Occassionally WHF will review a product and give it 5 stars, then later it will re-review it in say a group test and give it 4 stars. I can see the argument for this. but I don't really like this policy. I think a product that is worthy of 5 stars should keep that rating. I mean did the Dali Lektor 2s really change in a year?
Star power
- Thread starter jaxwired
- Start date
No, the product didn't physically change, but its ultimate value did.
Every star-rating we give is based on a comparative, performance-per-pound basis. That means as newer, better (and better-value) rivals appear, products can lose their position.
Star ratings can also fall (or, indeed, rise) as their prices change and therefore their position in the market alters.
I like to think we always make this clear in review text....
Every star-rating we give is based on a comparative, performance-per-pound basis. That means as newer, better (and better-value) rivals appear, products can lose their position.
Star ratings can also fall (or, indeed, rise) as their prices change and therefore their position in the market alters.
I like to think we always make this clear in review text....
I actually think that limiting a review to 5 stars is the major fault here.
There is a huge area between four and five stars and I would like to see a product given a % score based upon, value for money, sound qualities, ease of use, appearance etc etc
There is a huge area between four and five stars and I would like to see a product given a % score based upon, value for money, sound qualities, ease of use, appearance etc etc
jaxwired:Occassionally WHF will review a product and give it 5 stars, then later it will re-review it in say a group test and give it 4 stars. I can see the argument for this. but I don't really like this policy. I think a product that is worthy of 5 stars should keep that rating. I mean did the Dali Lektor 2s really change in a year?I don't happen to like the star system either but as I understand it the 5* means a top product in the price range when the test takes place. If new prodcuts in the price range come along, that are better, then it is no longer a 5 * product.
Clare Newsome: No, the product didn't physically change, but its ultimate value did.
Every star-rating we give is based on a comparative, performance-per-pound basis. That means as newer, better (and better-value) rivals appear, products can lose their position.
Star ratings can also fall (or, indeed, rise) as their prices change and therefore their position in the market alters.
That's the same answer I came up with before I posted. I'm still not a fan of demoting products. It seems to arbitrary.
BTW, I can't recall a product ever having it's star rating increased...
Every star-rating we give is based on a comparative, performance-per-pound basis. That means as newer, better (and better-value) rivals appear, products can lose their position.
Star ratings can also fall (or, indeed, rise) as their prices change and therefore their position in the market alters.
That's the same answer I came up with before I posted. I'm still not a fan of demoting products. It seems to arbitrary.
BTW, I can't recall a product ever having it's star rating increased...
jaxwired:Clare Newsome: No, the product didn't physically change, but its ultimate value did.
Every star-rating we give is based on a comparative, performance-per-pound basis. That means as newer, better (and better-value) rivals appear, products can lose their position.
Star ratings can also fall (or, indeed, rise) as their prices change and therefore their position in the market alters.
That's the same answer I came up with before I posted. I'm still not a fan of demoting products. It seems to arbitrary.
It's not arbitrary at all. The star ratings are relative to a product's competitors in the same category, if those competitors introduce a better product it affects all the products in that category.
BTW, I can't recall a product ever having it's star rating increased...
I can, a pair of KEF floorstanders I think, a year or so ago, WHF reviewed them, basically said they were awful, gave them 2 stars (I think, might have been 3), KEF were understandably concerned and then realised they'd sent out a pre-production pair that were not the same as the ones on sale (different crossover I believe), sent a new pair for review and they went up to 4 stars.
There's far less opportunity for a product to increase in stars, it would require a competitor to withdraw from the market (and presumably not replace the product they were withdrawing). I could have happened with the TV section when Pioneer pulled out, but I don't know if it did or not.
Every star-rating we give is based on a comparative, performance-per-pound basis. That means as newer, better (and better-value) rivals appear, products can lose their position.
Star ratings can also fall (or, indeed, rise) as their prices change and therefore their position in the market alters.
That's the same answer I came up with before I posted. I'm still not a fan of demoting products. It seems to arbitrary.
It's not arbitrary at all. The star ratings are relative to a product's competitors in the same category, if those competitors introduce a better product it affects all the products in that category.
BTW, I can't recall a product ever having it's star rating increased...
I can, a pair of KEF floorstanders I think, a year or so ago, WHF reviewed them, basically said they were awful, gave them 2 stars (I think, might have been 3), KEF were understandably concerned and then realised they'd sent out a pre-production pair that were not the same as the ones on sale (different crossover I believe), sent a new pair for review and they went up to 4 stars.
