 
|
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 |
72.69.235.47
In Reply to: RE: Reviewer errors? posted by Jack G on November 25, 2024 at 08:59:20
If there is an editor.
Follow Ups:
Obtuse or inaccurate technical descriptions are the audio business's stock in trade. Manufacturers have to differentiate their products and often explanations are tenuous but these get passed to reviewers to be passed off as fact.
When I look at the mastheads of audio publications everyone is an editor!
What I've often wondered is who edits the editors? I recall John Atkinson writing that he would never change a reviewer's opinion - which is fair enough - but there have been some occasions in Stereophile where style has been a problem. I believe even top authors have editors who advise on style.
An example is a review that started with the phrase 'you can't polish a turd', which I suspect the reviewer thought was clever as he tried to explain why it was not applicable but all that is remembered is that product and that reviewer associated with 'turd'. Another example was one of those tortured lead-ins that seem related to the product but really aren't and just leave the impression that the author is paid by the word, this one about seeing a movie on environmental disaster. Whether there really was a link to the product under review, does it help people choose between audio components while thinking about the end of the world except, perhaps, that they should make such decisions more quickly in order to have time to enjoy them? And the review of very expensive speaker cable and an audio rack that ended with a joke about veils lifted and ISIS. I don't have a problem with the old man humor as we are mostly a bunch of old men but it doesn't really help to suspend the disbelief of how costly cables can be when juxtaposed with the thought that some would kill us for listening to music. Also, a manufacturer 'comment' that was just a thinly disguised diatribe against a semiconductor company's products should never have been published and a think piece against blind listening tests was full of contradictions, exaggerations and non sequitors that really needed someone to massage into coherence and make it look less like someone have a crisis of faith in his listening abilities. Lastly, a columnist whose wife (IIRC) volunteered at a local library that had a some records. She brought home a record that he might be interested in and it turned out to be rare. He didn't like it enough to keep so decided to sell it - great I thought, he will know the right price and donate the money back to the library. But no, sell it and keep the money. Not a great crime but not a great character reference either. An editor could have/should have said 'this doesn't put you in a good light, do you really want to publish it?'.
Anyway, just a suggestion that small editorial changes could have left those pieces less memorable:)
:)
| 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 ]
