Do you trust reviews?

There is a great deal of cynicism about magazine reviews on these forums. I've read a few which are pretty difficult to understand (mainly in Hi-Fi+!), a few which I've disagreed with, and some that I think are absolutely spot-on (or pretty close) IMO.

So which to believe? The ones you agree with, obviously. But what if you haven't heard the gear?

Some people have indicated a belief that the big advertisers get the best reviews. But occasionally, very good reviews go to products from companies who don't seem to advertise in the hi-fi mags very much, if at all. Could these be the ones that a 'worth a look'?

 

I personally would only use reviews to draw up a shortlist of products to demo myself.

 

There is a modicum of truth in everything.

 

Yeah, the mags are handy for getting a feel for what's out there that might be of interest. They can point out obvious sonic properties ("this one's rather bright", or "the bass is great on speaker x"), which helps in sorting out which kit might be relevent to you, and a glowing review is certainly an indication that a given piece of kit should be heard.

After reading the mags for some time, it becomes second nature to ignore the hyperbole and flowery prose and try and pick out the useful nuggets of information.

Dunc

 

How much would you trust what a guy, who you don't know at all, writes or says?

 

Well, er, that's the question I'm asking. Thanks for re-iterating it so helpfully.

 

I'm with Dunc and Dev, usefull reference tools nothing more, well also abit of eye candy, and something to read on the bog.

 

Don't you get the Sun or similar comics where you live?

 

I would only really trust the reviews that were conducted using strict controls and double blind testing. Otherwise, there is always the chance that the reviewers are just making it up because they have to appear competent and show that they are able to describe the sound of everything they review, or, even if they are sincere and genuinely belive they can hear what they are reporting, they might be delusional.

I would also trust the reviews that said my "gear" was "tops".

 

If a piece of kit has had good reviews in all of the mags. Then it's highly likely that the machine will, surprise, be a good piece of kit!

I've seen some equipment get very good reviews all round in all of the hifi rags... (examples include the Marantz CD6000KI praised in HFW, HFC, WHF... Unison Research Unico praised in HFW, HFN, WHF, HFC... Naim CD5i praised in HFC, HFW, WHF... to name but a few)

Also, there are some very good reviewers out there, whose critical appraisal of the equipment is an accurate representation of how it sounds. I find that writers such as Martin Colloms, Ken Kessler, Paul Miller, Jason Kennedy usually write fairly accurate reviews.......

Other times I've seen a bit of kit get a glowing review in one mag... and then a complete slagging off in another. These are the reviews which could perhaps leave me feeling a little weary ( for instance, Arcam FMJ CD33 praised in HFN, ripped in HFC...)

Agree that HF+ reviews are a bit of a chore to read. WHF reviews are written for Sun readers.

 

I feel Jason Kennedy is badge lover and find a lot of reviews are simply pants,
especially the high end stuff.Quote " its worth 96% on sound quality but its not a rapid as some other cd players". Unreal (and he was talking about a Wadia!!!) its not that good trust me I've had one
Mind you he rates valhalla & dcs, so I suppose this must be taken into account.
But as with all things you checks & balances, as long as there a few 'real world' reviewers in that particular mag then well you know, it should equal itself out

 

Yeah of course, what do you think we wipe our arses with?

 

I agree with most of what Gundam said.

Despite commercial pressures, I don't think any of them will intentionally recommend bad stuff. A single journalist writes WHF reviews it seems. They are far from in depth. HFC try harder by including lab tests and findings of a panel of listeners.

It is outside the scope of most people to audition everything on the market. So as it has been pointed out, these reviews are helpful to narrow down the list to a manageable few for further research.

With I/Cs, cables and gizzmos, reading opinions of experienced people on this forum helps a lot

 

I think you'll find that those are the companies that are being pursued as potential advertisers.

 

I once bought a DAC on the strength of universally good reviews everywhere and regretted it pretty quickly. Never again.
How many genuinely bad reviews can you remember - have seen a few recently, e.g plinius integrated amp in HFN. Also review of Primare universal player in HFN is not too good!
my favourite reviewer is Ivor Humphreys in HFN, formerly of Gramophone. Objective and to the point.

 

Densen B-400 Plus CDP got slated in HFC... "A poisoned chalice..." They said... "Like viewing an oil painting with a torch"... "Astonished by the heavily compressed sound"... "The sax sounding like a trumpet"...

And I'm sure Densen have been advertising in HFC for quite a while now too....

 

hmm Colloms is boring to the extreme, I can't get past his first paragraph without my eyes rolling totally drawn out sentances using unnecessarily complex language, hard to fathom grammer and flowery words, just to show all how complete he is. Antithesis of plain, clear, concise english.
Ken Kessler just writes for entertainment and doesn't say anything.
Paul Miller quite good
Messenger excellent
J kennedy full of shite
We all know about our friend in hifi plus!!
I also almost universally have the same ears as Alvin Gold, and liked him, lost track lately.
David Price in hifi world says everything is the best he's heard.
Noel Keywood writes very well but doesn't have the same taste as me.
Peter Comeau who used?? to write for hifi news was pretty good

Anyone remember Eric Braithwaite? one of the good guys.

I used to go on a good consensus in all the mags., as one could be error prone, but have learned enough to trust myself now, and distrust most that is said for taste or bias reasons. Even if unbiased, reviewers are individuals that simply have different ears and taste, there really is no mag. opinion, as such, its the individuals.
Also, most big branded stuff is pretty good.

 

It's like Ian says.

The only reason to value some reviewers' opinions over, say, some forum members is that many of the reviewers are professional and some have been playing this game for a long time, reviewing thousands of bits of kit.

 

Paul Messenger seems to know what he's talking about. Art Dudley is extremely entertaining, and the only reason I can think of for reading Stereophile. The rest are a bit of a shower, although I do admire Ken Kessler's moustache.

-- Ian

 

Usually i read the comics because it's about a subject i'm interested in. just like i used to read car magazines and computer games mags. even if i wasn't going to spend money on a new car or a new games console i'd still be interested in the latest gossip and info.
if i AM going to spend money on something i'll still read the latest mags but i'll also search the internet and ask on a forum or two before i draw up a short list. then i'll audition and eventually make a decision and slap the cash. much as i do for cars and consoles.
magazines are a piece of the jigsaw not the be all and end all, they are going to have to face and embrace this fact if they are to survive.
cheers


julian