OK.
If you write here at ASR that 'I like the sound of xxx dac and I prefet to yyyy dac a lot' - is it an information?
Sure I'm informed of the person's subjective preference, but that's of no value to me when it comes to understanding audio gear. It's worthless as a piece of consumer advice. It adds nothing to the conversation, because it isn't grounded in anything but a personal impression, which, we know for a fact, is extremely fallible, prone to biases, virtually untranslatable from one individual to another.
And that's not even the point - it would be a dream world if ppl just stopped at saying 'I enjoy using DAC X' - no, they will wax poetic about 'juicy bass' of DAC X vs. 'clinicality' of DAC Y etc. with nothing to back the claims, zero proof, zero controlled testing, nada.
At the next step you've got the 'reviewers' who use the same sort of empty drivel to sell stuff, framing it as consumer advice. That guy you linked to writes:
[played through Chord DAVE] The sounds were no longer free and unhindered as they were on the X30
It surely is 'information' if you insist, but care to decipher it for me? Sound is a well-researched, deeply studied phenomenon. What is an 'unhindered' sound then? What parameters produce a 'hindered' soundwave? And even if you have your understanding of those terms, how do you know the reviewer had the same stuff in mind?
You joined quite recently, and I don't mean to come across as blindly combative. There are dozens of forums where this kind of methaphorical talk is welcome, and discussions are focused on exchanging impressions. This forum, however, has a different set of principles, which makes it unique. The evaluations shared here are expected to be backed by well-designed tests or at least an understanding of how devices operate and of the limits of human sensory perception.
