Looking for a Few Good Reviewers

[ericl]

Hey Gang,

I need some reviewers to help me ramp up our fledgling editorial review program into the real deal. Partly involves reviewing products, but can also be articles about setup, buying and selecting equipment, etc. We will provide the gear in most cases, but if you own a current, compelling product, reviewing that is great.

I need people handling a few categories:

Video displays/other video products.
I've asked Edtyct, but he may be too busy. Anyone else? You should have some real experience with displays, dvd players, I'm hoping for the experts (or as close as we come to it).

Home Theater/Surround Sound gear.
Looking for someone(s) specializing in receivers, multi-channel amps, processors and speaker setups.

About You:

-Decent writing skills, able to communicate clearly and take constructive criticism from your editor, moi.
-Established reputation here on the forums or elsewhere on our site or in the audio community.
-Have the time to complete a review in a timely fashion.
-Enthusiastic!

We will pay for your work, the rate is TBD. Of course, you won't care about money, you're in it for the love!

email me at elobue@audioreview.com if you are interested! Also, I hereby open the floor for nominations from AR members!

-eric

[Geoffcin]

email me at elobue@audioreview.com if you are interested! Also, I hereby open the floor for nominations from AR members!

-eric

Kexo & Wooch!

Both are "heros" of the forums. They write well, and have proven themselves open minded about audio gear.

Of course I want a piece of the action too!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Kexo & Wooch!

Both are "heros" of the forums. They write well, and have proven themselves open minded about audio gear.

Of course I want a piece of the action too!

I second this, except no action for Geoff LOLOLOLOL

[L.J.]

I third that

[Kam]

So....... then.... you're not looking for any........ 'official' dvd reviewers..... ?
.
.
.
.
couldnt resist.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

So....... then.... you're not looking for any........ 'official' dvd reviewers..... ?
.
.
.
.
couldnt resist.

Isn't resistance futile???

Actually Kam I am working on that now. I got started on that late last year, and got so busy that only recently have I been able to pick this up again. Its a pretty complicated process I am learning, but Eric and I are going to be working on this shortly.

[ericl]

So....... then.... you're not looking for any........ 'official' dvd reviewers..... ?
.
.
.
.
couldnt resist.

I AM! shoot me an email if interested.. Sir T, could you do the same?

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

oh noooooo, defn not my area of expertise (if i even have one). i can pretty much only comment on content of a movie and its execution, have only a leeeeeeeeeeeetle bit of knowledge on video quality issues or even soundtrack issues other than 'sounds good' 'sounds bad', 'looks good' 'looks bad'. defn wouldnt be able to give any usefull info to anyone on video/sound issues on any dvd.
i was just reminded of our favorite disc jockey printer. ahh... happy times, happy times.

LOLOLOL shame on you! LOLOL

[Kam]

I AM! shoot me an email if interested.. Sir T, could you do the same?

oh noooooo, defn not my area of expertise (if i even have one). i can pretty much only comment on content of a movie and its execution, have only a leeeeeeeeeeeetle bit of knowledge on video quality issues or even soundtrack issues other than 'sounds good' 'sounds bad', 'looks good' 'looks bad'. defn wouldnt be able to give any usefull info to anyone on video/sound issues on any dvd.
i was just reminded of our favorite disc jockey printer. ahh... happy times, happy times.

[Florian]

Well i disagree with the hero comments and donth think they can fairly evaluate ALL kinds of equipment. If i were to vote then my vote would go for Y_Suradi, E-Stat, Bernd or Geof. I think it is important to keep a real open mind for alternative technologies in all price categories. Also it would be great to have a person review the equipment that actually has a real reference point and does not compare them to a Paradim box with a Yamaha receiver in my opinion. Room acoustics, experience in the digital and analog domain is also important.

Edit: I know its a typical hard comment but i cant talk around the bush.

[Woochifer]

Eric, for your prereq's, you forgot to add:
-wife/girlfriend that wholeheartedly wants to see the living room used as a test lab

I appreciate the generous nominations, and the WAF is a reality to consider! (of course, I could always setup shop at the local park -- lots of space, no boundary effects to worry about, and plenty of reputable looking guys sitting over by the playground that I'm sure will be glad to "help" me move and set stuff up!)

Considering that this is primarily a consumer review site, I'm not sure about how much value editorial reviews of equipment will add to this site, especially since so many other websites already do editorial equipment reviews. But, I can definitely see a lot of potential for some good content regarding setup, tweaking, optimizing, and listening. (Basically, yet another soapbox for my persistent mantra about optimizing what people already own before pursuing fresh hardware upgrades )

To that end, I think there are plenty of contributors to this site who have the demonstrated experience, knowledge, and balanced viewpoint to provide that kind of content. Terrence, Geoffcin, and kexodusc are the obvious choices in my view, and I would add other experienced guys like topspeed, Pat D, markw, and Lensman, among many others, into the mix as well.

