Originally Posted by chalugadp
Having wads of cash to me doesn't lend credence to your subjective opinion . Pro reviewers have heard five times as many speakers but we can't put much stock in what they say cuz there all in the pockets of the speaker companies . :screwy:
The thing about the Internet is that it's allowed for the creation of all sorts of experts. Millions of social media experts. Thousands of websites and reviewers of alternative medicines and nutritional supplements. And of course, many so called pro reviewers of all sorts of audio equipment. While the Internet has spawned an unprecedented glut of information, the same cannot be said for a commensurate glut of knowledge.
The work that's submitted by many so called pro reviewers isn't vetted for accuracy. By no stretch of the imagination are the writings intended to provide a reasonable overview of the person or company WRT the health of the business or its ethics. There are in fact some businesses that provide product or services that are not even properly registered in the state in which they operate.
When companies send out products for review, they have a fairly good idea what sort of reception they'll receive. Likewise, not every reviewer who requests a product for review will be accommodated. Companies would like to be fairly sure their product will not be judged harshly and that the reviewer will choose the right audiophile approved terms and phrases even when there are deficiencies so as not to make them appear glaring.
This is no different when it comes to what TV or radio network a political candidate will appear on. If you're liberal you don't want a no holds barred Q&A session on a conservative program. You go on MSNBC. The converse is equally applicable. If you're promoting Coral Calcium, you don't appear at a bona fide medical convention.
In general, when it comes to audio publications, they shun controversial reviews which cast products in a negative light. There's a reason why a reviewer such as nwavguy gets banned on some websites after he points out inconsistencies in a particular product by Schiit.
Now it's true some of these reviewers have heard a great many products. More than us for sure. But just because someone has heard a wide body of speakers does not by extension automatically give their personal assessment great weight. After all, the person at the counter who sells you your prescriptions does not make him qualified to offer an opinion as to their efficacy.
Oh and reading other posts makes you an informed opinion on a product you have never heard
Well, reading posts from some who have had a product for a while may well point out issues WRT its operation, service, and reliability, no?
Earlier, it may have been you or others who said how can it be that all these 'pro reviews' are saying the same thing? Does not the general uniformity count for something? Well, if they all arrived at their positions independently of each other, maybe yes. But it's a trivial matter nowadays to read about what's being said. After all, if I borrow heavily from one person's writings, that's considered plagiarism if I borrow from many people, that's considered research.