I've been reading hi-fi and record reviews for... a long time. When M. Fremer popped into the thread and claimed that his writing is intended as 'entertainment' (albeit of the 'informed' variety), my first reaction was to say "Hey, wait a minute. You've got a journalistic responsibility to get it right. People hang onto your words, a bad review can kill a product, or make one... how can you take your task so lightly?"
But, after thinking about it for a while.... I think he's right. Here's why:
1. I'm more interested in learning what I can when I read these magazines- a glowing review, using all the magic audiophile words, doesn't really give me much information. I'm more interested in the process by which the reviewer tries to get at what the component does and does not do well than any ultimate and all encompassing conclusion about whether it is an A+ or C- in that reviewer's estimation.
2. All of the subjective evaluations are system dependent to a greater or lesser degree. Yes, you can suss out particular characteristics of a given component by listening to it in a variety of set-ups, but unless that review covers your precise system, in a room of pretty much the exact acoustic character of yours, it's all extrapolation- hints, insights, maybe some questions, but no firm conclusions. I doubt any of us would buy an expensive piece of gear based solely on a professional reviewer's opinion, regardless of how good that review or reviewer is. And of course, that doesn't take into account program material, let alone each listener's own biases (including but not limited to the reviewer himself).
3. Reviews can be voyeuristic to a degree- let's see what he/she (there aren't many 'shes' in this business) says about a component I own. And if you don't own it, it can be fun to read, just for the pleasure of learning a little about the component and one person's experience with it- somebody that knows their way around equipment and knows how to write clearly enough to make it worthwhile to read.
4. There are some bad writers out there, and some shallow reviewers- I don't consider M. Fremer to be one of them. I think he struggles with the process, and I like the fact that he focuses on analog equipment.
Fremer did not pay me to say this. I don't even know the man.
But, after thinking about it for a while.... I think he's right. Here's why:
1. I'm more interested in learning what I can when I read these magazines- a glowing review, using all the magic audiophile words, doesn't really give me much information. I'm more interested in the process by which the reviewer tries to get at what the component does and does not do well than any ultimate and all encompassing conclusion about whether it is an A+ or C- in that reviewer's estimation.
2. All of the subjective evaluations are system dependent to a greater or lesser degree. Yes, you can suss out particular characteristics of a given component by listening to it in a variety of set-ups, but unless that review covers your precise system, in a room of pretty much the exact acoustic character of yours, it's all extrapolation- hints, insights, maybe some questions, but no firm conclusions. I doubt any of us would buy an expensive piece of gear based solely on a professional reviewer's opinion, regardless of how good that review or reviewer is. And of course, that doesn't take into account program material, let alone each listener's own biases (including but not limited to the reviewer himself).
3. Reviews can be voyeuristic to a degree- let's see what he/she (there aren't many 'shes' in this business) says about a component I own. And if you don't own it, it can be fun to read, just for the pleasure of learning a little about the component and one person's experience with it- somebody that knows their way around equipment and knows how to write clearly enough to make it worthwhile to read.
4. There are some bad writers out there, and some shallow reviewers- I don't consider M. Fremer to be one of them. I think he struggles with the process, and I like the fact that he focuses on analog equipment.
Fremer did not pay me to say this. I don't even know the man.