Most are shills, whether they realize it or not. Few are liars. Most are just lacking the audio knowledge required to be competent reviewers. For example, if an audio company sends Bruce here a product that sucks, and Bruce says "This product sucks", that audio company will never offer another product to Bruce to review. First thing reviewers learn: don't bite the hand that feeds ya. Even the big boys are guilty. Stereophile will review Wilson speakers, do measurements that show the drivers NOT starting or stopping at the same time, one or more drivers wired in negative polarity but say "This indicates optimal crossover design" Beg to differ. Music is NOT recorded that way (recording engineer here) The midrange driver should not suck IN while the Tweeter and woofer pushes out. That's CRAP design. If Stereophile said as much, Wilson would pull their ads. The measurements are there for all who understand them to see. Then we have to total shills like Randy over at Cheapaudioman. As dumb as a box of rocks, about audio yet has 250,000 subs. Randy just did a "Best speakers between $500-1K" video. The first "Best speaker" on his list has baffle reflections, drivers wired in reverse polarity, peaks in the tweeter, cabinet and port resonances, stored energy in the low frequencies, poor frequency response. Randy also admittedly has hearing damage from his submarine days. I liken it to asking a color blind man his advice on 4K tv's. Randy bills himself as the "Cheapaudioman" yet there is not one cheap component in his own system. Is that a shill or do you have another word for it? I correct Randy on literally every lie he tells only to have my corrections deleted. I see other reviewers like Andrew Robinson saying "Who cares" about crossover design, topology or parts quality. I see still others who ONLY care about directivity in speakers. Others still with glass on 3 surfaces of the listening room. Others still with 50 pair of speakers in the room he's testing in. In other words, a whole lot of audio idiots claiming to be reviewers. ANYONE can be a professional audio reviewer on TH-cam. All ya need is a camera. Are YOU a shill Bruce? Not sure but ya sure seem to have a whole lot of gear in your house. How much of it was free? Give us an item by item tour of the free gear in your home. You previously said you give some to needy family members. If companies are GIVING you product, it's hard to be honest about reviews of said company.
I'm sure many audiophiles wonder about that. Reviewers who have over ten thousand views and universal credibility can make or break a product, or at least affect its sales. With ones like that; who knows what goes on. Free equipment offers, money offers, trip offers, trips with the company secretary offers. Who knows? Maybe it's common, maybe it's rare. Let's hope it's the latter. "I ate tuna sandwiches in my lunchbox for 9 months when I could have been eating out at restaurants, to afford that DAC.
Hello Bruce. I assure you I am not trolling, nor would I ever contemplate it. The concerns I raise are a genuine attempt to make the audio hobby better and better understood. Lets start with a basic precept: There's a lot of crappy products out there and most of them are not cheap. Conversely, there are some really great products to be had. This leaves us with a very basic question that is more important now that brick and mortar audio stores are rapidly gaining anachronism status. I'm sure you've noticed that most of the stores are now almost totally devoted to "vintage" (read "used") equipment with very few showrooms available for new product. So, question: How do we tell the gems from the junk? The answer to that is, that over time consumers are becoming more and more reliant on online "reviewers" to help them sort it out. So now, lets ask the question: What constitutes a helpful review? I can tell you right up front that, for 95% of the electronics out there today, spending 15 minutes talking about Bass, Mids and Highs, while waving the device around in your hands is not it. In fact, given the flowery, often made up language of subjective reviewers this often creates more confusion than anything else. It is seen as a sales pitch, because that is exactly what it is... they're trying to convince people to buy. What a consumer wants to know is whether the thing will work with their gear, whether the features operate as depicted and whether the thing is going to die on them. A good review will... + Detail and test all inputs and outputs. + Detail and test all features. + Explain the device's operation. + Demonstrate any menus or settings. + Give impressions about quality of workmanship. + Relate any problems or inappropriate behaviours. + Relate compatibility with published standards. + Make recommendations about relative value. + Talk about sound quality. Consumers aren't just worrying about how good it sounds... They want to know if it's a good purchase or a waste of money. To give an example: The SU-1 DAC was very well reviewed by over a dozen channels. Everyone was talking about how good it sounds. But when I brought one in for testing and hooked it up to my Windows driven PC, it completely shut down the onscreen volume control and media buttons on the keyboard. Totally useless to me or anyone else using a wireless keyboard to control volume! Not one of the many reviewers even mentioned that it was not Windows compatible... not one. So when we talk about reviews, how about we don't explain how you get your samples or what TH-cam entails ... how about we discuss the quality of information you are imparting and how it does or does not help your viewers.
