The Credibility Gap

Kind of strange that a guy that's an audio manufacturer,importer, distributor, and owns a magazine would write an article like this.

I'm not concerned about reviewers getting special pricing. It's the ones that get equipment for free, aka permanent loan which should concern us.
 
Now, this is interesting. Is HP not a part of the high fidelity report? HP was never one to mince words and I'm sure, pissed off more than his fair share of advertisers with his often blunt and honest reviews while at TAS. So, this article is in line with that.

That being said, it's long been known that although HP may not often ask for accommodation pricing, but he seems to certainly "borrow" gear for very very long periods of time. I believe he had the McIntosh 2301's for years before publishing a half ass review at the end of last year.

It's a tough business guys. Manufacturers are very protective of their reputation. They now understand the impact of the internet. For example, my comments on my impressions of the Poly mer speakers indirectly invoked the wrath of their owner. He was not happy about my opinion....gasp!

You can't squelch freedom of speech. After all, it's just opinions and you know what they say about opinions.....

As for reviewers getting accommodation pricing, I'm not that bothered. The lowly scribe still has to come up with 50% of retail (if that's the number) and I'm certain the same lowly scribe knows their fair share of dealers where dealer friendly pricing is available to them. What's the difference then? Not much.

And at the end of the day, if you are relying solely on a magazine reviewer to make a $50,000 purchase, then you're in trouble regardless.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
It is a complex situation, and without boundaries. ...The business aspect, the integrity, and the absolute pleasure.

But it is present in all lines of life; from the musician performers, the record labels, to the recording engineers and the music software.
Reviewing is just one small footprint of the entire chain, and no two reviewers are alike and with the same privileges. ...I think.

The final judge at the end is ultimately us; the reader and the customer. Our job is to go beyond the surface and explore the real world; the audio gear in our own rooms, and make sense of it all. ...In a balanced assessment and perspective; financially in relation to the emotional impact and our own comfort zone.

It is us who decide which reviewers are worth reviewing.
 
jap said:
Kind of strange that a guy that's an audio manufacturer,importer, distributor, and owns a magazine would write an article like this.

I'm not concerned about reviewers getting special pricing. It's the ones that get equipment for free, aka permanent loan which should concern us.
Click to expand...

+1

Pathetic.
The guy puts down accomodation pricing as it's the big problem in hi-end, while he hardly says anything about these "long term loans", like Mike mentions below (2+ years for a couple of lines).

I think there's a lot more commitment from a reviewer in putting down SOME money for gear he claims to like, than putting NO money at all, and feeding the eternal "merry go round", "BEST SPEAKER EVER" hype factory that seems to be prevalent these days.


alexandre
 
If the reviewer can expect to get accommodation pricing on everything, then for him the playing field is pretty level. The long term loan thing might be different... Perhaps it is just another reference point nice to have around for comparison purposes?

All said, I think the key is to find out what the reviewer values sonically before keying on their word, but still only using a review as one part of an informed buying decision. I've made some purchases of gear I never heard and felt I've been lucky, but then I don't have the experience of Joe or Mike. Thats where I do trust opinions of my local reps who know my taste and my system, hopefully helping me avoid sonic mismatches.

Of course, one of the greatest assets is the opinion of those in the Shark Tank, though here too it requires a intellectual filter and trying to discern who values what sonically. Which is one reason, amongst others, I'm going to NYC at the end of the month to meet some sharks, listen to some music and gears, and generally have some fun!
 
yes very interesting. but it is not a surprise to anyone i would imagine. i think the free gear for good reviews happens.and the large discount for good reviews as well. and im even sure that there are people using review gear to make a nice little profit also. this is no different than any other bizz in the world. except the fact that people tend to trust reviews and its a more public thing.
the perfect scenario is not out there for this type of situation
before i knew more about the audio business, i always thought the reviewer would get the review sample, put it through its paces ,write the article. then if he decided to keep it, then he would talk about a price with the manufacturer. and why should he pay full retail if im out there trying to get the best discount i can off of the retail price just like anyone else. i know thats pretty naive of me , and over the years ive learned the real deal and know a few reviewers that i trust and most as stated in the article i "take with a grain of salt"

with that said i find a piece of gear i like i take these steps.
1. read the company info and specs
2. come to the shark and start a thread to see if anyone has experience with it.
3. find any review i can, hopefully there are a few to compare notes between.because i can not trust just 1 review.
4. find a place to go hear it
5. go listen for myself. (if i decide its something i want)

i have not read much of that website and because of that honest and to the point article i will read more of it in the future.
i also dont see how any website or magazine can give a bad review to someone who writes them checks for advertising. id imagine those checks would stop. as far as magazines go, i go through TAS and look at all the advertisements to see the new gear out there. then i dont even bother reading the reviews of those same companies if in the same mag. why bother , they are never bad reviews always glowing.
and its not much different than the dealer scenario. is a dealer going to tell you to go buy toms preamp down the block cause its better than the one im showing you? lol!!!
 
