|
|
Post by geebo on Aug 23, 2013 14:16:43 GMT -5
While I am likely opening myself up to some ridicule here, I wanted to comment on the use of "colorful" adjectives in professional reviews. Actually, first, can I just say, Ed, I don't get you sometime. I mean I have tremendous respect for you and think you're a character, but you're a hard man to nail down. Clearly you love Emotiva, you're what I've dubbed in the office as a super fan. Don't take that as a knock, believe me, high-end companies this industry over would kill for a customer spokesperson like you. I mean that. If more folks in this hobby were like you -okay maybe not JUST like you  -it (the hobby) would likely be stronger for it. All that aside, I'm perplexed by your response to the Carver review. Now that Carver is a) part of the Emotiva family and b) has seen its prices slashed by half in most cases, I would think, despite maybe not liking tubes, that you'd see them (Carver products) in a similar light as you do Emotiva. I'm not saying that the Carver products should be given a "pass" based solely on their affiliations, but tube vs. solid state aside, there is a market for them (tubes) and to each their own. I suppose you're just voicing your opinion, and that's cool, it's just that the tone took me by surprise. If I misinterpreted your intentions then please excuse me. Okay, back to what I really wanted to discuss. Professional reviews. I'm of two minds when it comes to professional reviews, which is especially difficult for me given that, well, I'm a professional reviewer in some circles. On the one hand, for many they are a valuable resource for many and on the other, they can be complete and utter BS. Moreover, as time passes, I believe the need or importance of professional reviews are going to fall more and more by the wayside in favor of true user experience(s) like those shared on sites like this. I've said this for years, which why I was never that popular in certain circles. At the end of the day, what with sites like Yelp and the like -not to mention specialty forums such as this -who's opinion is likely going to carry more weight? The guy who gets everything sent to him for free, or Tom (fake name), a father of three earning $60K, who saved up to buy the one AV item a year he can afford. Tom's feelings towards said product, even if he isn't the biggest audiophile or greatest writer, are likely going to carry more weight in the long run for, well, others will relate. No one, and I mean this, no one relates to Sr. Editor What's His Nuts who says you have to drop everything and buy Wilson MAXXs because he did. All that being said, colorful adjectives, while sometimes silly, do have their place. They may not resonate with more knowledgeable folks like all of you reading this, but for people looking to join in on the fun, or get a few quick recommendations on where to focus their attention for their next purchase, they do help. Not everything can be a technical manual or black and white. I'm guilty of using colorful descriptors all the time, and I do it because along with trying to communicate the facts surrounding a product, I'm also trying to convey the emotional response I garnered from it as well. Technical specs are well and good, we know this, but when really trying to connect we always try and appeal to one's emotions. Do some of the descriptors get a little outlandish? Yeah, they do. But at the same time, it can be part of the fun. I don't think anyone should make their purchasing decision(s) based solely on a single review or point of view, which is why I urge folks to make up their own minds and use what I say merely as a guide, but nevertheless some folks go with what the pros tell them to do. This is why specialty AV publications still have some relevance from a sales perspective and will continue for the foreseeable future. But like I said earlier, it won't last forever. But also at the same time, it's okay for people to try and capture their excitement the best way they know how, even if, at times, we don't always agree with the word choices etc. That was very pepperminty, Andrew.   |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Aug 23, 2013 14:23:53 GMT -5
While I appreciate the creative writing of many professional reviews, where I struggle is with WHY the words that are used are used. Gritty? Silky? Organic? Transparent? If you're using words that nobody can agree on what they mean, then that kind of defeats the purpose. Most of the time they just make you feel warm and fuzzy like it's something you should buy. It's a cheap gimmick. I get, resolvable (this could be a stretch in some contexts), distorted, clipping, muddy, clear, bright. What I don't get is phrases like "a nicely layered depth perspective". Who could possibly agree on what a nicely layered depth perspective is? My setup is more silky than yours?  Perhaps Andrew said it best....... in alluding to it being about "excitement" and having some fun. I just feel like there is a fine line between that fun excitement and sometimes stuff that reads like a snake-oil ad. This amp has youth! It's the fountain of youth and you'll live forever! |
|
|
|
Post by Porscheguy on Aug 23, 2013 14:24:18 GMT -5