Eric - I'll PM you with some ideas on how I think this site might be able to create equipment reviews with something different from the usual "I listened to this component, and this is what I think" reviews that typify other audio review sites.

[kexodusc]

Well i disagree with the hero comments and donth think they can fairly evaluate ALL kinds of equipment. If i were to vote then my vote would go for Y_Suradi, E-Stat, Bernd or Geof. I think it is important to keep a real open mind for alternative technologies in all price categories. Also it would be great to have a person review the equipment that actually has a real reference point and does not compare them to a Paradim box with a Yamaha receiver in my opinion. Room acoustics, experience in the digital and analog domain is also important.

Edit: I know its a typical hard comment but i cant talk around the bush.

Well I'm no hero that's for sure. Flattered to be considered with some of the helpful regulars here but Flo, I'm not sure why you think anyone is opposed to different technologies and price categories...I can't recall bad mouthing any particular technology or price point, except if I believe something peforms poorly compared to less expensive items.

Can't speak for Wooch since I don't read all his posts, but from what I gather he's not opposed to these either, just chooses to own what he does for other reasons.

You sure you got the right guys here?

[PAT.P]

Well i disagree with the hero comments and donth think they can fairly evaluate ALL kinds of equipment. If i were to vote then my vote would go for Y_Suradi, E-Stat, Bernd or Geof. I think it is important to keep a real open mind for alternative technologies in all price categories. Also it would be great to have a person review the equipment that actually has a real reference point and does not compare them to a Paradim box with a Yamaha receiver in my opinion. Room acoustics, experience in the digital and analog domain is also important.

Edit: I know its a typical hard comment but i cant talk around the bush.

Here we go again ! Mr Green as spoken ,do you have nightmare of Yamaha and Paradigm product.The people that we as members have a great deal of respect are mention Flo.You on the other side are digging yourself to a new low on the scale of respect.

[Florian]

I dont understand how my different opinion supposely lowers my respect on this site. I have gotten lots of thanks from numerous people on this site for my dedication of help which exeeds more then recommending Paradigm, B&W and Axiom ;-)

No need to attack me, i was simply recommending users that i would be interested to read an article from. And if a few pople cannot understand my dedication and disagree with my opinion on how music should be reproduced then i can easily live with that.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I dont understand how my different opinion supposely lowers my respect on this site. I have gotten lots of thanks from numerous people on this site for my dedication of help which exeeds more then recommending Paradigm, B&W and Axiom ;-)

No need to attack me, i was simply recommending users that i would be interested to read an article from. And if a few pople cannot understand my dedication and disagree with my opinion on how music should be reproduced then i can easily live with that.

Florian,
I do not think anyone is attacking your opinion on how music should be reproduced. I think we disagree with the assertion that it takes a $40,000 speaker system to reproduce music correctly, or up to your snuff. Almost every day I work with audio equipment that costs as much as a house here in the bay area($500,000+), and quite often it doesn't sound any better than my own reference speaker system which costs MUCH less. A well made Paradigm or Axiom speaker system can sound as good, or better than many of the mega buck speakers found in stereophile and the other high end rags. Be ALOT more open minded about speakers in lower prices ranges, their performance may surprise you.

[PAT.P]

Florian,
I do not think anyone is attacking your opinion on how music should be reproduced. I think we disagree with the assertion that it takes a $40,000 speaker system to reproduce music correctly, or up to your snuff. Almost every day I work with audio equipment that costs as much as a house here in the bay area($500,000+), and quite often it doesn't sound any better than my own reference speaker system which costs MUCH less. A well made Paradigm or Axiom speaker system can sound as good, or better than many of the mega buck speakers found in stereophile and the other high end rags. Be ALOT more open minded about speakers in lower prices ranges, their performance may surprise you.

Sir Terrence I totaly agree with you ,its not how thick your wallet is for your equipment.I do received lots of info from this site and I let my ears do the rest.As for Flo always putting the Yamaha receiver down and Paradigm I dont understant.

[PAT.P]

I dont understand how my different opinion supposely lowers my respect on this site. I have gotten lots of thanks from numerous people on this site for my dedication of help which exeeds more then recommending Paradigm, B&W and Axiom ;-)

No need to attack me, i was simply recommending users that i would be interested to read an article from. And if a few pople cannot understand my dedication and disagree with my opinion on how music should be reproduced then i can easily live with that.

Your dedication and how music should be reproduced is from your narrow minded mind.Thank "God" there only one like you on this site.Go and listen to a few live Symphony ,classical music,rock concert ect ect and try to convince yourself you got the best equipment ever made to reproduce the best audio sound.Give me a break! You get into vinyl and now you probably think you have the best TT.

