|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
|
|
Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry. |
|
In Reply to: Herb Reichert/ Linear Tube Audio ZOTL40 MkII posted by mark.korda@myfairpoint.net on September 11, 2017 at 15:40:43:
I usually don't post on this Critic forum but I've known Herb since the 80s and once upon a time edited his work. I know him to be a super honest and candid, very professional writer, verging on confessional sometimes.
I can understand how his unique voice catches folks off guard but it is genuine and sincere. He is a rather unconventional individual who loves what he does and takes it ultra seriously. The colorful, offbeat approach often discussed is Herb laying his cards on the table in his open, natural way. With Herbert, what you see is what you get.
Some reviewers are careful to frame their analysis in a careful. authoritative, sober tone employing the conventional audiospeak lexicon and well-trodden structure that marks the genre. Herb couldn't even fake that if he tried.
Understand, the thing is that to be a reviewer, you have to love audio gear, most if not all gear. You have to love the idea of the 1000th mini speaker or headphone that comes in for review. You have to be an audio optimist of sorts, with high hopes for every box that rolls in the door.
Cynics and curmudgeons need not apply. Guess that counts me out. I'm only deeply interested in a narrow slice of audio gear, mostly vintage and DIY flavored. I am just not cut out for general review work. I did it a few times, almost committed suicide. It is not as easy as it looks to write readable, relevant, and engaging reviews, especially if the item isn't super exciting to the author.
Now, Herb is the opposite: He LOVES low dollar integrated amps, headphone amps, budget cartridges and pointing the way to sleepers and bargains is a point of joy for Herb. He announces this outright. If he can find a $29 cartridge that plays way above its salary grade, he is happy as a clam. He is excited about the promise of gear every time and not only super expensive bling stuff. Audio for the people! That's good, right?
This enthusiastic audio love attitude I'm describing translates naturally into a stance where reviewers see their job as telling the manufacturers' story to some degree and looking for the bright side, describing the device under test in such a way that people who might like what it offers will be given a heads up, as it were.
Perceived negatives are often encoded in read between the lines fashion, especially if they are matters of taste or preference. The careful, intelligent reader can usually decipher these points, but there are reasons they are not made more explicit.
Good reviewers understand that one has to be careful not to let personal preferences completely swamp the evaluation because reader #15241 might love what you hate, and vice versa. Accurate description, in whatever poetic or prosaic idiom a writer selects, emerges as the fairest and most useful way to proceed.
Overtly thrashing gear in print stirs up bad feelings among those who own or like the item, dealers, and manufacturers. Rejection usually comes off as petty and somewhat arbitrary when based on subjective dislike, perhaps less so when referenced to safety issues, ergonomics, or manufacturing quality deficits. A conscientious reviewer is economical with crushing criticism, the title of this subforum nothwithstanding.
"Critic" is the wrong word to use, I think. "Reporter" or "describer" might be more apt.
I know many longtime pro reviewers around the world and this seems a fair general assessment. Good longtime reviewers love audio gear overall and they almost have to. Everybody in the field wants to promote good feelings and esprit de corps among those in it. This is where we live, a small and friendly community for the most part. Industry media do a lot to bring everybody together and set the tone.
Thanks to various strains of embedded contextual relationships, the review business is indeed somewhat skewed towards positivity and light. Writers are cheerleaders for the industry writ large and encouragers of the hobbyists in the trenches, as well as promoters and representatives of media giants they work for.
Twenty years ago, I could point to a few big shot writers as tyrannical, ego monster abusers of privilege, but things have surely gotten a lot better in recent years. Today, I'd trust most (not all) print reviewers to babysit my wallet and my dog.
"Buyer beware" still applies but most of the hyper-suspicious conspiracy theories of nefarious backroom deals and influence peddling are imaginary.
Granted, I know for a fact that some overseas mags and many small and hungry internet operations do rely on the old "ad contract for good review" squeeze, but as far as I can tell Stereophile, for one, is above that low grade, blatant hustle.
The institutional prejudices that invariably do exist are encoded in the social order of the audio community and the manifold responsibilities of the role reviewers and media play. The gangster shakedown game is not always a factor.
Try bribing Art Dudley and he will first laugh in your face, then bonk you on the head with a mandolin or something, and tell all about it in his next column. On the other hand, show him a new Bulgarian repro of a French broadcast tonearm from 1956 and he will be struggling to hide his embarrassing erection. Gotta love Art!
Want strict objectivity? Read an algebra textbook. There is no such thing in audio evaluation (or anywhere else in human experience, but that is another discussion.)
I am in manufacturing and used to be in publishing so I get to see, hear, and feel what is going on. The consumer is well-advised to consider the source, but most of the established actors in this market are reasonably responsible, precisely because they love what they do more than money and free gear.
As chance would have it, I talked with Herb a few weeks ago and he brought up this ZOTL review. He (and everybody else) really likes and respects David Berning, who is one of the nicest guys on the planet and one of the smart guys in audio, to be sure. Herb also really liked all other Berning designed gear he's heard. He was surprised and a bit disturbed that he couldn't make this one work for him and told me he "had" to write a bad review, in a tone of regret and resignation to a code of duty.
Herb and I sometimes discuss the art of reviewing in probing theoretical detail. Make no mistake, deep thinking and philosophical reflection lies behind Reichert's trademark metaphorical pyrotechnics! ;op
I have not yet read the review in question, but I too have to wonder if the unit was 100% up to snuff. The ZOTL gear I heard in passing was quite nice. Made me pause to wonder what is going on. I might even read the review when it comes up online.
I think that this thread is getting it right. It is odd for Berning's stuff to get a poor review and, yes, the reviewer is being honest and candid. He is always being honest and candid, as far as I can tell, if you know how to read his comments.
All will survive this month's issue. Nice to have an occasional reality check, isn't it?
------------------------------
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must remain silent -- Wittgenstein
Free your mind and your ass will follow -- Parliament/Funkadelic
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Herb's review... and conspiracy theory generally - Joe Roberts 09/19/1709:51:48 09/19/17 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
