A pointless review?

[Covenanter]

I've just read the review of the Burmester 069 CD player at a modest £35,840. Now I think the number of WHiFi readers that could afford to buy this can be numbered on the fingers of one foot. So what is the point of the review?

I think it is the same as you see on Top Gear when they review supercars that nobody can afford. It's about dreams and fantasies. I guess it's harmless. little boys playing with their toys, but I think the time could be better spent reviewing things we might actually buy.

Chris

 

[spiny norman]

It was in the Temptation section of the magazine, which seems to be designed to be the WHSV equivalent of those Top Gear supercar reviews, and it was presumably only one of many products tested in the same issue, many of which – phones, Bluetooth speakers and the like – would have been much more core WHSV fare.

 

[professorhat]

I think it is the same as you see on Top Gear when they review supercars that nobody can afford. It's about dreams and fantasies. I guess it's harmless. little boys playing with their toys, but I think the time could be better spent reviewing things we might actually buy.

Unless they suspected some people might be interested to read a review of a product, even if they can't afford it? But hang on, what am I thinking - you don't want to read it so it must be a complete waste of time. No one else's opinion counts for anything - I forget this sometimes.

 

[steve_1979]

I can't afford a McLaren P1 either but that didn't stop me from reading the Top Gear review. It's entertainment.

 

[simonlewis]

A bit of de ja vu going on already mentioned here.

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/about-the-site/reviews-system

 

[BenLaw]

I think it is the same as you see on Top Gear when they review supercars that nobody can afford. It's about dreams and fantasies. I guess it's harmless. little boys playing with their toys, but I think the time could be better spent reviewing things we might actually buy.

Unless they suspected some people might be interested to read a review of a product, even if they can't afford it? But hang on, what am I thinking - you don't want to read it so it must be a complete waste of time. No one else's opinion counts for anything - I forget this sometimes.

That's tickled me

 

[MajorFubar]

To be honest I quite enjoy reading reviews of state-of-the-art products. Cars included. I dream that one day some useful part of the technology might trickle-down into something I can afford.

 

[Singslinger]

To be honest I quite enjoy reading reviews of state-of-the-art products. Cars included. I dream that one day some useful part of the technology might trickle-down into something I can afford.

Yes me too. I can't afford a Patek Philippe watch but I like reading reviews about their complications, design and history.

 

[fr0g]

Would this work well with a DAC Magic?

 

[proffski]

I think it is the same as you see on Top Gear when they review supercars that nobody can afford. It's about dreams and fantasies. I guess it's harmless. little boys playing with their toys, but I think the time could be better spent reviewing things we might actually buy.

Unless they suspected some people might be interested to read a review of a product, even if they can't afford it? But hang on, what am I thinking - you don't want to read it so it must be a complete waste of time. No one else's opinion counts for anything - I forget this sometimes.

That's tickled me

Strangely enough me too...

 

[MakkaPakka]

I've just read the review of the Burmester 069 CD player....

The point of any article is to get people to read it. The fact you read it - irrespective of why you did so - proves that it was not pointless but was in fact entirely successful. I'm sure that piece had more page views than something on another £100 ipod dock for instance.

Only thing missing from the article for me would be whether WHF thinks it should replace the current 'reference' CD player it uses (the £20k Naim).

 

[The_Lhc]

It was in the Temptation section of the magazine,

Yes but nobody reads the magazine. Apparently.

 

[Native_bon]

I get Covenanter's piont.. Its not that it not a good read, but I would rather see something I could buy than something which I would dream of been reviewed. I suppose thats why it's called temptation. :doh:

 

[MakkaPakka]

'Official' figures:

Print: Circulation: 35,792 (ABC 2012) | Readership (UK): 191,000 (Worldwide): 1.6m

 

[wilro15]

Entertainment & fantasy as has been said elsewhere.

 

[The_Lhc]

I get Covenanter's piont.. Its not that it not a good read, but I would rather see something I could buy than something which I would dream of been reviewed. I suppose thats why it's called temptation. :doh:

So, in your fascist dictatorship where only things you can afford are allowed to be reviewed, where do you draw the line, £1000, £2000, £5000? Many people couldn't afford those (I can't, realistically), so are you suggesting that only items costing a couple of hundred pounds at most should be reviewed? Get a grip. Why are people so mean-spirited they have to complain about things like this?

If they had anything else to review it would be in the magazine already, if they take out the Temptations section the magazine would be ten pages shorter and I expect there'd be LOADS of people just waiting to whinge about that...

 

[Joe Cox]

It would be a bit boring if we only reviewed kit everyone could afford! Plus, if we hadn't heard "possibly the best CD player in the world", that would strike me as something of a shame...