Anyone who takes reviews by either the print or online publications/websites as dispassionate, objective analysis of gear is naïve at best and well frankly brain dead at worst. Forget for a moment that for the print publications, the subscription revenues represent a miniscule percentage of their revenue base which frankly does not likely cover the cost of printing and distributing the magazines. Which leaves advertising revenue as the driver of profitability (assuming there is such a thing in the print publication business). If you understand that advertising revenues = survival for these publications then the customer is clear...the customer is not you or me (we are the end customers the manufacturers and dealers are trying to reach) rather the customer for the publications are the manufacturers and dealers who are trying to reach you and me. So in effect these reviewing publications are the marketing and sales extension of the industry trying to drum up buzz/interest etc... in their products, supporting the shorter and shorter product life cycles so that the new version of XYZ amp or speakers is so much better than its predecessor that it warrants a replacement cycle and on and on it goes. This is of course plain for everyone to see and understand.

So when you layer on accommodation pricing and long-term free loans (which I remember Art Dudley at Stereophile wrote a great scathing piece about a few years ago) then you basically have specific reviewers/publications essentially signing up with specific brands/manufacturers becoming their mouth piece in essence. These fan boys become the promulgators of taste/fashion and the "experts" on specific brands. The obvious example is a certain TAS reviewer who waxes poetic on anything ARC, Magico, and a few other brands. Another obvious one used to be the editor of a british publication and then became head of sales for a high end cable company which he couldn't stop being so effusively positive about for two years prior to being hired by said company and who now continues to review products although thankfully he no longer reviews products from said cable company. In any case, the industry is small and incestuous and conflicts of interest abound.

The best one can do is use these reviews as a guideline to create a shortlist of gear you want to audition and then just demo for yourself and make up your own mind (preferably in your own home with your own gear but clearly that is very had to do for most). One strategy is to figure out which reviewer(s) has similar taste to you sonically and musically and more often than not they can become your preferred guides of short-listing gear for you to listen to Finally, if you have a good local dealer than even though this dealer will be motivated to sell the brands/line he/she carries, if you play fair with them and you establish a good long-term relationship with them, then they can become an indispensable resource in your system's evolution.
 
Rub my back and i will rub yours, it was like that in the 50s - 60s - 70s - 80s - 90s - 2000s - 2010 - 2011 - 2012 - 2013 - 2014 - and it will be like that till the end of time you have dealers saying that they are not making any money and on the other side you hear something else everybody is looking for a bargain and i mean everybody rich or poor i have a friend that just bought a pair of Sonus Faber Guarneri Ovation list price Canadian 24k + taxes 15% bought them in the USA ( open box 4 hours use ) price shipping included to Canada 13k US i am positive that the seller made money on this deal and it's normal but i do ask myself is how much is the real cost of a 24k pair of speakers if they are sold at 50% discount the seller is making at least 10% so that would make a 24k pair of speakers about 9.5k and that is very close to the REAL prices. 60% - 60% - 60% - 60% - 60% -
 
I look at reviews and the gap as 45% bathroom material or entertainment, 25% read between the lines and 15% possible if your lucky measurements and 15% BS, There has got to be credibility and intergrity. I for one feel there is something about these reviewers and advertisements , you don't cut the person that is paying your salary. Have you ever noted the amount of paid adds in some mags vs actual content. Ex; like this months Stereophile. 123 pages, 77 pages of advertisements, and of those 77 pages 55 are full page advertisements including classifieds. Who is buttering who's bread ?

I remember a long time ago when I was going through college working for a few major sportsman magazines, there was always the sell add space objective vs content after all we were always told "sells drove salaries and publication cost", that was #1. Without add sells, well you were looking for a new job unless you were a major player in the company. After a while I saw that credibility was directed towards supporting the paid advertisers vs the product content for the monthly publication and those paying subscribers/book store purchases.
 
Seriously, has anyone not figured out yet that print magazines are only financially viable if they sell ads? So why do people constantly act surprised when print magazines are full of ads? The prices you pay for Stereophile and TAS don't actually come close to the cost of providing you those magazines. You are being subsidized by the ad revenue. Ad revenue is governed by circulation numbers so Stereophile and TAS are motivated to have as many subscribers as possible in order to boost their subscription numbers which in turn boosts their ad revenue. It's a vicious cycle you see.

As for reviewers, you either find some that you learn to trust their judgement over time or you don't. I always want to read reviews of gear I'm interested in because it gives you a mix of opinions to think about. Some reviews and reviewers are very entertaining to read. For example, even though he is a polarizing figure, I find Michael Fremer highly entertaining-especially when he is poking digital in the eye.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top