Soundonsound is a good site where I found many reviews of gear I bought or didn't. Thing is, I can't remember any of their review where they did that said that a product was not good... For that matter, no website will tell you 'this is exactly the sound you're looking for' without hitting wrong on a few of us.
We need to figure out by ourself what kind of sound we want and the best way to find the right tools to achive it will always be trial and error.
I wish music store would expect us to try gear before we buy, as car dealers do.

I have to agree. I can't recall ever reading a review from SOS, MIX or any of the other pro trade mags that wasn't at least "kind".
Maybe not an over-the-top "Hey! You have GOT to buy this model !", but at least kind enough to write something like "...not bad for the money".

Just once I'd like to see a reviewer write "This thing sucks. What were they thinking when they designed this?" If the product really is bad.

And we all know that, from time to time in our business, there are certain pieces of gear released that do indeed truly blow.

For example, the Alesis Mattica Power Amp, circa 1995.

Man, what a joke that thing was. I had an "in" at a local music store in those days, and they knew me well enough to allow me to take several models home to A/B them for a few days, so I took several amps home with me, and one of those was the Mattica. (FWIW, I ended up buying a Hafler Transnova, and I still have it, use it and absolutely love it).

The slew rate on the Mattica was sooo slow, that I could play audio through it, stop the audio, go out for a pizza, walk my dog, do my taxes, go back to the studio.... and it was still "slewing". LOL

I'd surely appreciate it if someone could be kind enough to point me in the direction of a pro-trade review where the article is honest...
And, LOL, I'm not talking about the descriptions used by music stores, where everything is "pristine", "stellar", "warm", and my personal favorite:
"Only $99! This model is reminiscent of the classic twenty thousand Dollar XYZ Model used in every professional studio, and made famous on albums like...". Uh Huh. LOL

ditto to what Donny says. reviews and reviewers rely on product to be supplied by manufacturers. you don't bite the hand that feeds you. if you do you won't be getting product to "review" for very long.

i have to ask why you continue to whip this horse, no matter how dead it is ???

the question was asked. you got several answers / replies. none of them said what you wanted to hear. continuing to go on about it will not convince anyone chineese mics sound good. if you like them fine. use them. like i said, it only gives me an edge.

Yup, found that out recently with mix er man and his shilling over at GS over a particular clock that started looking like an advertisement. He was raving about it while I was questioning why believers thought is was so amazing, it did little to nothing for me.
I thought the crowd would be interested to learn why a super clock was good for some and not so good for others but that didn't sit well with his over inflated ego and admin. This is a $6500 clock btw.
We both have the same clock. Well not all true, I've since passed mine to some believer in snake oil, or, I'll put it another way, to someone with clocking problems that needed it more than I. :)

My informative posts however, were deleted and I was attacked with no moderation. The thread ended up looking like manufacturer are paying for space while their shills pay their dues for the free gear they get from them as long as they said something good about it.
We wouldn't want to loose the advertisers .

Well, no money is enough to get me to shill about something I don't believe in so I'm pretty sure they won't be renewing their ads here. :)
Low and behold, 2 weeks later MM was shilling that for the company at NAMM. I posted that video somewhere here a month back, the writing is on the wall .

What a bunch of ass kissing in this industry. I'll use the product but I lost what little respect I had for him and that product . We had that same crowd shilling here years ago and I booted them out. It exists wherever there is traffic and profit.

I've found a couple of definitions for 'shill' and 'shilling' that sort of fit, but I've never heard the world before.

Sound on sound said quite a few years ago that they don't bash products for the obvious business reasons but not all the products they review get printed. They insist that what you read is accurate. What you don't read are negative reviews, just no review. This is acceptable to me, and all the purchases made blind on products recommended have worked for me. I have not disagreed with anything in 30 years.

"...Sound on sound said quite a few years ago that they don't bash products for the obvious business reasons but not all the products they review get printed. They insist that what you read is accurate. What you don't read are negative reviews, just no review. This is acceptable to me..."

I accept that this is the way it is, Paul, but.... that doesn't make it acceptable. I understand a trade mag not wanting to piss off advertisers, but if you are a gear reviewer, then I think you should be brave enough to do negative reviews too, if it's warranted.

And, maybe doing so would make the manufacturer step up to improving the product, or addressing the issues that the reviewer mentioned. One thing for sure, they won't do a thing if they aren't forced to, either by word of mouth or by a negative review.