[Florian]

Well i disagree that any Paradigm or Axiom system gets even anywhere close to a good sound like a Genesis, Infinity IRS, Alon, Apogee etc.... no matter how you set it up.

To Pat, your not using your brain and are judging me based on nothing. Bernd is like me, Y_Suriady, E-Stat (equipment wise) and there ARE TONS on audiogon or in the Apogee forum. Audioreview is a site for normal commercial systems and best bang for the buck and i thought i could bring in some other areas of audio too but its impossible on this site.

Thats ok, ill just write less and less and finally stop entirely. There are too few people who accept that a well thougt out high end system will run miles around the commerical junk.

[PAT.P]

Well i disagree that any Paradigm or Axiom system gets even anywhere close to a good sound like a Genesis, Infinity IRS, Alon, Apogee etc.... no matter how you set it up.

To Pat, your not using your brain and are judging me based on nothing. Bernd is like me, Y_Suriady, E-Stat (equipment wise) and there ARE TONS on audiogon or in the Apogee forum. Audioreview is a site for normal commercial systems and best bang for the buck and i thought i could bring in some other areas of audio too but its impossible on this site.

Thats ok, ill just write less and less and finally stop entirely. There are too few people who accept that a well thougt out high end system will run miles around the commerical junk.

Im judging you by your childish behavior,your sarcasm thought on what the perfect system is in your mind, while cutting anybody that does'nt have what you think is the best out there or follow your" QUEST".None of the guys you mention are bragging or have a bias on what others have.Most of them also will help others while you try to help your cause.I know you are knowledgeable ,but to preach us on your belief on what is the ultimate system for proper listening pleasure and you own it .My system is entry level and Im proud of it.Yours in my book would be Mid level .In the high end would be in the $100,000 +.This is my opinion on what people spend for their system ,is it better I hope so.I dont play show and tell and dont need to and dont care .

[dean_martin]

oh noooooo, defn not my area of expertise (if i even have one). i can pretty much only comment on content of a movie and its execution, have only a leeeeeeeeeeeetle bit of knowledge on video quality issues or even soundtrack issues other than 'sounds good' 'sounds bad', 'looks good' 'looks bad'. defn wouldnt be able to give any usefull info to anyone on video/sound issues on any dvd.
i was just reminded of our favorite disc jockey printer. ahh... happy times, happy times.

I nominate Kam for the content-based part of the review, if appropriate for your format. But don't make him watch crap! We don't want to break his spirit.

[Mr Peabody]

Although Flo could have used more tact, he made some good points. Many of this sites "heroes" have gone on record here one time or another claiming there's no difference in CD players or cables, claiming Yamaha is as good as any preamp processor, claiming any difference heard between cheap and expensive gear is imagination, etc. And this is who you want to review equipment? It's no wonder this site is dead. It's these that chase most of the posters away. I'm not calling anyone out, you know who you are. Some mentioned here on the thread are deserved their respect and obviously others need their keyboards taken away.

Flo is correct in stating one has to have a reference point. All pro reviewers have a system they use as a reference and state that equipment in their review. If the heroes here use mass market receivers as a reference and refuse to concede that there is anything better, then what is the point in putting anything in their hands to review.

I don't knock anyone for having a receiver, I have had many myself in the past, but I knew there was better and as soon as I could afford better I progressed. The key here for me was not in the spending of more money but to have the hearing to discern the improvement and appreciation for better hi fi gear.

** It was not Pat I am referring to in my comment about a Yamaha receiver.

[kexodusc]

Although Flo could have used more tact, he made some good points. Many of this sites "heroes" have gone on record here one time or another claiming there's no difference in CD players or cables, claiming Yamaha is as good as any preamp processor, claiming any difference heard between cheap and expensive gear is imagination, etc. And this is who you want to review equipment? It's no wonder this site is dead. It's these that chase most of the posters away. I'm not calling anyone out, you know who you are. Some mentioned here on the thread are deserved their respect and obviously others need their keyboards taken away.

While I agree with your points, I think this statement is a bit off-base. Most comments I've seen here are more fence-sitting in nature than out right refusal of the idea of sonic differences. I've been on record saying my Arcam doesn't sound any better (to me) than a mass market CD player when I use the optical out and by-pass the mass-market DAC (well, maybe a tiny bit better). This shouldn't be construed as me saying a $400 Denon CD player is as nice as my $1200 Arcam or whatever...(IMO my Arcam is far superior to my $200 changer). The point I was making when I made this statement is that modern a/v receivers have reasonably good DAC's compared to costlier CD players from just a few years back. And much better DAC's than A/V receiver of even 5 years ago. Sign of the times. Offering a cost-effective solution to newbies shouldn't be misconstrued as denying performance improvments exist, just responsible advice that isn't suggesting people throw a smuch money at their systems as possible. Sometimes you have to paint extreme pictures to make a point.

