[quote user="Clare Newsome"]
But if you read the HFC review, they're not wildly differing views - as mentioned above, they only give it four stars for sound, and say largely the same as us re its performance strengths and weaknesses.
its funny though (well maybe not), i read that review in HFC and was put of by it... in particular the comment about its rhythm and timing and polite manner...
in reality four stars is great but i just think why settle for 4 when i can choose a 5 star product. when i look through the HFC reviews it is only the sound reviews i take any notice of - all the rest are afterthoughts for me.
To clarify, when i said they were journalists, i meant i bet almost all of them don't have a degree in electronic engineering or acoustic physics when they join the magazine. As some mags do. I suppose i'll never hear the end of this, or maybe i will.......
Some of the comments on hear are mad! Of course reviews would be better if undertaken by people qualified in electronics and in acoustics! The Specialist is keen on the measurable objective side of HiFi and is being ridiculed by the "foot tappers". There was a similar debate on another forum regarding CD transports and the person with extensive professional audio experience ended up being picked on by the subjective types who swore their differently - i.e. against the measurable evidence.
[quote user="darrenwm1"]Some of the comments on hear are mad! Of course reviews would be better if undertaken by people qualified in electronics and in acoustics!
The Specialist is keen on the measurable objective side of HiFi and is being ridiculed by the "foot tappers". There was a similar debate on another forum regarding CD transports and the person with extensive professional audio experience ended up being picked on by the subjective types who swore their differently - i.e. against the measurable evidence.[/quote]
no-one is being picked one here. The Specialist made some rude remarks and that is why he has been given a frosty reception.
with regards to the topic, a person doesnt need a degree of any kind to review hi-fi. hi-fi is about music and you only need ears and a brain to appreciate music. tech specs dont mean a thing to most people because there is no way to reliably relate them to how the equipment will sound. if equipment sounds good that is all that matters for most people.
also, ashley james was subjected to extenisve scrutiny by myself and others because of his continued promotion of his own products. he also made some very sweeping (and unfounded) about hi-fi listeners and products. when challenged about these statements he preceeded to back-pedal and contradict himself.
The problem with wholly subjective reviews is that one man's "bright" is another man's "detailed" and it is easily possible to imagine differences too - for example, between Apple Lossless and WAV, when these don't actually exist.An objective review with measurements should be more consistent and reliable.
Could you professionally review hifi? I agree you only need ears and a brain (amongst other things) to appreciate music. But i think you need more than that to actually review hifi. A discerning ear above all, but all i was saying is that, a knowledge of the internal workings and circuit design would obviously be helpful. The more one knows the better
I find all this weird. Clare I understand about rhythmn and timing, but I really don't understand why Arcam gets such a hard time on many of these threads. I would agree on rock music, but anything else including good dance music/beats Arcam is king.
I happened to be listening to an MF pre/power combo with Marantz CD and Celestion Dittons at the weekend and it sounded like I was listening through a pillow case. I got home and my system sounded like a dream comparatively. Involving, detailed, close your eyes beautiful (that's the system, not you Andrew!), a great soundstage etc etc.
I'm listening now in my kitchen which is full of hard objects and a Victorian wooden floor and listening to Lemonjelly and only one glass of wine down and I had to put the CD on again.
Since when were arcam even uttered in the same breath as dance beats. Nevermind King! Surely your thinking on NAD or Rotel, something with superior dynamic power and lower output impedance. And PS, Celestion Dittons are over forty years old. Where did you go to hear the system? 1960?
Arcam gets plenty of five-star reviews from us - this, however, is a case where it hasn't. Not because it's dreadful - far, far from it - but because when we compared it with other current rivals at that price it was lacking in some key areas.
Onto the subject of our reviewers and their ability to understand how products work - what amazing assumptions are being made about all our team! Have you met them all? Do you know them all and their individual experience and qualifications? No - we're "just journalists".
We have several members of our test team who know more about electronics and hi-fi/AV design than it's probably healthy to know - we've got team members who've designed and built their own kit; who can tell the genesis of a piece of kit just by examining its circuitry; who've been on industry-standard courses on vision calibration and more.
Add what's upwards of 50 years of hands-on experience with about every brand and every type of product, and the ability to combine such expertise with a passion for excellent music and movie reproduction - and the talent to communicate that fervour to others - and i'd say we've got a damn fine set of credentials.
Why don't you use your experts knowledge in your reviews. I appreciate you've this new site coming out with all manner of technical data, you certainly need them for that. But throughout the years that i bought your magazine every review was written like the products were purely listened to, with no mention of electronic testing or such by experts.
[quote user="The specialist"]Why don't you use your experts knowledge in your reviews. I appreciate you've this new site coming out with all manner of technical data, you certainly need them for that. But throughout the years that i bought your magazine every review was written like the products were purely listened to, with no mention of electronic testing or such by experts.[/quote]
Their knowledge is used - that's the whole point of team testing!
Just because we don't write about taking the lid off a piece of kit and
seeing what it's made of (though if we find anything highly notable, we
will mention it), doesn't mean to say it isn't done.
In print, we'd rather focus on the experience of a product than its nuts and bolts - after all, why do you buy a product but to enjoy music and movies?
Oh, and why have you bought our magazine so regularly - and why are you here on our Forums - if you are so negative about our methodology?
[quote user="The specialist"]Your amp scored 92% in hifi choice. Extremely good for the money. As for me, when it comes to listening to reviews, i tend to buy hifi news and pay most attention to the measurements they do. That way i can get a good idea of the way a component sounds before going to listen to it. PS, in my opinion, whf don't know what they are talking about, they're mere journalists - if that remark gets me barred, so be it.[/quote]
You should visit the DIY audio forum and see the arguments that take place over measurements, measurements can tell us certain things, but once measured it also needs to be heard, you can't sell a product on measurements alone.