I agree on wanting more info in reviews. I remember reading a response a number of years ago in one of the mags, I think it was "Recording", that explained part of why the reviews are generally positive. They get HUNDREDS of manufacturers trying to get them to review stuff. They have a limited space for reviews in the magazine. So they look at products they think might be most useful to their audience and review those. Most of them are at least good or the reviewer would not want to spend time with it. I have occasionally seen a "meh" review, but it doesn't happen often. I know they've got to be careful to not tick off any of their advertisers, or potential advertisers, but I would like to see more head-on-head comparisons. I agree that when all reviews end with "so this is definitely a product you should consider", that they don't help that much.

drumrob, post: 411212, member: 18501 wrote: Most of them are at least good or the reviewer would not want to spend time with it...

Except being a true reviewer doesn't mean that you review only the gear that you like, Rob. Or, at least it shouldn't be that way.
If they do come across something that isn't good, then they should say so, and perhaps help those consumers who may be on the fence about it.

I'd like to see one of these reviewers try out any of the various "classic" emulators. We've all seen them, in both hardware and software emulation form.

If one of these guys did come across a particular model that they didn't care for, or, downright dislike, just once I'd like them to come right out and say so.
"This tape emulator doesn't sound anything like tape" or "This LA2A clone bears no sonic resemblance to a real LA2A whatsoever", (or whatever model you can think of, you can insert your own choice).

We've all seen the good reviews. Hell, I've even seen positive reviews on gear that I knew from personal experience to be substandard.

Not too long ago, I came across an SOS review on the Audio Technica 2020 condenser mic:

"Despite its low cost, this mic actually delivers a very mature, believable sound both on vocals and on instruments. As a vocal mic, it displays the kind of lower mid-range warmth that flatters most singers, and combines this with a very subtle presence peak that adds 'air' and clarity without erring on the side of sibilance or harshness." SOS, February, 2006

https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb06/articles/at2020.htm

Well, I've had the opportunity to use the 2020 on several different occasions while working at client's home studios.. and I can tell you that this mic is... well, it's awful.
Its sonic characteristics are anything but "believable", and its hi-mids are harsh enough to drill a hole in your forehead. And, it seems as though the more you try to EQ it, the worse it sounds.
Yes, it's only $99. Yes, one should expect only so much for that money. But... that $99 would have been far better spent on an SM58 than it would on that AT2020 paperweight, and I would have liked the reviewer to have said so. My suspicion is that SOS probably had a major advertising account with AT, and didn't want to rock the boat.

So, in a sense, an advertiser is pretty much assured of positive reviews, whether the model deserves it or not, by simply sustaining a healthy advertising account with the trade rag. And, you can do the math however you want to, but in the end it's essentially equal to the manufacturer "buying" a good review.

Actually, it's worse than that... it's almost a sort of extortion: "Give us a good review on model ABC and we will renew our half-million dollar advertising account with your magazine."

Process of elimination...or leaving out reviews on poor equipment and then picking gear you already know you will like just so that you can write a positive review about it and not piss anyone off, isn't offering a true critical review section.
If that's the case, I'd rather they didn't review any gear at all.

IMHO of course.

My take ,
Successful Reviewers are similar to lawyers working for a firm. Reviewers get around (justify) "honest to goodness" like a lawyer justifies the rights for the client (need to know basis). Everything is good for something and therefore, if I was running a magazine that depended on profit, I would pass reviews off to the people it suited best (win win).
SOS is well produced. It has excellent quantization where needed and smart people running it. I like SOS most of all.

Being said,
You wouldn't dare give me a product to review that had anything to do with emulation because no plug-in will ever emulate the real reason why I choose analog in a chain.
The sole reason I use voltage is to be different than digital and that happens and works for me because I use a specific method that eliminates 90% of all the BS I used in the past. I don't think that would go over well either.

The value in analog is voltage and capture. I choose digital to capture analog a different way as well. I love how we can move code from place to place after the fact.
I don't base my opinions from a lack of funds and experience or fear I will upset share holders or clients. Life is too short to BS myself.

If I was to do a review, I would have to tell every person, every time about the importance I've now discovered about "difference" and that would completely drop the bomb on the review and take the focus off of the product and put more on the process every time..

I only need a handful of plugs and no more so I choose a DAW that works on a PC (not a Mac) and doesn't need the third party shopping list like the Avid /Pro Tools supermarket. So, I just pissed off all the pro studios on the planet who read this now.