 

[Native_bon]

It would be a bit boring if we only reviewed kit everyone could afford! Plus, if we hadn't heard "possibly the best CD player in the world", that would strike me as something of a shame...

yea true. kind of agree. Oh well take my word back then.. :help:

 

[Alec]

I think it is the same as you see on Top Gear when they review supercars that nobody can afford. It's about dreams and fantasies. I guess it's harmless. little boys playing with their toys, but I think the time could be better spent reviewing things we might actually buy.

Unless they suspected some people might be interested to read a review of a product, even if they can't afford it? But hang on, what am I thinking - you don't want to read it so it must be a complete waste of time. No one else's opinion counts for anything - I forget this sometimes.

His comments were not half as snarkey as yours. It's a shame to see this (increasingly) from The Good Prof.

 

[The_Lhc]

I think it is the same as you see on Top Gear when they review supercars that nobody can afford. It's about dreams and fantasies. I guess it's harmless. little boys playing with their toys, but I think the time could be better spent reviewing things we might actually buy.

Unless they suspected some people might be interested to read a review of a product, even if they can't afford it? But hang on, what am I thinking - you don't want to read it so it must be a complete waste of time. No one else's opinion counts for anything - I forget this sometimes.

His comments were not half as snarkey as yours. It's a shame to see this (increasingly) from The Good Prof.

I can understand his frustration though, the OPs comment was a lot more pointless than the review he was complaining about. Seems to be a lot more of that around these days.

 

[professorhat]

I think it is the same as you see on Top Gear when they review supercars that nobody can afford. It's about dreams and fantasies. I guess it's harmless. little boys playing with their toys, but I think the time could be better spent reviewing things we might actually buy.

Unless they suspected some people might be interested to read a review of a product, even if they can't afford it? But hang on, what am I thinking - you don't want to read it so it must be a complete waste of time. No one else's opinion counts for anything - I forget this sometimes.

His comments were not half as snarkey as yours. It's a shame to see this (increasingly) from The Good Prof.

Just getting increasingly fed up with the attitude (not just here, but more and more in the world it seems) of "I think this, therefore this is how it should be" with no reflection at all on what others might want / think / enjoy. What's lacking is called empathy and it's a very important trait that seems to be a lost art at the moment (in my world anyway), and people only really bothered on what they want / think / enjoy.

But then maybe I'm just slowly becoming a grumpy old man...

 

[Joe Cox]

But then maybe I'm just slowly becoming a grumpy old man...

You say that like it's a bad thing :?

 

[Covenanter]

I think it is the same as you see on Top Gear when they review supercars that nobody can afford. It's about dreams and fantasies. I guess it's harmless. little boys playing with their toys, but I think the time could be better spent reviewing things we might actually buy.

Unless they suspected some people might be interested to read a review of a product, even if they can't afford it? But hang on, what am I thinking - you don't want to read it so it must be a complete waste of time. No one else's opinion counts for anything - I forget this sometimes.

His comments were not half as snarkey as yours. It's a shame to see this (increasingly) from The Good Prof.

I can understand his frustration though, the OPs comment was a lot more pointless than the review he was complaining about. Seems to be a lot more of that around these days.

I was simply questioning whether WHiFi should be spending its time reviewing stuff its readers won't buy when there is any amount of kit that hasn't been reviewed that they might buy? Why is that pointless?

Chris

 

[Covenanter]

I think it is the same as you see on Top Gear when they review supercars that nobody can afford. It's about dreams and fantasies. I guess it's harmless. little boys playing with their toys, but I think the time could be better spent reviewing things we might actually buy.

Unless they suspected some people might be interested to read a review of a product, even if they can't afford it? But hang on, what am I thinking - you don't want to read it so it must be a complete waste of time. No one else's opinion counts for anything - I forget this sometimes.

His comments were not half as snarkey as yours. It's a shame to see this (increasingly) from The Good Prof.

Just getting increasingly fed up with the attitude (not just here, but more and more in the world it seems) of "I think this, therefore this is how it should be" with no reflection at all on what others might want / think / enjoy. What's lacking is called empathy and it's a very important trait that seems to be a lost art at the moment (in my world anyway), and people only really bothered on what they want / think / enjoy.

But then maybe I'm just slowly becoming a grumpy old man...

Did you not see the question mark in the title of the thread? If I had titled it "WHiFi shouldn't be reviewing this" then you might have a point but I didn't!

Chris

 

[professorhat]

Did you not see the question mark in the title of the thread? If I had titled it "WHiFi shouldn't be reviewing this" then you might have a point but I didn't!

Chris

Ah, the magic of the question mark. So comparing them (and everyone who enjoys reading that review, or indeed any expensive car review) to "little boys playing with their toys" was also a question? No question mark on that statement.

Honestly.