What happened at WBF

[a.wayne]

I've heard horror stories from vendors about some "reviewers" who hold products captive for months, if not close to a year for their "review". And what about those "reviewers" who demand a lower price than the heavily discounted price they were already offered.

Not saying all of them are like this, but there's enough out there for me not to trust "professional reviews".

You only know the half of it , let me just say , many today must rejoice because they have the Internet , manufacturers are no longer held captive by the natives ..


PS: Isn't Peter a reviewer...?


regards

 

[Mike]

 

[rbbert]

I've just set back and read comment after comment. So now this thread is heading off into "reviewer " territory. And all along I though it was about Pete offering up an apology. I say move talk of reviews to a new thread, as it gives some odd impressions to newbies doing introductions.

Both topics are inter-related, perhaps inseparable.

 

[Smile]

I think you need to watch more than one show wrap up. That's hardly the case. I've given top show awards to Wilson, Focal, YG, SF and a few others far more often than Magico. You can't draw a conclusion based on one video just as my advisor used to say one experiment is no experiment. I call them as I hear them.

I don't consider a Best of Show choice as a review or recommendation- its more of a fun little comment. The show videos often speak of poor room conditions and such possibly hurting alternatives.

The point of bias does have some common sense to it though. If I prefer blonds, and must pick only one out of a line up of otherwise equals,...... But again, this BoS choice is not a review.

I sense we want absolutes in a field of personal preference. It would be helpful if all incentives received were stated, etc., but the industry of audio review is just not that advanced so we take what we find adding our own grains of salt. We all know, if there was ever universally declared THE BEST SPEAKER IN THE WORLD, some of us wouldn't like it.

 

[a.wayne]

See above. I was responding to the fellow who asked why reviewers are different.

You asked why reviewers buy products. It's simple: because they like them.

Mike,

My sincere apologies , you must have edited your post while I was responding , that was not the post I saw, as your original post only had me quoted ...



Regards

 

[CPP]

Rob I agree, but not in the area of Newbie Introductions area. So we have reviewers introduce themselves in the Introductions area and then members start bashing them, brilliant. Now we are starting to act like other audio forums where reviewers are treated as second rate consumers. I say start a thread in the General Discussion area if we want to better understand reviewers, which never gets anywhere, civilly. I just want to note like I already noted, taking this to task in the Introduction part of a forum is not the right place.

 

[a.wayne]

I Chris ,

Look at the the loaded OP " what happened at WBF " is this an introduction ..?

I feel like I'm watching the audio Version of Bill Cosby , with all the necessary blocking and deflecting assisted by insiders. Newbies should be made aware not blocked from Peter's past malfeasance, Absolutely sorry to see him use AS to wash away the dirt by blaming WBF and its members for his egregious behavior ....






Regards

 

[Myles B. Astor]

I Chris ,

Look at the the loaded OP " what happened at WBF " is this an introduction ..?

I feel like I'm watching the audio Version of Bill Cosby , with all the necessary blocking and deflecting assisted by insiders. Newbies should be made aware not blocked from Peter's past malfeasance, Absolutely sorry to see him use AS to wash away the dirt by blaming WBF and its members for his egregious behavior ....






Regards

:disbelief:

 

[AJ Soundfield]

Arguing in cyberspace about stereo systems, is an extremely serious matter

 

[Shadowfax]

 

[Duke]

So we have reviewers introduce themselves in the Introductions area and then members start bashing them, brilliant. Now we are starting to act like other audio forums where reviewers are treated as second rate consumers.

Since this thread has become a commentary on reviewers, I'd like to come down on the side of welcoming and treating them with the same respect and courtesy that is extended to other members. I greatly appreciate their expertise and have learned from a thoughtful and thorough review on many occasions. I'm not bothered if a reviewer paid less than me for this or that piece of gear; their reference system is a tool of the trade and good tools are essential.

And I prefer not to indulge my cynical side at the expense of my fellow audiophiles, whether they are professionals or not.

 

[FlexibleAudio]

The hard reality is those in the business of providing opinions face a significant conflict of interest as a natural byproduct of their trade. In turn, there are two types of these practioners, those that use their position for personal gain behind the scenes and those that avoid doing so at all cost.

Those that do the latter embrace full disclosure of all financial dealings, direct and indirect business dealings, and avoid even the appearance of conflict where such disclosures can not be made. Those that do the former avoid such disclosures, live in an arena of ambiguity, and sometime use aggression as a tool against parties whom demand transparency. The more subjective a buying decision, the more susceptible that market is to nefarious business practices. In its most contrived form these practioners can go so far as making intellectuly obtuse claims with vigor and stand behind subjectivity as a defense.