While I am likely opening myself up to some ridicule here, I wanted to comment on the use of "colorful" adjectives in professional reviews. Actually, first, can I just say, Ed, I don't get you sometime. I mean I have tremendous respect for you and think you're a character, but you're a hard man to nail down. Clearly you love Emotiva, you're what I've dubbed in the office as a super fan. Don't take that as a knock, believe me, high-end companies this industry over would kill for a customer spokesperson like you. I mean that. If more folks in this hobby were like you -okay maybe not JUST like you -it (the hobby) would likely be stronger for it. All that aside, I'm perplexed by your response to the Carver review. Now that Carver is a) part of the Emotiva family and b) has seen its prices slashed by half in most cases, I would think, despite maybe not liking tubes, that you'd see them (Carver products) in a similar light as you do Emotiva. I'm not saying that the Carver products should be given a "pass" based solely on their affiliations, but tube vs. solid state aside, there is a market for them (tubes) and to each their own. I suppose you're just voicing your opinion, and that's cool, it's just that the tone took me by surprise. If I misinterpreted your intentions then please excuse me. Okay, back to what I really wanted to discuss. Professional reviews. I'm of two minds when it comes to professional reviews, which is especially difficult for me given that, well, I'm a professional reviewer in some circles. On the one hand, for many they are a valuable resource for many and on the other, they can be complete and utter BS. Moreover, as time passes, I believe the need or importance of professional reviews are going to fall more and more by the wayside in favor of true user experience(s) like those shared on sites like this. I've said this for years, which why I was never that popular in certain circles. At the end of the day, what with sites like Yelp and the like -not to mention specialty forums such as this -who's opinion is likely going to carry more weight? The guy who gets everything sent to him for free, or Tom (fake name), a father of three earning $60K, who saved up to buy the one AV item a year he can afford. Tom's feelings towards said product, even if he isn't the biggest audiophile or greatest writer, are likely going to carry more weight in the long run for, well, others will relate. No one, and I mean this, no one relates to Sr. Editor What's His Nuts who says you have to drop everything and buy Wilson MAXXs because he did. All that being said, colorful adjectives, while sometimes silly, do have their place. They may not resonate with more knowledgeable folks like all of you reading this, but for people looking to join in on the fun, or get a few quick recommendations on where to focus their attention for their next purchase, they do help. Not everything can be a technical manual or black and white. I'm guilty of using colorful descriptors all the time, and I do it because along with trying to communicate the facts surrounding a product, I'm also trying to convey the emotional response I garnered from it as well. Technical specs are well and good, we know this, but when really trying to connect we always try and appeal to one's emotions. Do some of the descriptors get a little outlandish? Yeah, they do. But at the same time, it can be part of the fun. I don't think anyone should make their purchasing decision(s) based solely on a single review or point of view, which is why I urge folks to make up their own minds and use what I say merely as a guide, but nevertheless some folks go with what the pros tell them to do. This is why specialty AV publications still have some relevance from a sales perspective and will continue for the foreseeable future. But like I said earlier, it won't last forever. But also at the same time, it's okay for people to try and capture their excitement the best way they know how, even if, at times, we don't always agree with the word choices etc. That was very pepperminty, Andrew. Your lucid thoughts wax eloquently.... |
|
|
|
Post by geebo on Aug 23, 2013 14:25:33 GMT -5
That was very pepperminty, Andrew. Your lucid thoughts wax eloquently.... Hey, I don't sprinkle around. |
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Aug 23, 2013 14:29:11 GMT -5
That was very pepperminty, Andrew. I have a really bad craving for a Wintogreen lifesaver now. Thanks a lot!   |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Robinson on Aug 23, 2013 14:52:00 GMT -5
And please stop defending Emotiva at every turn. I might be wrong, but I'm sure it's not your job to second guess forum members. Wow. Copy that. I didn't view it quite that way, though I find the criticism ironic coming from you of all people Ed. I'll think twice before chiming in next time. |
|
|
|
Post by Porscheguy on Aug 23, 2013 15:28:43 GMT -5
