New Stereophile Reviewer irritates Totem and Musical Fidelity

[Ajani]

This month's Stereophile had a follow up review of the Totem Forests by Erick Lichte. Erick is a new reviewer for the mag, and I thoroughly enjoyed reading his first review (a follow up review of the Musical Fidelity 550K Superchargers)...

His review of the MF 550K was well... ummm... he didn't recommend the product in any capacity:

http://www.stereophile.com/solidpowe...mf/index5.html

That review has been credited with killing sales of the Superchargers in North America...

His latest review of the Totem Forests is not as scathing as the MF one, but it's not an 'instant recommendation' either... and it was met with a rather nasty letter in the manufacturer's comments from Totem... The review is not online yet, but you can check out discussions of it and the letter from Totem, on the Stereophile forums:

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/s...ge=0#Post79549

For those who have never read a less than stellar review for a popular product in a North American Hi-Fi mag, I suggest you read both articles... It's great to see fresh perspective and a little controversy in Hi-Fi reviews every now and again...

[recoveryone]

WOW I didn't know they still put out a magazine. I can't find it in any stores in my area.

[harley .guy07]

Wow a reviewer that does not care if what the says causes a company not to pay to advertise in their mag. I remember back when Stereo Review was like that as well before the Sound and Vision Magazine started and the whole advertising buys you good reviews thing. I am not saying it did not exist back then too they just were not so damn obvious about it like they are now. I mean a speaker could be as ugly as a Ford Pinto, Sound like Sh*&, and be priced higher than hell and the magazines will still say it is a good product because the company advertises in their mag. I see right through that when it happens and I am not saying all magazines or online publications do this but it does happen and it is insultingly obvious when it does and it gives this hobby and publications about this hobby a bad name and it makes me sick when it does.

[Feanor]

This month's Stereophile had a follow up review of the Totem Forests by Erick Lichte. Erick is a new reviewer for the mag, and I thoroughly enjoyed reading his first review (a follow up review of the Musical Fidelity 550K Superchargers)...

His review of the MF 550K was well... ummm... he didn't recommend the product in any capacity:

http://www.stereophile.com/solidpowe...mf/index5.html

That review has been credited with killing sales of the Superchargers in North America...

...

I'm not sure I follow. The MF 550K review seemed quite positive to me: what did I miss?

[Ajani]

I'm not sure I follow. The MF 550K review seemed quite positive to me: what did I miss?

The last paragraph:

Musical Fidelity's 550k Supercharger is a neat idea, and I really wanted the pair of them to transcend my system's limitations. But using them either as standalone amplifiers or to Supercharge my own amp, I found their tonal balance too bright and forward of neutral to preserve the magic of the less powerful amp strapped to them, or of the recording itself. The whole point of the Supercharger is to let your system play louder than it would be able to otherwise, but turning them up to the levels suggested by Musical Fidelity made their unforgiving sound only more prominent. While the 550K Superchargers could play loud, in other important musical ways, that was exactly what they couldn't do.

He didn't recommend the product as either a Supercharger (as they were marketed) or even as a standalone amplifier... which is the exact opposite of the previous reviews of the 550K in Stereophile....

[Feanor]

The last paragraph:

He didn't recommend the product as either a Supercharger (as they were marketed) or even as a standalone amplifier... which is the exact opposite of the previous reviews of the 550K in Stereophile....

Ah! Right you are. Comments like "bright" and "forward" wouldn't sell me an amp.

[Geoffcin]

Ah! Right you are. Comments like "bright" and "forward" wouldn't sell me an amp.

That's the trademark of a lot of the MF amps under the Kw series. Anyone who's used one of them can tell you that they can really output power into the treble. It's just what a lot of even really good speakers can use. Maybe not the reviewer's Revels, or my Maggies, but a lot of speakers could do with a dB more energy into the top octaves. I know first hand, as right now I'm using an MF A3cr to drive my big CSW T500's in my HT setup, and the extra dB of treble energy really suits them, not to mention that the dual mono design can dump a load of current when called on. It is really all about synergy. Got a laid back speaker? A MF amp might be just the ticket.

[Ajani]

Ah! Right you are. Comments like "bright" and "forward" wouldn't sell me an amp.

That would be bad enough if the 550K were just being sold as monoblocks, but keep in mind that the purpose of the 550K was to "supercharge" your system... so you would keep your existing low powered amp, and connect the speakers output of that amp to the inputs of the 550K, and then connect the 550k outputs to your speakers... The claim was that the 550K would preserve the sound quality of your flea-watt SET amp, while adding 550 Watts of power... So the last thing anyone thinking of buying the 550K for that purpose would want to hear, is that it will make your delicate tube amp sound "bright" and "forward"...