Bingo and a half !!... Some of the equipment that gave me the most fun didn't even have the best sound quality....but it was good. Talking about the Carver C-4000 preamp. There was a built in dynamic range expander, noise reduction circuit, Sonic Holography which made the instruments focus snap into place and reveal great depth and seperation between instruments. Seperate bass and treble controls for the left channel and the right channel.A real blessing if you have absorptive drapes on one side of the room. Also it had a time delay circuit for two rear channel speakers, which delayed the sound to the rear channel speakers to create the longer paths of sound reflecting back from the farther away walls of a very big environment.
I think we're touching on several issues here. One that I note is that when a new speaker or the such comes out (e.g. Klipsch 600M II, Elac Debut 3, WiiM streamer, etc.), it seems like the reviews are all over TH-cam, talking about how great the product is. That gives the appearance of paid endorsement, even when it may be nothing other than new product euphoria or keeping the channel relevant by doing new product reviews. Obviously, some reviews are more critical of the product than others, but these rushed reviews all generally seem to speak about how great the product is, which seems suspicious to the lay person. Second, is how deep down the audiophile rabbit hole does one go before they question the diminishing point of return, of even their own sanity. For example, speaker cables: I find it difficult to believe that a pair of $20k speaker cables have any appreciable sound difference/sonic impact from a $30 roll of 12 gauge ovygen-free copper stranded wire that I get at the local hardware mega store. Heck, I just saw one channel reviewing $80,000 speaker stands and talking about significant a difference they made vs other stands. Really? I do believe that there is a difference in components and partially their pairing (e.g., an Accuphase connected to some Focal speakers may give a completely different sonic profile than a McIntosh connected to some Klipsch La Scalas - or even swapping the amps between the speakers to achieve yet a different sound). They key with HiFi is that you have to set your budget and hear the equipment in your home in the component combination that you've chosen and, obviously that can be hard as there are so many options to choose from for each component - which brings us back to the audio reviewers...
On your second point... For many audiophiles, cables are like a religion. They discuss the differences between brands and models with some noteworthy passion in their conversation. They even have parties where they show off their new cables. Not only have these guys been totally sucked in by snake oil, they are actively recruiting new members to the cult. When I see videos with opening lines like _"At some point every stereo system needs high end speaker cables"_ my skin just crawls. How can someone make such a pitiably stupid declaration? Well, it's because they're being paid to. Paid by these snake oil companies to tout their products and spread their pseudoscience. Our friend Bruce, here, sounds like he's pretty much on the level and aside from making the mistake of opening this topic, he seems clever enough. But that simply is NOT true of a significant number of online presenters. If fact some of the ones with the highest view counts are the biggest shysters in the game. Their real skill is being popular among idiots... not audio electronics. This of course begs a rather ugly question: How do we tell these people apart without a program?
even my $40 speaker wire i can hear an improvement, and another that was $160 i can hear a difference (although it sounded worse). at first with my old cone speaker i could not hear a difference . but when i upgraded to better speakers GodenEar BRX with AMT tweeters , i do hear a difference. my point is either your gear is not resolving enough, or your hearing, or your source (u should use a lossless source like Apple Music, not compressed spotify)
. 6:32 This must be April Fools. Where in the world does this person get the idea that if they put in the time they should be compensated? So the slower, most inefficient and unwanted efforts should get paid the most? They put in the most time right? Money is the compensation for Demand not time. I spend a lot of time scratching my back-side, but no one compensates me. Acid Jazz, Funk & Brass 🔈🔉🔊
Most are shills, whether they realize it or not. Few are liars. Most are just lacking the audio knowledge required to be competent reviewers.
For example, if an audio company sends Bruce here a product that sucks, and Bruce says "This product sucks", that audio company will never offer another product to Bruce to review. First thing reviewers learn: don't bite the hand that feeds ya. Even the big boys are guilty. Stereophile will review Wilson speakers, do measurements that show the drivers NOT starting or stopping at the same time, one or more drivers wired in negative polarity but say "This indicates optimal crossover design" Beg to differ. Music is NOT recorded that way (recording engineer here) The midrange driver should not suck IN while the Tweeter and woofer pushes out. That's CRAP design. If Stereophile said as much, Wilson would pull their ads. The measurements are there for all who understand them to see.
