2. analog
  3. 1364382162

When a Reviewer "likes" something

... what does that mean in your opinion. I read in one of the last Stereophile mags a comment from Mr. Atkinson where he wrote about the differences in "opinions" in forums or in printed mags. After all he ended with the argument, a component is good when a reviewer likes it.
Isn't is more helpful, when a reviewer knows something about a real tone reproduction? Or is it ok, when he used every month another CD or LP he got for free, a kind of music nearly no one wants to listen to?
Harry Pearson used in the 90's always the same records for his reviews but that was an exception I think.
What is it worth for you when - for example - Mr. Dudley/Fremer/Valin/HP .... "likes" something? Do you have the same "taste" they have?
I know it is possible to like a Turntable even when that unit can't hold the proper speed, or is extremely sensitive to any influences, there are endless recommendations written about such units...what is it worth for you?
Atkinson for example measures units, some have top datas but they can sound very boring, far away from the real thing, some have no top datas, some "tests" are shortened because a unit can reach a area which can be pretty dangerous (see one of the latest Agostino units, just as an example) but they are rated Class A in recommendations anyway....
When someone "knows" what is right or not, then his "liking" is only a personal opinion which is more or less uninteresting or?
Most customers (not all of course) would prefer to know what a unit is really able to do sonically, or not? Would knowledge destroy the joy of Hardware rolling? Or is there a reason why reviewers use low efficiency speakers when they have a tube amp for review (for example Lamm ML2.1/ML2.2 with Magico Speakers)? Is the matching "expensive + expensive" the proper way to show competence?
128x128syntax
Ag insider logo xs@2x
rauliruegas
12,822 posts
 
Dear Swampwalker: +++++ " may be based on differing goals. Raul says (I'm paraphrasing, so feel free to correct me, Raul) that his goal is to reproduce exactly what's on the recording. Nothing more, nothing less. My goal is to have an emotionally enriching experience listening to an artist's work. " +++++

I think we have not different goals but we need some explanation about.

IMHO that " emotionally enriching experience listening... " or it comes in the recording or it not comes.

If does not comes in the recording then we are adding " colorations/distortions " to the recorded signal and if that comes in the recording then we are really enjoying it.

The emotionally charge in any recording is absolutely independent on any audio system: comes in or not.

As truer to the recording is the quality system performance level as better and truer are that " emotionally charge ".

I like music but I like even more music that wake up my emotions and feelings that permit to enjoy at full the music experience.

I don't like analytical audio systems or " accurate "/specs-oriented audio systems that can't shows that music emotional charge when it comes in the recording.

Unfortunatelly many times the recording producers/enginnerings made so signal manipulations that the main music sense ( emotional charges. ) is losted on the recording process. and believe me: we can't recover it.

All of us know when we are listening a good or bad recording beause we " feel " the RYTHMUM or not on each recording.

I'm not different from you about, maybe more discriminating but I'm always looking for that recorded music emotional charges that with out that the music we hear is only sound.

Regards and enjoy the music,
R.
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,233 posts
 
Frogman and Lewm,
Very nice posts, well reasoned and expressed. Wisdom on display.
Raul, oh never mind.
Regards,
rrog
1,958 posts
 
Raul makes some very good points regardless of what the thread police and the posting critics think. It's not like this is the first time a thread has evolved into a broader topic.
leicachamp
103 posts
 
A good example of system mismatch is Jeff days system. He is currently blowing the trumpet for ASR Emitter amp and praising it as his new reference. In my opinion his system was always underpowered with flea tube Amps driving big Tannoys.

Yet he is calling the Emitter amp as his reference when he never even compared the emitter to any other high powered amp. How can a reviewer take about 3 months to review an amp and not compare apples with apples. And to call it a reference amp is irresponsible for a reviewer if his calibre.
frogman
7,361 posts
 
Bifwynne, thank you for the response. I understand that you were not one of the posters declaring one technology to be superior to the other. And, for the record, I did not intend to be confrontational in any way. My comments were a suggestion to FIRST AND FOREMOST trust what your ears tell you; they are usually correct, just like first impressions often are.

Your comments, like those of many of the posters, still point to letting the "theory" override the ears: " at first I thought it sounded terrible, but the techno geeks convinced me to hang in there" followed by "what I think I am hearing". "I not sure why or even if my speakers sound more forward with the 8ohm tap".

My comments are simply a suggestion to force the theory to prove our ears wrong, not the other way around. I am certainly not trying to diminish the importance of measurements; but, I have experienced too many instances when the theory was simply wrong. Not because I "like" this distortion or that, but because my ears told me that this or that "distortion" (and I use the term loosely) sounded more like music sounds; that makes it right in my book.
More to discover