If you need digital emulation, Ableton live is the bomb for spinning everything past tradition recording today. No one with Pro Tools wants to believe that. No one wants to believe they have to spend $2800.00 on an LA2A when they can get the same thing in a plug-in.

The whole industry is making money off affordable recording products. Reviews and trade mags are about profit and saying it just right.

what you fail to consider Donny is that many manufacturers have very cozy relationships with many distributors and retail outlets so when you piss one of them off you actually will be pissing off several different very powerful entities. it's a huge web they weave and the tentacles of these spiders are far reaching. these dealers and manufactures can not only cut off product but they can wage a war against an individual and destroy their credibility.

for example if a reviewer were to diss a product from a powerful company like PreSonus, Sweetwater, GC/MF and many other gear pimp outlets would jump on the bandwagon at the same time. the problem is exacerbated by the fact that it is more likely that a product from a larger manufacturer with wider distribution would market a dog that would be subject to criticism than a product from a boutique builder that wields less influence over the industry but even then sometimes a boutiqe manufacturer will have friends in the industry that will flock to their defence.

it's just an unspoken rule that "reviewers shall not diss the manufacturer or their products."

Indeed Kurt. Everything you've taught me (that I've picked up) about this business from you has been spot on.
I crossed the line with MM last month on GS, knowing damn well what the outcome will be challenging him in public. I'm at a point in my life where I don't care if I am blacklisted, loose advertising or readers. I already know its happening, again, because I called a spade a spade regardless of loosing a shilling.
But this time I can afford to keep the doors open. :)

Its a good feeling to know I don't have to pretend or BS to keep this place.

I've had my share of crap analog gear as well as digital. It wasn't my intention to focus only on digital, which is why I gave the example that I did in my previous post about the AT mic.

I understand that business is business, and that you don't crap where you have to eat. What might be a refreshing change of pace, would be for each trade rag to come right out and divulge, without focusing on any manufacturer or model in particular, that they will never talk snot about any company or product, whether they advertise with them or not, and that all reviews will be of a positive nature...at least then the reader would know where the rag stood in relation to product reviews vs revenue...
but then pigs might also fly out of my butt and monkeys might drive me to Jillian Anderson's house where she's waiting for me with wanton lust... it just ain't gonna happen.

SOS, MIX, Recording, Keyboard and EQ Magazines.... Allll positive reviews alllll the time!

Exactly Donny. It will never happen.

I have an [[url=http://[/URL]="https://www.soundon…"]MXL 2001[/]="https://www.soundon…"]MXL 2001[/] that I was going to give away ( because i was certain it sounded like crap) but maybe I should try it again just to be certain. Its been about 15 years since I used it. I have a RODE NT1 and many other RODE mics. I'll do a test between it and re read this review for fun.

You've got to read that review. Its priceless :)

I may or may not report my findings.

I found a few with some negative comments but gave up looking for a real rubbishing!

I was excited to get my hands on the CP1, and I tried hard to like it. It certainly looks the part, and it must be said that it can feel and sound it too. Ultimately, though, I came away less impressed than I thought I’d be.

I belong to neither camp, and I'm not afraid to stand up and say that the 200e is not the right instrument for me. I accept that even given the months I've been using it, I've had it for too limited a period to get to grips with it fully, and I know that it's still unfinished in one or two areas, but I find nevertheless that it stands between me and my musical ideas instead of enhancing my creativity.

This one brought a complaint from Don Buchla, the designer.

hehe, well there ya go, it has happened!

DonnyThompson, post: 411226, member: 46114 wrote:
What might be a refreshing change of pace, would be for each trade rag to come right out and divulge, without focusing on any manufacturer or model in particular, that they will never talk snot about any company or product, whether they advertise with them or not, and that all reviews will be of a positive nature...

i said that repeatedly when i was reviewing but for the largest part it went unnoticed. people should understand the nature of the process. review samples are for the most part provided by the manufacturer and in lesser part by retailers. for instance i got pieces from Millennia, Great River, JLM, Sebatron, PreSonus just to name a few. i also got one piece from Mercenary due to a long debate and the manufacturers unwillingness to supply a particular product to me. of all these products i never published a negative review even though i did run across some dogs. i did make comments in bulletin boards but i never actually "published" a bad review.reviews are really more of a "product release" article than a true review of the product. you can rest assured that if the reviewers impression is negative, the review is not published.