Then we have to total shills like Randy over at Cheapaudioman. As dumb as a box of rocks, about audio yet has 250,000 subs. Randy just did a "Best speakers between $500-1K" video.
The first "Best speaker" on his list has baffle reflections, drivers wired in reverse polarity, peaks in the tweeter, cabinet and port resonances, stored energy in the low frequencies, poor frequency response. Randy also admittedly has hearing damage from his submarine days. I liken it to asking a color blind man his advice on 4K tv's.
Randy bills himself as the "Cheapaudioman" yet there is not one cheap component in his own system. Is that a shill or do you have another word for it?
I correct Randy on literally every lie he tells only to have my corrections deleted.
I see other reviewers like Andrew Robinson saying "Who cares" about crossover design, topology or parts quality.
I see still others who ONLY care about directivity in speakers.
Others still with glass on 3 surfaces of the listening room.
Others still with 50 pair of speakers in the room he's testing in.
In other words, a whole lot of audio idiots claiming to be reviewers. ANYONE can be a professional audio reviewer on TH-cam.
All ya need is a camera.
Are YOU a shill Bruce? Not sure but ya sure seem to have a whole lot of gear in your house. How much of it was free?
Give us an item by item tour of the free gear in your home. You previously said you give some to needy family members.
If companies are GIVING you product, it's hard to be honest about reviews of said company.
I won’t even watch cheapaudio man
yep i agree with you that if a reviewer borrows then returns (with no intention of keeping) is a no no because that raises prices for everyone.
I'm sure many audiophiles wonder about that. Reviewers who have over ten thousand views and universal credibility can make or break a product, or at least affect its sales. With ones like that; who knows what goes on. Free equipment offers, money offers, trip offers, trips with the company secretary offers. Who knows?
Maybe it's common, maybe it's rare. Let's hope it's the latter. "I ate tuna sandwiches in my lunchbox for 9 months when I could have been eating out at restaurants, to afford that DAC.
Let's hope stuff like that doesn't happen often....unless I become a reviewer.
Short answer: YES.
Proof is in the Pudding 🍮
Hello Bruce. I assure you I am not trolling, nor would I ever contemplate it. The concerns I raise are a genuine attempt to make the audio hobby better and better understood.
Lets start with a basic precept: There's a lot of crappy products out there and most of them are not cheap. Conversely, there are some really great products to be had.
This leaves us with a very basic question that is more important now that brick and mortar audio stores are rapidly gaining anachronism status. I'm sure you've noticed that most of the stores are now almost totally devoted to "vintage" (read "used") equipment with very few showrooms available for new product.
So, question: How do we tell the gems from the junk?
The answer to that is, that over time consumers are becoming more and more reliant on online "reviewers" to help them sort it out.
So now, lets ask the question: What constitutes a helpful review?
I can tell you right up front that, for 95% of the electronics out there today, spending 15 minutes talking about Bass, Mids and Highs, while waving the device around in your hands is not it. In fact, given the flowery, often made up language of subjective reviewers this often creates more confusion than anything else. It is seen as a sales pitch, because that is exactly what it is... they're trying to convince people to buy.
What a consumer wants to know is whether the thing will work with their gear, whether the features operate as depicted and whether the thing is going to die on them.
A good review will...
+ Detail and test all inputs and outputs.
+ Detail and test all features.
+ Explain the device's operation.
+ Demonstrate any menus or settings.
+ Give impressions about quality of workmanship.
+ Relate any problems or inappropriate behaviours.
+ Relate compatibility with published standards.
+ Make recommendations about relative value.
+ Talk about sound quality.
Consumers aren't just worrying about how good it sounds...
They want to know if it's a good purchase or a waste of money.
To give an example: The SU-1 DAC was very well reviewed by over a dozen channels. Everyone was talking about how good it sounds. But when I brought one in for testing and hooked it up to my Windows driven PC, it completely shut down the onscreen volume control and media buttons on the keyboard. Totally useless to me or anyone else using a wireless keyboard to control volume! Not one of the many reviewers even mentioned that it was not Windows compatible... not one.
