Not trolling or pushing your buttons (sincerely)…
That said, I just don’t understand what you are trying to say. First, you seemed to imply (I think) that PS Audio relies too heavily on reviews of their products. I am not sure how that could be an issue so I was not sure what your point was. Hence my reply.
In response to my post you write “Who looks for 8 reviews of what is a fairly basic budget product?”
I am still lost – not getting your point.
No matter.
Cheers.
A very well known turntable manufacturer with a global reputation recently brought out a phono amplifier. He told me he needed to get a review or two to get interest in it.
It is a cabal. I have products from a manufacturer who gets reviews from a close friend and has actually named two of his products after his friend. Both great guys and great products, but would you expect anything other than praise from a friend reviewing a product whose name you put on the box?
I’ve owned two PS products that were reasonable value for money and that may be the case for BHK and that level, but in the UK and probably Europe the Stellar range is not very good value.
All reviews are basically free publicity because they rarely contain any adverse comment. The need for reviews reflects the need for publicity. Some manufacturers sell or reputation and dealers doing their job properly and don’t need reviews. Harbeth released a range of 5 new speakers in February and there are no reviews, last I heard they haven’t been sent out for review, they can’t make them fast enough to meet orders.
This is a naive understanding of the corruption. Reviewers never give a negative review because they are dependent upon the manufacturers to provide them with gear. That is inherently corrupt. An actual integrity based review enterprise acquires the product on their own, with no strings connected to the manufacturer - at all.
Also, many reviews are paid by the manufacturer to write the review. They also may get to keep the review product which they can later sell. Magazines like Stereophile (et al) need ad revenue from the manufacturers, which adds another layer of corruption and bias.
All that adds up to a ridiculous situation on the integrity front. That’s not to say that true advice can’t come from a corrupt review. But nearly all the reviews are corrupt, and ought to have a few well deserved asterisks. It’s an incestuous relationship between the reviewer and manufacturer.
PS Audio has had the same issue with a couple of recent products; too much demand to send units off for review.
I note you again have ignored my question nor responded directly to @scotte1.
My guess is @stevensegal is saying that reviews are corrupt. And that if PS Audio needs 8 corrupt reviews to get their product going, then that doesn’t speak highly of the product. That a product of note would not need 8 dubious reviews. Rather the quality of the product would speak for itself.
I totally understand why companies and reviews have an incestuous relationship. It makes great business sense for both parties as reviews sell product, that’s a fact. The arrangement is less advantageous for the consumer.
C’est la vie…
No, not an expression of naïveté. I am merely addressing one aspect of the process.
correct, I agree
Reviews did play a role in my selection of HiFi products from PS and other brands. Generally speaking, I was never disappointed. However, there were instances when the reviews were done in a different context (other components, room acoustics, cabling, source material, taste of the reviewer) and I had to work harder to “squeeze” better performance out, which is commonplace.
I’m not saying what you say does not go on, but that is not experience of the Uk review process.
2 examples:
When the 1st Krell SACD player was reviewed by the leading Uk magazine by its leading reviewer, he really slated it, so much so that the uk importer, who were the biggest importer of us and Italian gear never leant him another piece of kit to review again.
I bought a Dan d’ Agostino amp that was used by the reviewer from the uk dealer who loaned the magazine the unit for review.
I think we must also keep in mind that most probably no reviewer (maybe except of those who have their own websites with ad income) could afford the gear he owns from his pure writing job.
We all also see ad campaigns from distributors who just got a good review in exactly those magazine releases they place increasing ads now for a few months, which then go down again to normal level. Usually in exactly those releases with the review, the need for additional ads would be the lowest because that gear gets attention enough by the review in this moment.
Musical Fidelity is a brand that I used for a long time. I bought MF based on reviews and sound rather than measurements. Likewise, I used Naim Audio products and Rega products based on sound and “subjective” reviews. I never regretted those purchases. The inability of HiFi or High End start-ups to push their products (probably of excellent quality) for reviews resembles the case of all technology start-ups. Many end up being swallowed by larger ones. There are many buried gems I bet. I can only congratulate those who manage to push a review especially in a respected magazine. Everybody needs testimonials from experts and others, even when applying for a job, a loan, or whatever. People make choices, and they make them based on reviews, listening, a combination of both. Some are not fortunate to listen before buying and it is up to them to take the dive. I gambled a few times, and the reviews were magnificent. I visited a showroom of Devialet. He demoed the all in one Devialet using Wilson, German Physiks, and Focal speakers. It was not my sound. I went for PS Audio, and I am happy. So simple: trusting Bob Harley, John Atkinson, or Ken Kessler is no more complicated than trusting you MP. Next election you vote for the trustworthy one. Pardon the typos, I am using my mobile.