[Geoffcin]

I think the whole premise is flawed from the begining. If you like the sound from 2.5w flea power amps, then your into a kind of euphony that isn't served by power, or the speakers that can use it. Any SS amp is going to sound "bright" and "forward" compared to it.

[kexodusc]

I think the whole premise is flawed from the begining. If you like the sound from 2.5w flea power amps, then your into a kind of euphony that isn't served by power, or the speakers that can use it. Any SS amp is going to sound "bright" and "forward" compared to it.

Well said (Missed these kinds of post during your hiatus...)

As for the reviews - I can't find the comments from Totem, but I don't really think this is a big deal. If the review sort of griped over something that designer was passionate was not the case, or not fair, of course they're going to complain. And as for the reviewer, well, I kind of hate the whole process. A lot of reviewers put positive-only spins in their articles and you sort of have to read between the lines to get info out...other reviewers pick and choose a few products here and there to sacrifice so they can make a name for themselves in the review industry as a hard-ass gear-slayer, it's a cheap trick to try and establish some street cred fast. Not saying that's the case here, but I am saying how would we know?

I wouldn't make a very good reviewer. I tend to find "warm" anything boring and unrealistic so I would probably have half the audiophile world on my doorstep with torches and pitchforks.

As for Totem - they make some damn good speakers - the Rainmaker and Dreamcatcher are solid performers. The Rainmaker is scary good for the size and price. I'd put it up against my Paradigm Studio 40's in every are except bass - but my Studio 40's wouldn't sound as good in smaller room, that's for sure! The Arrow is stil competitive and sounds good. The Forest is one that I think is a good speaker, but just a tad too expensive for what it offers. Might be time for them to update their product line a bit - some of the older models have lost their competitiveness.

It doesn't help either that once upon a time Totem could export their speakers when the Canadian dollar was trading at 70 cents to the US dollar....Totem's lost 30-40% on the currency exchange since the Forest came out.

[Hyfi]

I think it's great that someone finally gives an honest review. I used to get the mag for about 10 years and was skeptical of the fact that 99.9% of the reviews were just a bunch of ass kissing. Nobody ever said a product was crap and they would not buy it.

But, I also never give too much credit to those golden ear few that reviewed every piece of equipment with the same classical music. My hearing, likes and dislikes, are going to be way different than those getting paid to help sell gear through reviews that are more an advertisement and endorsement of a product even if it was no big deal.

Also, every product they review will sound different in your home coupled with the gear that most of us can afford. I have yet to see personal systems using vacuum cleaner hose size cabling but have heard the systems in the old Soundex.

Give this guy a raise for telling it like he heard it and not just kissing ass as usual.

[Geoffcin]

I think it's great that someone finally gives an honest review. I used to get the mag for about 10 years and was skeptical of the fact that 99.9% of the reviews were just a bunch of ass kissing. Nobody ever said a product was crap and they would not buy it.

Give this guy a raise for telling it like he heard it and not just kissing ass as usual.

Very few poor products ever get reviewed so I think the occasional bad review is about all your going to get.

Stereophile has been pretty good about posting "not-so-nice reviews" but on the whole the idea is to review products that you would want to buy, not to steer you away from crap. Stereophile has a varied bunch of reviewers too, so you really gotta take it from a guy that has your tastes. I pretty much like anything that Atkinson like, but I take anything Fremer likes with a grain of salt. Other people like Fremer's taste (euphoniacs) but that's OK, audio is a big enough place for all of us. Oh, and even though I don't have Fremer's taste in audio, the guy could hear a pin drop at the crescendo of the 1812 Overture and tell you how far you dropped it. These guys didn't get their jobs caused they "kissed ass" on manufactures, they got it because they know audio and can articulate about it.

[poppachubby]

Stereophile has a varied bunch of reviewers too, so you really gotta take it from a guy that has your tastes.

That's it in a nutshell. Unless you know the reviewer's biases and tendencies, it's really a bunch of crap. There's far too many variables to put alot of trust into a review. It's the few shadier variables that keeps me sceptical.

Bottom line is, if you are gearing up to spend thousands of dollars on a high end unit, you will be auditioning or using a more reliable source for info. I think the reviews can be helpful with a smaller decision, with less at stake.

With that in mind, reviews make for interesting reading (sometimes) and that's about it. I will make decisions based on what I know, not what someone else tells me, unless I know their preferences.

I find it funny how some guys just can't bring themselves to say "nope, don't know anything about it" or "never heard it". Instead, they will begin spouting every review they've ever read on the piece, as though it's gospel. Aside from technical specs, these are all just opinions.

[Geoffcin]

Well said (Missed these kinds of post during your hiatus...)

As for the reviews - I can't find the comments from Totem, but I don't really think this is a big deal. If the review sort of griped over something that designer was passionate was not the case, or not fair, of course they're going to complain. And as for the reviewer, well, I kind of hate the whole process. A lot of reviewers put positive-only spins in their articles and you sort of have to read between the lines to get info out...other reviewers pick and choose a few products here and there to sacrifice so they can make a name for themselves in the review industry as a hard-ass gear-slayer, it's a cheap trick to try and establish some street cred fast. Not saying that's the case here, but I am saying how would we know?

I wouldn't make a very good reviewer. I tend to find "warm" anything boring and unrealistic so I would probably have half the audiophile world on my doorstep with torches and pitchforks.

As for Totem - they make some damn good speakers - the Rainmaker and Dreamcatcher are solid performers. The Rainmaker is scary good for the size and price. I'd put it up against my Paradigm Studio 40's in every are except bass - but my Studio 40's wouldn't sound as good in smaller room, that's for sure! The Arrow is stil competitive and sounds good. The Forest is one that I think is a good speaker, but just a tad too expensive for what it offers. Might be time for them to update their product line a bit - some of the older models have lost their competitiveness.

It doesn't help either that once upon a time Totem could export their speakers when the Canadian dollar was trading at 70 cents to the US dollar....Totem's lost 30-40% on the currency exchange since the Forest came out.

Why thank you my DIY genius friend! And you've touched about all the points regarding the Totem review perfectly. I can't agree more!

The loss of value for the US dollar, in addition to the prolonged recession has really pinched the Canadian audio manufacturing. Vince might have blown up on the reviewer (which is his right), but I think there's more there than meets the eye. With the perfect storm of economic trouble, the last thing they need is a reviewer picking on the fact that the speakers didn't ship with the sand for ballasting!?

[Ajani]

With the perfect storm of economic trouble, the last thing they need is a reviewer picking on the fact that the speakers didn't ship with the sand for ballasting!?

I've agreed with just about everything you and RGA have said in this thread except that point... That is patently untrue of the reviewer's complaint...

He validly said that the speakers don't sound good without the sand... So despite what Totem says; the sand is not optional... Whereas his reference and other comparable speakers in the Totem's price range sound good without that much effort... he also seemed to think the product was due for an update from Totem... also valid considering how old Totem's products are... So the complaint is not that Totem didn't ship the products filled with sand, but why the product should need sand to sound decent in the first place...

I've heard Totem's line and while they sound good, I think they are well overdue for updating... and hopefully a less than stellar review will give their product designers a much needed kick in the @$$ and get them back to work... rather than posting crap like this on their website:

Ultra sophisticated crossover
Hard wired
Bypass capacitors
Ultra expensive
Lovingly hand-assembled
Result
Non obsolescence
Soul moving

Seriously: Non obsolescence??? How arrogant do you have to be in order to believe that your product will never be obsolete???

[Ajani]

A lot of reviewers put positive-only spins in their articles and you sort of have to read between the lines to get info out...other reviewers pick and choose a few products here and there to sacrifice so they can make a name for themselves in the review industry as a hard-ass gear-slayer, it's a cheap trick to try and establish some street cred fast. Not saying that's the case here, but I am saying how would we know?

Why that 'cheap trick' can work so well is because for many Audiophiles, dismissing reviews as being just the result of advertising bribery, is a medal of honor... I find it sad how many Audiophiles would never even read a review in a major mag, but mouth off opinions about how "worthless" reviews are...

I think the best way to combat both "read between the lines reviews" and "hard-ass gear-slayer reviews" is to educate more audiophiles about the correct way to use, and not use reviews...

Reviews, both the subject aspects and the technical measurements, can be of real use to any audiophile, as long as you don't make them a substitute for your own auditioning...

[kexodusc]

Why that 'cheap trick' can work so well is because for many Audiophiles, dismissing reviews as being just the result of advertising bribery, is a medal of honor... I find it sad how many Audiophiles would never even read a review in a major mag, but mouth off opinions about how "worthless" reviews are...

I think the best way to combat both "read between the lines reviews" and "hard-ass gear-slayer reviews" is to educate more audiophiles about the correct way to use, and not use reviews...

Reviews, both the subject aspects and the technical measurements, can be of real use to any audiophile, as long as you don't make them a substitute for your own auditioning...

Yeah, they can be of use for sure. I usually learn about gear in magazine reviews. If a piece really sparks my curiosity I usually follow up with some consumer review searches, then an in-store audition.

For the most part, I find reviews to be 3 parts entertainment, 1 part information now. Some of the measurement data is valuable, and opinions of one person, possibly in comparison to that reviewer's reference gear, have some value, too.

[RGA]

Why that 'cheap trick' can work so well is because for many Audiophiles, dismissing reviews as being just the result of advertising bribery, is a medal of honor... I find it sad how many Audiophiles would never even read a review in a major mag, but mouth off opinions about how "worthless" reviews are...

I think the best way to combat both "read between the lines reviews" and "hard-ass gear-slayer reviews" is to educate more audiophiles about the correct way to use, and not use reviews...

Reviews, both the subject aspects and the technical measurements, can be of real use to any audiophile, as long as you don't make them a substitute for your own auditioning...

As John Marks said recently on Audio Asylum - there is no bribary - reviewers can get discounts on gear - usually at manufacturer cost if they want it - but consider that that applies to ALL manufacturers - everything is still at a level playing field - in other words even if I could get a $5k retail amp for $1500 that is true for pretty much all $5k amps. Secondly, once the product is used by the reviewer it can no longer be sold as a "new" item so it is now "used" - what is the manufacturer going to do with it?

And even then there are often stipulations that the manufacturer would want if a reviewer did buy the unit - like not allowing the reviewer to sell it for a year to hurt resale etc. Now some reviewers may in fact be taking money - but I seriously doubt it. Why? Because most stuff is actually pretty good - good enough to be able to find someone who will Like it and positively review it.

[poppachubby]

As John Marks said recently on Audio Asylum - there is no bribary - reviewers can get discounts on gear - usually at manufacturer cost if they want it - but consider that that applies to ALL manufacturers - everything is still at a level playing field - in other words even if I could get a $5k retail amp for $1500 that is true for pretty much all $5k amps. Secondly, once the product is used by the reviewer it can no longer be sold as a "new" item so it is now "used" - what is the manufacturer going to do with it?

And even then there are often stipulations that the manufacturer would want if a reviewer did buy the unit - like not allowing the reviewer to sell it for a year to hurt resale etc. Now some reviewers may in fact be taking money - but I seriously doubt it. Why? Because most stuff is actually pretty good - good enough to be able to find someone who will Like it and positively review it.

I've heard that all reviewers big and small attend an annual, secret conference deep in the Rocky mountains. Dressed in black robes, they are all taught this mantra that RGA has uttered on this post. LOL.

If there was bribery, I would think it would come in the form of scale. More infamous and trusted the reviewer, bigger the "bribe".

I know the instrument world operates like this, at several levels of endorsement. The little and barely known guy might get a guitar at cost for lending his name. Eddie Van Halen would get squillions of dollars, free merch, limos, coke, whores, etc.

Personally, I'm not too paranoid. It comes down to bias and opinion for me. I still read reviews and watch for new and interesting products. However, just watching the boards here and at AA is helpful too.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Reading this was quite refreshing. I am reminded of a very good AND brutally honest reviewer for the hometheater magazine Widescreen Review. Richard Hardesty is a analytical and profoundly thorough reviewer who had no problem telling high end speaker designers that their speakers look good, but do not sound very good. He used measurements to accompany what he heard in his listening room. After pissing off several of Widescreen Reviews advertisers, he was asked to toned down and de-emphasize the negative things, and play up the good things. He refused, and end up leaving Widescreen Review. It took years for that rag to make up for his loss.

[Ajani]

As John Marks said recently on Audio Asylum - there is no bribary - reviewers can get discounts on gear - usually at manufacturer cost if they want it - but consider that that applies to ALL manufacturers - everything is still at a level playing field - in other words even if I could get a $5k retail amp for $1500 that is true for pretty much all $5k amps. Secondly, once the product is used by the reviewer it can no longer be sold as a "new" item so it is now "used" - what is the manufacturer going to do with it?

Like you, I just don't see any great reason for reviewers to take bribes, or any evidence of it either... But that claim is still preached like Gospel, by so many persons who don't even read reviews... Persons who have never even had a discussion with a reviewer on a forum or at trade show etc, but somehow think they have 'inside knowledge' of the workings of the industry....

And even then there are often stipulations that the manufacturer would want if a reviewer did buy the unit - like not allowing the reviewer to sell it for a year to hurt resale etc. Now some reviewers may in fact be taking money - but I seriously doubt it. Why? Because most stuff is actually pretty good - good enough to be able to find someone who will Like it and positively review it.

Yep... I'm sure that many of the active members on this site would all be accused of taking bribes if we were reviewers, just because of the raves we'd give of favorite brands... Mr. Peabody for his love of Conrad Johnson & Dynaudio, me for Revel and Monitor Audio, E-Stat for those Soundlabs, Feanor, and Geoffcin for Maggies, Blackraven for Maggies and Van Alstine, Pix for B&W, Kex for Emotiva, etc... Just about any brand has loyal followers...

[poppachubby]

BTW, here's the latest version of my solid core cable.

[mlsstl]

Reviews serve two main purposes for me.

First, they are simply general readings about a subject that interests me. That's the same motive I have for reading and participating in online audio forums. Sometimes it is just entertainment, other times I'll learn something I didn't know and still others I'll find the writer has an opinion that differs from mine. Occasionally I'll even come to the conclusion that the fellow doesn't know what he's talking about.

The second and less frequent role of a review is helping find potential candidates if I'm in the market for a new piece of equipment. This is less frequent for the simple reason that I don't switch equipment all that often. It is certainly helpful to be familiar with the writings and preferences of a reviewer, but even having prior points in common with a reviewer doesn't mean I'm willing to let him choose things for me.

The latter is important for good reason. To use speakers as an example, there are well over a thousand speaker makes and models on the market right now. It would be impossible for a person to critically audition all of them. Even people who do this for a living have models they haven't heard and many more they've heard in only a cursory manner.

It is very useful to pare that large field down to a smaller list of reasonable candidates. Sure, some of that paring can be done without reviews on simply a cost, size or appearance basis, but that still leaves a lot of prospects. Well written reviews can help a person reduce the list of candidates to a manageable level. And, at that point, what most people should do is listen for themselves.

[RGA]

The problem with the negative review as I see it is threefold.

1) They are viewed as being more credible which is not necessarily the case. Negative is seen as objective while positive is seen as subjective. The negative review does stand out more though. Every critic likes or dislikes products. Generally magazines will send products to reviewers that the reviewer already tends to like (at least in terms of design).

2) People who want the negative review becuase it is supposedly mroe objective may not like what they read. For instance John Marks hates Magnepan loudspeakers. JM is one of the two or three main reviewers at Stereophile. You don't ever see him review them. His tastes though simply don't run to panels. So instead they give the guy who loves panels the magnepans and Quads to review. What purpose does it serve to have JM dump on a design he doesn't like? It will piss off Magnepan owners probably, and the manufacturer. The people who agree with JM about the speakers may view Stereophile as being more "objective" but see number one. He doesn't like the design and then gives it a negative review - it simply is his preference.

The Maggie owner will be far more interested in reading a panel review from Doug Schroeder of Dagogo - who has owned a lot of panel speakers - you want someone to compare "apples to apples" and a guy who already likes the sound of panel speakers in general. That reviewer can tell you the plusses and minuses of one panel at a given price level versus another.

3) Reviews of product components are in isolation - dependant on the listening environment and the associated gear. Bryston IMO sound horrific with my Audio Note J speakers - but they sound quite good on my Wharfedales. Reading between the lines of the reviews Bryston can be a mixed bag depending on the system. Stereophile also didn't rave about the Bryston 7B - I think from the same reviewer.

But here is an example of reviewer's hearing the same music in the same system with the same cd player and how differently they perceived the results. This is a review of my CD player - http://www.audiodesignguide.com/cdplayer/cd6.html

That is why no matter what the reivew positive or negative the bottom line is that you won't knwo until you listen. The review taking some heat from Stereophile however may be good for certain people - if you tend to agree with his likes/dislikes he mnay be someone to follow.

[kexodusc]

The problem with the negative review as I see it is threefold.

1) They are viewed as being more credible which is not necessarily the case. Negative is seen as objective while positive is seen as subjective. The negative review does stand out more though.

Well said...go to any web-forum and find a positive review....you'll see a few fan-boys of brand x congratulate the wise decision, but otherwise, an unremarkable thread. But say you dislike a piece of gear and you'd better be ready to fight a flame war.

The review process is complicated by more than just the gear chain too. An Audiologist acquaintance of mine once told me that the shape of a persons ears can have a profound effect on their sensitivity to certain frequencies - several dB...and that's just FR. He opined that human hearing variances would account for a bigger difference than room acoustics and even the choice between some gear. People who live and die by anechoic chambers are only considering half the equation.

Kinda makes the whole process a crapshoot unless you find a reviewer with similar preferences. Fun to read though.