This topic would be even better, and do even more good as its own thread.

I was thinking the same. What should we call it?

I'll throw in some suggestions.

The Good, The Bad, & the Ugly Truth About Some of Those Glowing Reviews

Pros & Cons (Pro Reviewers & Con Jobs)

The Shill Game

Honest Reviews vs. The Reality of Advertiser Revenue

Honest Reviews vs. The Reality of Advertiser Revenue and the Shill Game sound just right :)

Done.

I've subscribed to mix, electronic musician, SOS, recording, and tape op, as well as guitar world. It really is getting sickening, where I can read an article about a band w/ out mention of the new "boxed set" or whatever. I enjoy mix cuz of the industry updates I would otherwise not be aware of. So to me, it's not just the reviews, it the commercialization of the whole mag, that is really annoying. I stopped w SOS and recording a year or 2 ago, mainly cuz I was sick of the same advice hpf guitars @ 80, yada yada. Not that I'm some master engineer, but, geez, something. More creative or unique would help everyone. Plus I was sick of some gushing review, and then seeing an dad for the product on the next page. I do miss sos's article where they show the screenshots, and outline exactly what the mixer did on a hit song, love that article.

That's why I reall really like tape op, I think it the only mag that actually seems like an engineer having a casual convo w another engineer. They don't censor language out to be PC, and it's free! I have yet to see a negative review in there either, but hey they gotta pay the bills.

More to the topic of convo, has anyone ever bought a product based on a magazine reveiw? I mean most of the people you talk to in general just say whatever they have is the "best", so while I definitely believe people believe what they're saying, but in the end I judge for myself. Even people I trust, have different tastes than I do. To me reputation/longevity is the best indicator of where to start when looking for new gear. But anybody who just carelessly buys gear cuz someone else said so, is just playing the lottery.

I just encountered this tonight when one of the interns was like I'm gonna get this avantone, cuz this guy likes it and Taylor swift used it on one of her songs. I was like have you even used it, are you planning on trying it before you buy it? Nah, he said. If I don't like it, at least I can say Taylor swift used one. Ugh, awful reason to blow $500. I then went into a rant on quality control yada yada.

Lol how many times has a monitor review said, wow, I noticed a more focused midrange, better imaging, when the reviewer has a pair of speakers ten times the price of the budget speaker they are reviewing. I read these things for 2 things, the feature sets of products, and what they person tested them on, kick , bass, ect.

"...More to the topic of convo, has anyone ever bought a product based on a magazine reveiw?"

Yes, several times, although it's been quite some time since I have. I bought a pair of Alesis Monitor One's (passive) and a Yamaha O2R Digital Console, both based quite a bit on reviews.

I don't regret either, although the O2R sits stagnant these days because it's just not up to par with current specs... although at the time I bought it, and for several years after, I was quite happy with it. It's just that at that time, digital technology was growing and changing so fast, that it was tough for any one manufacturer to keep up.

Also, at that time, while there were a few websites dedicated to gear reviews by actual users, there wasn't the accessibility and number of sources online that there is now.

When I was younger I always bought the magazines. Mix, Keyboard and Guitar Player were my favourites. I enjoyed the interviews and liked looking at the ads to see what was new. I'd read through it all several times. When I got to a Music store, I knew more about what I was looking for. Its hard to say if those articles influenced me negatively. They definitely influenced G.A.S. I could have paid for a few houses from all the money I've spent on gear. I do regret not have more houses and not having to still be working like a grunt.

Maybe we should have a forum where RO members could post their own reviews? I know we do so already, in various forum topics, but what if we had a forum dedicated solely to user reviews?
I've always found that user reviews at various retailer sites like Amazon, Sweetwater, etc. to be much more useful than any trade mag review. We could do that here!
Just a thought...
Jeff

Great suggestion.

I added this last week. Its called [[url=http://[/URL]="http://recording.or…"]Resources[/]="http://recording.or…"]Resources[/]. I'm setting it up for business as well ( with a fee for businesses cause I could use some extra $ to pay for this site) . Its a stellar system with download available for software too. As a test for businesses ( Recording, Mixing, Mastering Services no added) , I added my studio ( currently under construction) as a test and it was googled right away.

I need to figure out how to control who can and can't add a "resource/ review etc" . Spammers could get onto it and it would be a moderation nightmare.