If start-ups don’t sort out their marketing plan before they start, they deserve to fail. Crowdfunding is good because it’s a captive market.
I’ve been to two Devialet stores, both in Paris. The main store in Rue Saumur, looks great, sounds truly terrible both because of the acoustics and the speakers they had in use. A place to look, not listen. I actually went there to collect some records. The other one was in the Palais Garnier (we’d gone to Paris on that occasion mainly to go to the ballet). The store is inside the opera house, it has a very good acoustic, I heard the Devialet Reactor and subsequently bought one. My wife loves it and now has it in her clinic.
When I bought Devialet Expert, I had a demo at a proper dealer with sensible listening rooms.
You mention ‘marketing plan’: I assume you are on a decent retainer with both Harbeth and Devialet. It’s like spotting a needle in a haystack to find a post where you do not mention said manufacturers.
“C’mon man.” Could you be any more insulting of Americans? What a ridiculous thing to say.
My first and last post on this (IMO) condescending failure of an analogy.
“Good day, Sir. I said good day!”
— Fez
He is always theatrical and stagy. I put it down to his inner ballet dancer…
I think that the last thing a small niche stereo manufacturer has is a “marketing plan”. I feel the reason that local small builders of quality high performance equipment end up on a larger stage is due to product performance and peer to peer reporting rather than a “marketing plan”. There are literally hundreds of quality local manufacturers that most of us never heard of but in spite of no “marketing plan” are surviving just fine thank you.
I do respect 6moons.com for their position and perspective on the difficulties of running an online audio site, i.e.; readers who expect content for free, manufacturers who expect reviewers to work for free, perceptions that every aspect of the reviewing business is corrupt, etc. They clearly lay out their protocols and expectations for manufacturers and disclose their financial involvements and incentives in each review. Many object to their clearly stated policy “you have to pay us at least a minimal fee” to get reviewed but I can certainly see a valid case being made that 6moons policy is better than the status quo at other review sites. The link is 6Moons statement about how to get a product reviewed on their site. I’ve been reading their reviews for years and while I can’t recall them outright calling a product terrible their reviewers generally write reviews that contrast and compare to other market competitors. As a result, there are varying levels of enthusiasm (or lack thereof) in their final conclusions.
I read his statement and procedures. It is great to see this all upfront.
I gave the post a like because if a showroom fails a product, so could anything in the chain, but nothing could fail a product more than the product itself. Customers are educated and there’s social media. The fact that people come for more, is very important, and capturing consumer rating is quite significant. I use it whenever it’s available.
I do not agree that a small business or a start up deserves to die if their marketing is not up to scratch. Governments have a responsibility to support them, and there’s funding and professional advice available in many countries, in addition to venture capital.
There may be small business funding, but a VC is not going to put money into a product if there is no plan for getting it to market. As you may well know, most VC money goes into 2nd and 3rd stage companies, it very rarely goes into start-ups.
I’m doing a new office. I bought new speakers. As expected, when the room was bare, they were totally unlistenable. Now with about two thirds of the furniture fitted and plenty of books, it is a lot better. It still fails the clap test and is too reverberant and in one place it rings. A small rug 110 x 170 made a huge difference. I plan to clad the rear wall with absorber as well as the first reflection point on the right hand side. I cannot start with this until the rest of the furniture turns up in 3 weeks. It’s getting there, slowly.
When over a period of weeks you hear a pair of speakers change completely, with some way to go, it makes you think how subjective the whole thing is when you don’t know the review test conditions. I will end up tuning the room to how I want the speakers to sound. This is quite normal, with a mix of diffusion and absorption, and will vary depending on the output of the speakers.
Overall, as a consumer, I consider audio reviews generally worthless. What is needed are dealers with good listening rooms and the appropriate demo stock. I am fortunate in having several in close proximity, so it is not a problem. I appreciate many people do not and that’s just their hard luck. Frankly, if I was buying a product that I was going to spend thousands of hours using, I would drive or fly to a dealer to make that decision.