. If they were better engineers this thread and many others like it would never have sprung in to existence.

We have a saying in Australia. "Keeping the b*stards honest".

 

[amirm]

@amirm I know you pickle , or your wife does ( story of your life ) but have you made or more accurately prepared and kept sauerkraut?

We have not as we did not grow any cabbage.

 

[richard12511]

Stereo***au is a prime example of this. There is never a bad review about anything no matter how bad the product really is by any of these guys, some claim they are journalists but none of them have a technical blood cell in their bodies. If you read their "REVIEWS", you can clearly see its just a clever re-arrangement of the manufacturers advertising blurb, they don't review they write. They never get half of the equipment they do an article on. Stereo**ile and MF/JA and their cohort are another prime example. Imagine reviewing a 200k Magico, being honest and saying the midrange is "not quite right". Which to me it isn't, I heard them RMAF and I would rather have the little cast iron speaker for 1900. There goes Magico as a source of car and mortgage repayments They all rely on advertising dollars. Another good example is an Australian magazine. They got caught out being given cars to declare a particular vehicle as "Car of the Year". The car was a dogs breakfast.

Reviewers credibility to me is like carbon monoxide poisoning. Long after you have been removed from the poison the effects linger for a long time. Its like Drs. If they made everyone better they wouldn't have a job, so they don't make you better. They just prescribe a pill, come back and see me in a week by which time it has either cleared by itself or you have a terminal illness and are going to die in which case they cant help you anyway. Either way they got you to take some pills for a week or 2, much like audio reviewers. They sold a couple of cables for their advertisers, what do they care.

I was in a VERY HIGH END HiFi shop in Melbourne and there was a guy listening to a valve amp, waiting 30 minutes for it to warm up. I asked what speakers, music source etc he owned. He didn't own anything he was judging the amplifier on. I asked how are you going to judge if its any good on your system? He goes I read the review from Stereo***au. I read the review while he was listening. There was nothing about the reviewer actually listening to the amp, it was all advertising BS, shiny case, glowing valves to keep you warm on a cold night and all that crap. It wasn't a review at all but there was advertising for the amps on the stereo***au website. Then I found a proper technical review for the amp. It measured like a Kenwood Mixmaster and the audio review was less than flattering. I showed it to him and he changed his mind about buying it. It was 14k of rubbish.

Amir does a great job of pointing out the technical competency of the design, which is ultimately also about the engineering and technical competency of the designers themselves. How it sounds is up to you. Not some sociopaths who run magazines and websites who never have a bad word to say about anything. But they almost never own anything they review and when they do you can almost guarantee they never paid for it.

I'm so thankful that "electronics don't really matter" is something that I learned early on, somewhat by chance. Obviously that's a bit of an exaggeration, but there's quite a bit of truth. It's saved me so much money; well...not really, but it's allowed me to spend that money on new speakers instead.

 

[lemnoc]

Stereo***au is a prime example of this. There is never a bad review about anything no matter how bad the product really is by any of these guys, some claim they are journalists but none of them have a technical blood cell in their bodies. If you read their "REVIEWS", you can clearly see its just a clever re-arrangement of the manufacturers advertising blurb, they don't review they write. They never get half of the equipment they do an article on. Stereo**ile and MF/JA and their cohort are another prime example. Imagine reviewing a 200k Magico, being honest and saying the midrange is "not quite right". Which to me it isn't, I heard them RMAF and I would rather have the little cast iron speaker for 1900. There goes Magico as a source of car and mortgage repayments They all rely on advertising dollars. Another good example is an Australian magazine. They got caught out being given cars to declare a particular vehicle as "Car of the Year". The car was a dogs breakfast.

Reviewers credibility to me is like carbon monoxide poisoning. Long after you have been removed from the poison the effects linger for a long time. Its like Drs. If they made everyone better they wouldn't have a job, so they don't make you better. They just prescribe a pill, come back and see me in a week by which time it has either cleared by itself or you have a terminal illness and are going to die in which case they cant help you anyway. Either way they got you to take some pills for a week or 2, much like audio reviewers. They sold a couple of cables for their advertisers, what do they care.

I was in a VERY HIGH END HiFi shop in Melbourne and there was a guy listening to a valve amp, waiting 30 minutes for it to warm up. I asked what speakers, music source etc he owned. He didn't own anything he was judging the amplifier on. I asked how are you going to judge if its any good on your system? He goes I read the review from Stereo***au. I read the review while he was listening. There was nothing about the reviewer actually listening to the amp, it was all advertising BS, shiny case, glowing valves to keep you warm on a cold night and all that crap. It wasn't a review at all but there was advertising for the amps on the stereo***au website. Then I found a proper technical review for the amp. It measured like a Kenwood Mixmaster and the audio review was less than flattering. I showed it to him and he changed his mind about buying it. It was 14k of rubbish.

Amir does a great job of pointing out the technical competency of the design, which is ultimately also about the engineering and technical competency of the designers themselves. How it sounds is up to you. Not some sociopaths who run magazines and websites who never have a bad word to say about anything. But they almost never own anything they review and when they do you can almost guarantee they never paid for it.

It seems that the the word idiots have taken over the industry and are making a killing from writing weasel words on a website that don't really tell you anything about a product. Gone are the days of magazines like "Audio" where they would publish part of a schematic or a simplified diagram and attempt to explain the underlying technology before they would test it and then listen to it !!

In defense of publications such as Stereophile, Australian Hifi, Hifi News, where at least they have invested in the appropriate test equipment and do provide measurements or they use an outside independent consultancy firm to do their test and measurements. That's got to count for some sort of credibility these days. Whereas a mag such as TAS does no measurements at all and fills up pages full of audiofool poetry

cheers