The coolest thing this is, Someone adds a review, and it is then posted in the resource section, but it also opens up a thread in the selected forum for further discussion. People can rate the review and comment on it.

Check it out, See Top of the forum for the link.

thatjeffguy, post: 411402, member: 38103 wrote: Maybe we should have a forum where RO members could post their own reviews? I know we do so already, in various forum topics, but what if we had a forum dedicated solely to user reviews?
I've always found that user reviews at various retailer sites like Amazon, Sweetwater, etc. to be much more useful than any trade mag review. We could do that here!
Just a thought...
Jeff

So, in this review section, is the intent to review only expensive gear? I guess I would suggest that there possibly be a sub-section that could cover some of the lower cost stuff, being that we so often get questions regarding models that aren't of the boutique type... like The Scarlet Series from Focusrite, cheaper condensers, etc. and at that point, we could point the new members who seem to have very similar questions to that review section? Just a thought...

While I don't own much of the very cheap stuff, I do work with quite a bit of low to mid-priced gear in my hired gun sessions at clients houses, and it may be helpful to those members who don't have 3 grand to spend on a mic pre or a boutique-model, front-loaded class A amp...

thoughts?

I've been building this all day and ready to be tested. I am tired!
I have two review categories and a business section.

Hardware Reviews
Software Reviews

Its wide open for everything.

Donny, do you have something to add?

Chris... I do have a few models I could review, both low grade stuff, but as I mentioned above, reviewing the lower grade gear might be useful for those new members / new recording hobbyists who always seem to start their posts with "I need a new mic and I have $89 to spend...", "I want to upgrade to a decent audio I/O, is there something you could recommend for $200?"... etc.

I'm doing a session today, but I could post something later this week, I want to make sure that I have these few models well-tested and the reviews well-written before I post.

I just wanted to check with you first regarding the caliber of gear that you would expect reviews for. Because I work at many different home recording rooms (notice I didn't say "studios" LOL) I get the opportunity to work with quite a bit of the lower priced gear. I have no intention of giving this cheap gear a bad review just because it's cheap... there may be a hidden gem along the way that pops up... but, nor is it my intention to sugar coat a review if I come across garbage, either. ;)

Sure thing, file away. You will be the start to hopefully many more.

The Review section is a great idea, but is there supposed to be a distinction between user-written material and manufacturer-supplied copy? Maybe when RO members get round to supplying the former the latter can be removed, or at least moved to a commercial section?

I have a question...

Is this review section connected to RO in any way?

The reason I ask, is because I wouldn't ever want to hurt Chris by pissing off any manufacturers who either advertise here already, or who may want to in the future. I don't want to cost him any money or risk having him lose any relationships he may have cultivated with certain manufacturers.

My intent is to write honest reviews of two particular pieces of consumer-grade, home recording-based gear, based upon first hand knowledge and real time experience.

I have no intention of bashing any piece of gear just because its a "budget" model. By the same token, I also have no intention of writing a positive review of an expensive piece of gear just because it's expensive.
I'm also not going to write a review based upon "industry reputation", either. Nor am I going to take the word of the manufacturer's description and PR, unless I happen to agree with them.

I am planning on writing these reviews based solely on real experience with the gear that I am reviewing. And because of this - if I am going to be truthful - I'm not sure the manufacturers are always going to like what I have to say. LOL

If this equipment review section is directly (or even indirectly) connected to RO....I guess what I'm saying is that, if Audio Technica or ART happen to be paying advertisers here ... before I submitted the reviews that I planned on writing, I'd want to check with Chris first. ;)

Boswell, post: 411834, member: 29034 wrote: The Review section is a great idea, but is there supposed to be a distinction between user-written material and manufacturer-supplied copy? Maybe when RO members get round to supplying the former the latter can be removed, or at least moved to a commercial section?

Those are only examples to give us an idea of how they can look.

DonnyThompson, post: 411854, member: 46114 wrote: I have a question...

Is this review section connected to RO in any way?

The reason I ask, is because I wouldn't ever want to hurt Chris by pissing off any manufacturers who either advertise here already, or who may want to in the future. I don't want to cost him any money or risk having him lose any relationships he may have cultivated with certain manufacturers.

My intent is to write honest reviews of two particular pieces of consumer-grade, home recording-based gear, based upon first hand knowledge and real time experience.

I have no intention of bashing any piece of gear just because its a "budget" model. By the same token, I also have no intention of writing a positive review of an expensive piece of gear just because it's expensive.
I'm also not going to write a review based upon "industry reputation", either. Nor am I going to take the word of the manufacturer's description and PR, unless I happen to agree with them.

I am planning on writing these reviews based solely on real experience with the gear that I am reviewing. And because of this - if I am going to be truthful - I'm not sure the manufacturers are always going to like what I have to say. LOL

If this equipment review section is directly (or even indirectly) connected to RO....I guess what I'm saying is that, if Audio Technica or ART happen to be paying advertisers here ... before I submitted the reviews that I planned on writing, I'd want to check with Chris first. ;)

Thanks Donny, but no worries.

Everything posted is connected to us but we don't care about politics here, we never have. This should be treated no different than a forum post.
The only reason I can think of moderating a review would be if it was slanderous and obviously intended to be something more than a review. Fly at it. I'm not worried about advertisers or upsetting anyone. These are interned to me truthful ( from the eye of the beholder)
ALL registered users can vote and comment back.

Chris, I'm all for honest gear reviews. I think it's a great idea, but I hope there are some kind of minimal standards in place.

I think we all recognize the fact that the combination of affordable technology, and the anonymity of the internet, completely devalue words like, 'producer', 'engineer', 'mastering', and 'studio' to name a few. Anyone with a computer and internet access can claim to be any or all of those things.

In a perfect world, gear reviewers would be people who aren't afraid to put some examples of their work online somewhere. Put your best foot forward so we could, "consider the source" of the information and opinion. As subjective as audio adjectives can be, it would be great to hear some of their proudest moments with my own ears. Hearing some their work will help determine whether or not we have similar ideas on what constitutes "pristine sound quality" and all the other superlative cliches.

For example, I recently read an informal album review posted on the Facebook page of a local artist. Although I had absolutely nothing to do with this particular project, I DID have the distinct advantage of being very familiar with both the artist and reviewer personally. I'm sure I had a sneer on my face as the reviewer managed to squeeze in the phrase, "from a producer's standpoint", no doubt just to pad his resumé and draw attention to himself as a self-proclaimed 'producer' and expert. Now I know what you might be thinking, because we all know, shilling isn't just a problem at the corporate level - but that was NOT the issue here. The reviewer was NOT the producer of this album he gave such glowing comments (although he probably wishes he was). The shameless plug in the middle of the, 'nice job buddy' post only mildly irked me. The problem I had was, the reviewer/'producer' in question, is a college kid with a laptop in his bedroom whose self-produced work I've had the great displeasure of hearing. Leading anyone with that larger perspective, and two functioning ear holes to wonder, who the hell would care what THIS guy thinks?

Thanks for chiming in guys. I'm really glad to see you all so passionateness about this! cool.

My gut is to start and see how it all goes. Nothing is in stone. I'm hoping the software works as expected and flows well. ( I'm also not 100% on how this will operate so until we start, its a learning process and most likely some setup tweaks will need to be done).

That being said, we have a no BS reputation and I bet we won't be plagued with the nonsense. I'm always hoping to make a difference and change starts by us getting at it.
We can use this section to better educate the populous. If some uniformed posts something off, we can comment below, and migrate it to a forum where it will continue and turn it around (votes, forum and review is all connected). Its all set up to do it like that.
We give all members the ability to write about something, and in turn, we can't vote without comment. Its a win win no matter which way it rolls.

The core members know the difference between something hurtful towards anyone and I'm confident we will be able to balance anything that is published. This should continue in the same direction our forums have been, which are fun and helpful.

As an example, m i x e r man comes on G S like star and drops a blurb on the 10 M. It looks like a shill, acts like a shill and ends like a shill. I spot unsettling hype and post a question back to him and others over how this isn't for everyone. Rather than them asking me to explain more, they instantly attack with a tone of defending something. He is blind by the shill factor and ego missing anything remotely educational from a colleague. He is there to pay an under the table deal and dump a dated Radar system to some sucker, resenting anyone in his path.
If that had happened here, I/we would have controlled it and educated everyone in a very careful and respectful way.
The shilling would have been exposed and we would have discovered something very important about converters , clocking and this business. :cool:

Anyway, enough of that, I'm hoping you get what I am thinking. We all have our idea of what we want to see here. Lets just start adding the best and worst and see what happens. We need input, thats for certain. Lets change the industry somewhere.

Thoughts?

dvdhawk, post: 411987, member: 36047 wrote: Chris, I'm all for honest gear reviews. I think it's a great idea, but I hope there are some kind of minimal standards in place.

In a perfect world, gear reviewers would be people who aren't afraid to put some examples of their work online somewhere. Put your best foot forward so we could, "consider the source" of the information and opinion. As subjective as audio adjectives can be, it would be great to hear some of their proudest moments with my own ears. Hearing some their work will help determine whether or not we have similar ideas on what constitutes "pristine sound quality" and all the other superlative cliches.

The problem I had was, the reviewer/'producer' in question, is a college kid with a laptop in his bedroom whose self-produced work I've had the great displeasure of hearing. Leading anyone with that larger perspective, and two functioning ear holes to wonder, who the hell would care what THIS guy thinks?

I have no problem with posting examples. Although I can't spend a large amount of time on it because I have other projects (paying) to accomplish... but I don't have any problem with posting small snippets of things I've done with the gear I've used and am reviewing. As an example, the mic I am planning on reviewing is pretty bad, so I'm not going to spend a whole lot of time tracking with it, because in the end, I won't end up using the mic on any "keeper" takes, anyway. I also don't have any problem with posting the gear I've used in conjunction with the model I am reviewing, like pre amps, audio I/O's, recording platform, monitors, etc.

In response to the second part of Dave's post and his mentioning the possibility that no one would care what a reviewer thinks...He's right. I don't have anything to qualify my experience. I don't have any Grammies on my shelf, I've never done anything huge or groundbreaking. So, he's right. If I review something, the readers could certainly come back with "why would I listen to this guy?'
I can only speak for myself, and tell you that personally, I'd be far more apt to listen to the opinions of an "average" product user, than I would some rock star's paid endorsement.

Now, The other side of that coin would be reading a review from a pro, but being able to relate their opinion to your own situation.

Many years ago, I recall a number of ads running in Mix Mag that had Roger Nichols expounding on the wonderful sound of Schoeps mics. I've had the opportunity to use a few of those mics over the years and I can fully agree with Roger's statements. However, there are some huge variables to consider... The first is that Nichols had access to other gear that was really nice - mic pres, consoles, EQ's, etc., that he used in conjunction with the mics... so for the most part, he could have run virtually any mic through that gear and he would still have come out with a nice sound. But, I don't have a Neve, or a multi thousand dollar mic pre, so I had to be able to consider his review in relation to my own recording setup.

I think that, in the end, it's up to the individual to figure out whether or not they will give credence to any of the reviews. After all, a review is just one man's opinion.

Donny, I hope you don't think my post was in any way aimed at reputable guys like yourself. Yours is exactly the kind of review I'd be interested in reading, and would give some weight to.

Listing the signal path would be good as part of due diligence. I wouldn't expect a review to include A/B audio clips, I know that would be time-consuming. And like you say, anybody with that kind of free time must not have any paying projects. Most of those 'shootout' reviews I see are rarely objective enough to be very good science anyway.

What I was suggesting was, I'd like to hear a highlight or two from the reviewers professional portfolio - again, mostly just to see if we're using the same yardstick. As you point out, only a handful of people would ever have access to the level of equipment Roger Nichols used, but we still cared what he used, because everybody was familiar with his work. And if we liked his work, it gave us a standard to shoot for and measure against even with our inferior gear.

Regarding having the time. I'm slammed 18 hours a day too. We're all busy and need to make a living. Something like this will happen with inspiration.
I think we shouldn't be too expecting of us either, a review doesn't have to be anything more than an opinion on something. I'm not expecting a magazine style.

It up an ready, we know it there. done. :)

dvdhawk, post: 412147, member: 36047 wrote: Donny, I hope you don't think my post was in any way aimed at reputable guys like yourself. Yours is exactly the kind of review I'd be interested in reading, and would give some weight to.

As you point out, only a handful of people would ever have access to the level of equipment Roger Nichols used, but we still cared what he used, because everybody was familiar with his work. And if we liked his work, it gave us a standard to shoot for and measure against even with our inferior gear.

I appreciate the supportive words, Dave. I have posted mixes here in the past from time to time, Chris was even kind enough to add some hi voltage mojo to a few. ;) I think he would probably also agree that I'm no Roger Nichols... but that certainly doesn't stop me from trying to be. :)