So when we talk about reviews, how about we don't explain how you get your samples or what TH-cam entails ... how about we discuss the quality of information you are imparting and how it does or does not help your viewers.
Lol. Bro, all you do is troll
Bingo and a half !!... Some of the equipment that gave me the most fun didn't even have the best sound quality....but it was good. Talking about the Carver C-4000 preamp. There was a built in dynamic range expander, noise reduction circuit, Sonic Holography which made the instruments focus snap into place and reveal great depth and seperation between instruments. Seperate bass and treble controls for the left channel and the right channel.A real blessing if you have absorptive drapes on one side of the room. Also it had a time delay circuit for two rear channel speakers, which delayed the sound to the rear channel speakers to create the longer paths of sound reflecting back from the farther away walls of a very big environment.
Help write War and Peace? ✌️
I think we're touching on several issues here. One that I note is that when a new speaker or the such comes out (e.g. Klipsch 600M II, Elac Debut 3, WiiM streamer, etc.), it seems like the reviews are all over TH-cam, talking about how great the product is. That gives the appearance of paid endorsement, even when it may be nothing other than new product euphoria or keeping the channel relevant by doing new product reviews. Obviously, some reviews are more critical of the product than others, but these rushed reviews all generally seem to speak about how great the product is, which seems suspicious to the lay person.
Second, is how deep down the audiophile rabbit hole does one go before they question the diminishing point of return, of even their own sanity. For example, speaker cables: I find it difficult to believe that a pair of $20k speaker cables have any appreciable sound difference/sonic impact from a $30 roll of 12 gauge ovygen-free copper stranded wire that I get at the local hardware mega store. Heck, I just saw one channel reviewing $80,000 speaker stands and talking about significant a difference they made vs other stands. Really?
I do believe that there is a difference in components and partially their pairing (e.g., an Accuphase connected to some Focal speakers may give a completely different sonic profile than a McIntosh connected to some Klipsch La Scalas - or even swapping the amps between the speakers to achieve yet a different sound).
They key with HiFi is that you have to set your budget and hear the equipment in your home in the component combination that you've chosen and, obviously that can be hard as there are so many options to choose from for each component - which brings us back to the audio reviewers...
On your second point...
For many audiophiles, cables are like a religion. They discuss the differences between brands and models with some noteworthy passion in their conversation. They even have parties where they show off their new cables. Not only have these guys been totally sucked in by snake oil, they are actively recruiting new members to the cult.
When I see videos with opening lines like _"At some point every stereo system needs high end speaker cables"_ my skin just crawls. How can someone make such a pitiably stupid declaration?
Well, it's because they're being paid to. Paid by these snake oil companies to tout their products and spread their pseudoscience.
Our friend Bruce, here, sounds like he's pretty much on the level and aside from making the mistake of opening this topic, he seems clever enough. But that simply is NOT true of a significant number of online presenters. If fact some of the ones with the highest view counts are the biggest shysters in the game. Their real skill is being popular among idiots... not audio electronics.
This of course begs a rather ugly question: How do we tell these people apart without a program?
All good points, especially the bit about super wire and furniture promoters.
even my $40 speaker wire i can hear an improvement, and another that was $160 i can hear a difference (although it sounded worse).
at first with my old cone speaker i could not hear a difference .
but when i upgraded to better speakers GodenEar BRX with AMT tweeters , i do hear a difference.
my point is either your gear is not resolving enough, or your hearing, or your source (u should use a lossless source like Apple Music, not compressed spotify)
I trust your judgement!! Please continue
. 6:32 This must be April Fools. Where in the world does this person get the idea that if they put in the time they should be compensated? So the slower, most inefficient and unwanted efforts should get paid the most? They put in the most time right?
Money is the compensation for Demand not time. I spend a lot of time scratching my back-side, but no one compensates me.
Acid Jazz, Funk & Brass 🔈🔉🔊
Great video what I love about your video is that there honest .
I really appreciate that Great job.
Most reviews I see are really like Demos and not reviews and all reviews or most say it’s their opinion. I watch “reviews” just to see new gear.
Yep. It needs to be about a buying decision, not advertising.
Nice video, I think there’s a lot of truth in your remarks, but tbf there are some good reviews,but ultimately demoing is the only way to