There's far less opportunity for a product to increase in stars, it would require a competitor to withdraw from the market (and presumably not replace the product they were withdrawing). I could have happened with the TV section when Pioneer pulled out, but I don't know if it did or not.
I can assure you there's nothing arbitrary about it.
And here are two recent example of star-ratings rising:
Marantz's M-CR502 micro system - originally a four-star product, but promoted to five stars when Marantz dropped the price by 20%
And then there's KEF's KHT-3005SE surround speakers - two-time Award winners and five-star products, demoted to four stars when KEF hiked the price, but reinstated at five stars when cut back to original price.
Again, to reiterate - these decisions aren't knee-jerk: in both the cases above, we only revised the star rating after re-testing the products against their new price rivals. And the changes in rating are explained in the copy.
And here are two recent example of star-ratings rising:
Marantz's M-CR502 micro system - originally a four-star product, but promoted to five stars when Marantz dropped the price by 20%
And then there's KEF's KHT-3005SE surround speakers - two-time Award winners and five-star products, demoted to four stars when KEF hiked the price, but reinstated at five stars when cut back to original price.
Again, to reiterate - these decisions aren't knee-jerk: in both the cases above, we only revised the star rating after re-testing the products against their new price rivals. And the changes in rating are explained in the copy.
chebby
Well-known member
- Jun 2, 2008
- 1,257
- 34
- 19,220
True Blue:I actually think that limiting a review to 5 stars is the major fault here.
There is a huge area between four and five stars and I would like to see a product given a % score based upon, value for money, sound qualities, ease of use, appearance etc etc
You know from our local dealer that the budget gear benefits from having WHF 5 star tags and labels on them. A set of percentage ratings for all the criteria you listed above would not catch the eye or be understood as readily by the casual (or first time) buyer.
There is a huge area between four and five stars and I would like to see a product given a % score based upon, value for money, sound qualities, ease of use, appearance etc etc
You know from our local dealer that the budget gear benefits from having WHF 5 star tags and labels on them. A set of percentage ratings for all the criteria you listed above would not catch the eye or be understood as readily by the casual (or first time) buyer.
jaxwired:Occassionally WHF will review a product and give it 5 stars, then later it will re-review it in say a group test and give it 4 stars.ÿ I can see the argument for this. but I don't really like this policy.ÿ I think a product that is worthy of 5 stars should keep that rating.ÿ I mean did the Dali Lektor 2s really change in a year?
Which is a good reason IMO for reviewing on performance and not performance per pound? We can work out the "per pound" bit for ourselves if we know the performance and it's easier under a more pure performance score to work out whether to spend more to trade up for better absolute performance. And you wouldn't generally have to review star performances down unless a game-changing device came in with revolutionary sonic capability? Sorry, don't want to repeat an old thread but I just feel price is a bridge too far, even though I do very much like the WHF reviews and read them more avidly than is probably healthy.
Which is a good reason IMO for reviewing on performance and not performance per pound? We can work out the "per pound" bit for ourselves if we know the performance and it's easier under a more pure performance score to work out whether to spend more to trade up for better absolute performance. And you wouldn't generally have to review star performances down unless a game-changing device came in with revolutionary sonic capability? Sorry, don't want to repeat an old thread but I just feel price is a bridge too far, even though I do very much like the WHF reviews and read them more avidly than is probably healthy.
athenry: Which is a good reason IMO for reviewing on performance and not performance per pound? We can work out the "per pound" bit for ourselves if we know the performance and it's easier under a more pure performance score to work out whether to spend more to trade up for better absolute performance. And you wouldn't generally have to review star performances down unless a game-changing device came in with revolutionary sonic capability? Sorry, don't want to repeat an old thread but I just feel price is a bridge too far, even though I do very much like the WHF reviews and read them more avidly than is probably healthy.
It would be nice to get both ratings. However, it seem to me that an overall rating without regard to price is much more difficult to determine. Within a price category, they can just compare a product to other well known offerings at that price. To provide a price indifferent rating requires an assessment of the entire category of products in comparison to one products performance.
It would be nice to get both ratings. However, it seem to me that an overall rating without regard to price is much more difficult to determine. Within a price category, they can just compare a product to other well known offerings at that price. To provide a price indifferent rating requires an assessment of the entire category of products in comparison to one products performance.
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
-
-
-
Would a HiFi setup sound better than a home cinema setup for music?
- Started by R2D2
- Replies: 54
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram