 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
115.160.152.66
In Reply to: RE: Yet another peice of evidence that "professional audio journalism" is an oxymoron posted by Analog Scott on June 05, 2022 at 12:11:05
Yes, I had trouble with it too because vague broadsides are not helpful as it suggests that everyone is corrupt except me.
That said
"pay to play." That's a common claim. Are there any documented cases of pay to play in audio? Or is this just gossip?He may be referring to the magazine 6moons which is a pay-to-play magazine - you must pay them in order for them to review your product - they are upfront about this and their editor wrote an article as to why they are doing it.
Negative Reviews:
UHF Magazine in Canada under editor and owner Gerard Rejkind always did negative reviews and had a panel of listeners - who not all agreed. Some of their reviews of products were outright scathing to the point where many companies would not send them any more products like B&W Loudspeakers, Paradigm Loudspeakers, Arcam, Cambridge Audio, and Bryston (though Bryston did come back) off the top of my head.I always liked their line "Selling cables is easier than working and safer than stealing" - although I have heard cable differences - most of the time I enjoy that sentiment as just because something may be audibly different - different isn't necessarily better or different enough or better enough to warrant the idiotic prices IMO.
But to be honest - most stuff I audition is pretty good - it's difficult to rag on stuff at the lower price spectrum and most people including reviewers only hear the top end stuff at audio shows which is a piss poor environment to make any real judgements - only the really rich audiophiles have access to bags of top-end gear in the best environments. And that gear isn't given to non-uber-wealthy audiophiles.Audio Note will give the $150,000 AN M10 preamp to Fred Crowder on our staff because Fred can afford to buy it and has a commensurate system - I am not getting that preamp - zero-shot I am buying it.
TAs gets dumped on because of long term loaners but again if the reviewer isn't a millionaire and you're the magazine touting reviewing the "Absolute Sound" then you need to have the $50k ball out amplifier as your reference amplifier - the speaker maker wanting his $100k speaker reviewed isn't going to give the speaker to the guy who has the $3,000 Benchmark no matter how good it measures.And if I had the ridiculous amount of money to own the million-dollar system the last thing I'd be doing with my time is audio equipment reviewing lol - I mean seriously get a fraking life! I'd be listening to the million-dollar system from my indoor 30-person hot tub with my 20 lovely half my age beauties -- writing reviews.
People take this stuff far too seriously including some of the pompous reviewers who basically only have this in their life. I do it is a bit of fun - Fred Crowder and I don't take pay for reviewing audio equipment. We do it because we enjoy doing it.
I do have a thread on loudspeakers that are "informal" reviews based on audio shows and dealer demos where most speakers I have heard 3 times in three locations with 3 different systems (if I make negative comments).
I have a rather large spreadsheet going back over 20 years and a great many popular well-reviewed speakers I give a thumbs down.
Again informal rankings and in a better room or with better gear etc they may do much much better but if you want to see a reviewer with negative reviews you can see my speaker ratings - far from complete but a nice start
Unfortunately, many of the images got lost - my system is obnoxiously convoluted LOL but hey - it was meant mainly for fun during the pandemic.
Edits: 06/06/22Follow Ups:
Are people only now becoming uncomfortable with those accusations? Or does it depend on the magazine to which these accusations are directed?Our highly esteemed Charles Hanson used to regularly accuse TAS of "pay to play", e.g. "Magico went from being a rich boy's hobby with an internet presence for many years of at least a half-dozen completely different designs with no particular design philosophy (other than the fact that every single one was a blatant copy of some other existing product) into one of the major players in the field of "super" high-end loudspeakers in a span of 3 years, almost solely due to a combination of an advertising blitz in TAS plus completely over-the-top rave reviews of every single product Magico ever made in that same publication ... I was told by a credible person who would be in a position to know that the answer was very simple - $15,000 in small unmarked bills in a brown paper bag delivered to the aforementioned JV. I have no way to prove or disprove this story , yet it does appear to be consistent with all known facts" [emphasis added]. And "...the main reason the editors of "other publications" [other than Stereophile] stay away from here because they know they would be exposed as the frauds and charlatans they are."
I have to admit I felt a certain amount of discomfort with those posts, particularly given "I have no way to prove or disprove ...", and posted and said so. As far as I can tell, I was the only one to express reservations about these posts. I clicked the "Moderator Alert" button and mentioned that I thought these posts broke the AA rule "it's not okay to accuse a person or company of being dishonest, committing fraud, etc. ... avoid repeating vague and unsubstantiated rumors about someone or some company." A day or two later somebody showed up and told me that the moderators "have decided" and that "You are the only one who broke the rules. Consider yourself fortunate that you are still permitted to post after impugning another member's character." (I also got a private, friendly email from Charles Hanson who seemed genuinely puzzled that I didn't think he should say TAS was corrupt on a public forum without corroboration.) In any case, those posts were never taken down.
Best regards,
Daniel
Edits: 06/06/22 06/06/22 06/06/22 06/06/22 06/06/22 06/07/22
His pay to play was shown on TV, although one might hypothesize he cut his teeth on the practice while still an audio reviewer. Of course, the actions of one person cannot be used to tar everyone in an industry, but there is no doubt that it happens in a variety of "informal" ways. Note - he admitted to doing it.
One thing I note is how many people say they miss his writing despite the admitted dishonesty. I guess it is not too important to many people.
I will note that I haven't watched the video, and have no interest in wasting the time to do so.
What I think I fail to understand is how seriously many people write about reviews in audiophile magazines. The mags are for entertainment,; they're not peer reviewed articles. The best of the articles entertain and (maybe) inform, most are ephemeral dreck. That's OK. I have typically subscribed to Stereophile, got tired of it, rested for a few years then resubscribed. The metric was always did I get $12 worth of pleasure over the year, a pretty low bar.
Almost every industries "guides" are play to play in some form or another.Most internet "influencers" are clearly shills, so what? I am a sucker for travel books when I go somewhere international. I get a good rec, I'm happy. One that's not so good, oh well, on to the next. I have been able to audition all but my two most recent purchases. It is altogether likely (barring major thunderstorms) that these will be my last stereo purchases. I am happy with my listening and continue to enjoy this hobby. And I note it is a hobby for my (and my family's) enjoyment, nothing more
I think they certainly can be entertaining. They *can* (every now and then) also be informative when the products are being accurately described in terms of functionality and when the measurements are done well and presented well. BUT....yeah....the subjective part of the reviews has little to no value over and above pure entertainment. I think the problem is that while you see it and I see it and a number of other people see it....most audiophiles don't see it nor do most audio reviewers.
These two guys in the video clearly are not experts in audio. But they seem to be pretty convinced that they are. And most of their followers which can literally be counted on their respective Youtube channels believe that they are actual experts.
Nt
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]