I point this out not to indict any individual but rather, as it relates to audio reviewers, to point out the simple truth that the preponderance of skepticism in the industry could be mitigated by aggresive financial disclosure and common sense regarding product claims. Those that avoid these principals, IMO, deserve the greatest scrutiny.

 

[Mike]

I beg to differ Paul. I have never detected any conflict of interest anywhere. Reviewers review products and offer their opinions. If you don't agree, then you're free to say so. But this constant belief that there is a conflict is such BS, it gets tiresome after a while.

Because a reviewer reviews a BMW and then buys one doesn't mean there is a conflict of interest. He might be very passionate about it - but a good reviewer will always find the good and the not so good in a product since no product is perfect.

And let's remember, the more reviews a product receives, the more it either validates or discredits the early reviewers.

 

[FlexibleAudio]

I beg to differ Paul. I have never detected any conflict of interest anywhere. Reviewers review products and offer their opinions. If you don't agree, then you're free to say so. But this constant belief that there is a conflict is such BS, it gets tiresome after a while.

Because a reviewer reviews a BMW and then buys one doesn't mean there is a conflict of interest. He might be very passionate about it - but a good reviewer will always find the good and the not so good in a product since no product is perfect.

Mike, Respectfully I don't understand your post. By definition a conflict of interest exists if the party providing the opinion recieves any consideration of any kind whatsoever from a party directly or indirectly benefitting from the opinion. The mere act of lending equipment for review creates a conflict (not that this it itself is a troublesome practice as long as disclosures are made). That said, many have commented about other more severe practices in the industry.

The fact that you don't see this does not mean a conflict (or at a minimum it's appearance) does not exist; ergo the root of this discussion and many others like it on forums. I am simply pointing out that a way of addressing the issue which would render it benign is quite easy to implement and yet it is either ignored or met with aggression. The fact that this reaction sometimes originates directly from the parties in question creates its own set of concerns for readers and exacerbates the matter as a whole.

 

[Myles B. Astor]

Using that logic, a reviewer would own a Technics system.

I think Duke and Mike spelled the situation out perfectly. To condemn any and a whole field because of a few bad eggs is nuts.

Reviewers are in general pretty nice people who put their pants on one leg at a time and who just maybe have a little more passion, experience and resources to draw upon. Certainly the latter.

 

[Mike]

Does this apply to all product reviews or just audio?

How is a reviewer to review a product if the manufacturer doesn't loan it to them?

It's funny that there is such criticism of reviews yet the same critics are Johnny on the spot posting a link to a review which aligns to their beliefs.

Reviews are another medium of product education. The ultimate buying decision rests with the consumer.

Let me tell you, I have many friends who are reviewers and they have helped me immensely. Myles guided me through the entire R2R project, Fremer has helped me a lot with cartridges and tables, Atkinson has been invaluable with amp/speaker combos to try. The list goes on...

I don't agree with every review by every reviewer, but having done a few reviews myself, I have tremendous respect for their efforts.

 

[Myles B. Astor]

Does this apply to all product reviews or just audio?

How is a reviewer to review a product if the manufacturer doesn't loan it to them?

It's funny that there is such criticism of reviews yet the same critics are Johnny on the spot posting a link to a review which aligns to their beliefs.

Reviews are another medium of product education. The ultimate buying decision rests with the consumer.

I think the argument is the reviewer should buy the piece for review .

 

[Mike]

I think the argument is the reviewer should buy the piece for review .

And pay full MSRP just 'cause.

 

[FlexibleAudio]

Using that logic, a reviewer would own a Technics system.

I think Duke and Mike spelled the situation out perfectly. To condemn any and a whole field because of a few is nuts.

Myles, My point is to disclose; not own Techniques. It is a piece of advice that IMO would improve credibility not a condemnation; nothing more, nothing less. Of course condemning all would be rediculous; at the same time, if a reviewer is on the right side of the fence I can't for the life of me see why they wouldn't fight for disclosure rather than run from it.

 

[BlueFox]

Consumer Reports does that, and only looks at low-end stereo gear when they bother to look at stereo gear. Plus they do not take advertisements, so subscriptions is what pays their bills. I seriously doubt that model will work just for high-end stereo gear.

I don't have any problem at all with reviewers. It is just their opinion, and if they get gear at a discount, who cares? If one is corrupt then eventually they will be found out, and publicly humiliated.