And please stop defending Emotiva at every turn. I might be wrong, but I'm sure it's not your job to second guess forum members. Wow. Copy that. I didn't view it quite that way, though I find the criticism ironic coming from you of all people Ed. I'll think twice before chiming in next time. Andrew, please point out to me where I said something unfair or bad about the BM-20? I cannot find it, nor could several other forum members that I have spoke to. You took me to task for something that I did not do, at least not that I can see. I wouldn't mind you coming to Emotiva's rescue if I called it a piece of junk or I said it sounded terrible like jamescox50 did in his returning the UMC-200 thread. Here's what you said in that thread "While I would ask that James give the UMC-200 another shot, it's okay if it wasn't his cup of tea and I would urge against framing arguments for the UMC-200 around the notion that James somehow doesn't know what he's talking about and/or hearing. Sound quality is largely subjective, and if James is looking for something different then it would be more productive for us to help him find his audiophile center, rather than get too hung up on whether he's right or wrong for not liking the UMC-200." You defended his comments.. You also need to remember that Emotiva built it's whole business model on poo pooing receivers with wimpy power sections telling us that clean, brute power is the way the make wholesale changes in your SQ and dynamics. A big deal made by all that Emotiva amps deliver that power cleanly to all channels with no smoke in mirrors, no fancy footwork. You get what the ratings say and I agree. So along comes a 10 wpc amp with a 60 year old circuit topology and a $2100 price tag and I'm supposed to think what? The same power and performance as my XPR-1's? Was it wrong to call it a little underpowered for inefficient speakers? That's all I said. OK, guilty as charged. I did not disrespect that product in at all but you can't have it both ways.. |
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Aug 23, 2013 15:52:05 GMT -5
When we were in grade school there was always a smart alec clique, that sat in the back of the room continually making wise cracks between each other and giggling and disrupting the class, being condescending to those trying to absorb the lessons. I guess we are seeing what they turn into when they grow up.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1960broookwood on Aug 23, 2013 17:09:05 GMT -5
When we were in grade school there was always a smart alec clique, that sat in the back of the room continually making wise cracks between each other and giggling and disrupting the class, being condescending to those trying to absorb the lessons. I guess we are seeing what they turn into when they grow up. Got to agree with Ed--you can have it one way or the other. Emo has become a company of polar opposites .One or the other works but both are a hard sell-------. |
|
bootman
Emo VIPs 
Typing useless posts on internet forums....
Posts: 9,358
|
Post by bootman on Aug 23, 2013 17:34:29 GMT -5
When we were in grade school there was always a smart alec clique, that sat in the back of the room continually making wise cracks between each other and giggling and disrupting the class, being condescending to those trying to absorb the lessons. I guess we are seeing what they turn into when they grow up. Got to agree with Ed--you can have it one way or the other. Emo has become a company of polar opposites .One or the other works but both are a hard sell-------. I don't see it that way. It is a business and successful businesses tend to cater to a wide audience. I do not see those that like the Carver designed tube amps as being the same type of customer that buys the XPR-1s so I don't see where selling both is contradictory in any way. I can see some of us here owning both in different systems for different purposes. What is wrong with that? |
|
DYohn
Emo VIPs
Posts: 18,494
|
Post by DYohn on Aug 23, 2013 17:43:58 GMT -5
I don't see it that way. It is a business and successful businesses tend to cater to a wide audience. I do not see those that like the Carver designed tube amps as being the same type of customer that buys the XPR-1s so I don't see where selling both is contradictory in any way. I can see some of us here owning both in different systems for different purposes. What is wrong with that? Well said. |
|
|
|
Post by Andrew Robinson on Aug 23, 2013 17:48:37 GMT -5
I don't see it that way. It is a business and successful businesses tend to cater to a wide audience. I do not see those that like the Carver designed tube amps as being the same type of customer that buys the XPR-1s so I don't see where selling both is contradictory in any way. I can see some of us here owning both in different systems for different purposes. What is wrong with that? Well said. While I think a portion of this thread has gotten a bit off track -my apologies for being the root cause -I agree with both Bootman and DYohn. Having heard both the Carver amps as well as many an Emotiva one, I can say, definitively, there is definitely room for both as they both possess radically different sounds. |
|
|
|
Post by 1960broookwood on Aug 23, 2013 17:50:02 GMT -5
Got to agree with Ed--you can have it one way or the other. Emo has become a company of polar opposites .One or the other works but both are a hard sell-------. I don't see it that way. It is a business and successful businesses tend to cater to a wide audience. I do not see those that like the Carver designed tube amps as being the same type of customer that buys the XPR-1s so I don't see where selling both is contradictory in any way. I can see some of us here owning both in different systems for different purposes. What is wrong with that? Look at Cadillac and the Cimmaron--those in the know wouldn't pay the long dollar for a fancy Chevy Cavalier. See also Cadillac XLR and Corvette--or any of the reasons Mercury no longer exists. |
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Aug 23, 2013 17:50:51 GMT -5
When we were in grade school there was always a smart alec clique, that sat in the back of the room continually making wise cracks between each other and giggling and disrupting the class, being condescending to those trying to absorb the lessons. I guess we are seeing what they turn into when they grow up. Got to agree with Ed--you can have it one way or the other. Emo has become a company of polar opposites .One or the other works but both are a hard sell-------. Tube and ss both work in the hi fi arena. High power and flea power both work. Inefficient multi driver and hi efficient single driver speakers work. Monitor and full range speakers both work. Active and passive speakers and subs both work. Digital and analog both work. Hell, even pro and consumer products work in a carefull application. What are you talking about, Mr. Monobrow? |
|
|
|
Post by mgbpuff on Aug 23, 2013 17:56:03 GMT -5
I don't see it that way. It is a business and successful businesses tend to cater to a wide audience. I do not see those that like the Carver designed tube amps as being the same type of customer that buys the XPR-1s so I don't see where selling both is contradictory in any way. I can see some of us here owning both in different systems for different purposes. What is wrong with that? Look at Cadillac and the Cimmaron--those in the know wouldn't pay the long dollar for a fancy Chevy Cavalier. See also Cadillac XLR and Corvette--or any of the reasons Mercury no longer exists. Not the same - Emotiva's products are all in the affordable range. They have reduced prices on the Carver and Sherbourn brands. They are trying to bring different audio tastes to all. If a given line doesn't sell, I'm sure it won't be around long. But the market will determine that. |
|
|
|
Post by 1960broookwood on Aug 23, 2013 17:56:08 GMT -5
Got to agree with Ed--you can have it one way or the other. Emo has become a company of polar opposites .One or the other works but both are a hard sell-------. Tube and ss both work in the hi fi arena. High power and flea power both work. Inefficient multi driver and hi efficient single driver speakers work. Monitor and full range speakers both work. Active and passive speakers and subs both work. Digital and analog both work. Hell, even pro and consumer products work in a carefull application. What are you talking about, Mr. Monobrow? You say Neanderthal like that is a bad thing--LOL  |
|
|
|
Post by lionear on Dec 15, 2013 14:35:58 GMT -5
I just came across this thread and I think it brings up some important points.
Back in the day, HP of the Absolute Sound magazine began to use terms like height, width, depth, focus, dimensionality, and how all this added up to something called "soundstage". And there was macro-dynamics and micro-dynamics and a few other terms. He took some pains to define them and cite examples. For example he'd say I heard this, with this equipment, while playing this track on this record. And this allowed anyone who had access to similar gear to look for the same. And I have to admit that I did like his terminology.
(I have to admit that we didn't have access to the equipment that HP listened to. I was, however, part of a circle of audiophiles who'd listen to each other's sound systems, as well as see how specific gear would sound in different systems. And we could buy the same records that HP listened to. We'd hear a particular LP on different systems to see whether we could hear the same things that HP heard. This helped us understand what HP was talking about.)
Over the years, many reviewers have used HP's terms without understanding them, or created their own terms without defining them or using them consistently from one review to the next. There's no doubt that there's a lot of BS out there.
Done correctly, however, I don't think it's BS. And it's essential for our hobby because so much of what makes audio gear good cannot be measured. I would love to see reviewers using the same terms that HP came up with all those years ago. However, if this is not possible, the challenge is for reviewers to come up with a set of terms, to define them and then to use them consistently.
|
|
-it (the hobby) would likely be stronger for it. All that aside, I'm perplexed by your response to the Carver review. Now that Carver is a) part of the Emotiva family and b) has seen its prices slashed by half in most cases, I would think, despite maybe not liking tubes, that you'd see them (Carver products) in a similar light as you do Emotiva. I'm not saying that the Carver products should be given a "pass" based solely on their affiliations, but tube vs. solid state aside, there is a market for them (tubes) and to each their own. I suppose you're just voicing your opinion, and that's cool, it's just that the tone took me by surprise. If I misinterpreted your intentions then please excuse me. 