Similar with cables. I haven't heard many people deny that differences exists (aside from the few Engineers that frequent the site). The answer again is usually neutral, but presents the other side of the argument that people who make claims about cable sonics haven't been able to substantiate their claims in any sort of scientific study. Compared to say amps, speakers, and room acoustics that have had differences substantiated by standardized listening tests. This naturally begs the question if differences are real, are they significant enough to justify the cost for the vast majority of this site's audience? I can't imagine any scenario where someone would recommend pure silver cables for a $500 a/v receiver and $800 speakers. That's just not cost effective. I believe I've heard cables create improvements, but never with Dolby Digital soundtracks and a/v receivers. I don't think the subtle levels of enhancement can be captured by home theater sources (yet, maybe HD formats with hi-rez audio will change that).

Most of the other stereo sites I visit (I consider ar.com more of an HT site, most forum activity would support this) have "established heroes" who make similar recommendations to newbies and people with moderately priced systems. Especially those with 5.1 systems costing $1500 or less. You have to know your audience.

Flo is correct in stating one has to have a reference point. All pro reviewers have a system they use as a reference and state that equipment in their review. If the heroes here use mass market receivers as a reference and refuse to concede that there is anything better, then what is the point in putting anything in their hands to review.

That's true. But a reference system should represent the majority of the audience. Flo's got a better system than 99% of Audioreview's visitors so how does that serve as a reference to potential readers? You wouldn't use a Corvette as a reference in the economy car class. What possible value could comparing a $500 H/K receiver and $500 Denon receiver on Flo's Apogees have to a person looking for a $500 a/v solution?

I don't knock anyone for having a receiver, I have had many myself in the past, but I knew there was better and as soon as I could afford better I progressed. The key here for me was not in the spending of more money but to have the hearing to discern the improvement and appreciation for better hi fi gear.

** It was not Pat I am referring to in my comment about a Yamaha receiver.

I'm not sure I've ever met anyone who's said a Yamaha receiver was every bit as good as a costlier pre-amp or pre-pro. Perhaps they've said it was almost as good or as good in certain situations. Most (if not all) of the individuals who would make a claim about receivers generally qualify it in the context of the user's budget, system, etc. A lot of these same people do in fact own much higher quality systems.

Usually a person's opinion has to be kept in context for it to be of value.

[GMichael]

Hey Gang,

I need some reviewers to help me ramp up our fledgling editorial review program into the real deal. Partly involves reviewing products, but can also be articles about setup, buying and selecting equipment, etc. We will provide the gear in most cases, but if you own a current, compelling product, reviewing that is great.

I need people handling a few categories:

Video displays/other video products.
I've asked Edtyct, but he may be too busy. Anyone else? You should have some real experience with displays, dvd players, I'm hoping for the experts (or as close as we come to it).

Home Theater/Surround Sound gear.
Looking for someone(s) specializing in receivers, multi-channel amps, processors and speaker setups.

About You:

-Decent writing skills, able to communicate clearly and take constructive criticism from your editor, moi.
-Established reputation here on the forums or elsewhere on our site or in the audio community.
-Have the time to complete a review in a timely fashion.
-Enthusiastic!

We will pay for your work, the rate is TBD. Of course, you won't care about money, you're in it for the love!

email me at elobue@audioreview.com if you are interested! Also, I hereby open the floor for nominations from AR members!

-eric

I'd do it for the love. (and that I'd get to play with all kinds of cool stuff) But doubt that could do it justice.
My vote goes to Kex. He's very knowledgeable and doesn't pre-judge by name or $$.

[Mr Peabody]

Kex, I'm with you for the most part. A $500.00 receiver would not have the resolution to benefit from high end cables and could account for some of the comments as well. I haven't been taking names, well except Terrence, but some here have been absolutely irresponsible with their inaccurate statements. If they were as careful in their replies to newbies as you were to mine we wouldn't have a problem.

It would be interesting if you did hear a difference from your digital out, that would lend creedance to the fact that transports can make a difference. But most of the difference is how the signal is treated after the conversion. Arcam in my book is one of the best bang for the buck CD players you will find in whatever price range their unit is at.

My first HT set up was back in the Pro Logic days and I had a top of the line Yamaha processor with built in 80 watt amps for center and rear, I then upgraded to an Arcam which made the Yamaha sound like junk, then I moved to my current processor a Primare P31.7 which is another step up in performance. Some of that could be because the Primare is a dedicated preamp pro with no built in amplification. Each upgrade was more money and I could definitely tell where my money was spent. You can see right in this very thread that Terrance makes wildly misleading statements like " I have heard $500k equipment that don't sound any better than my custom speakers and HT setup" (yes I para-phrased). Although I agree that set up is very important but posts like that read to me that there is a denial of benefit to better, and yes more expensive, gear. I could add, with all things being equal. I guess it could be possible to have a system set up incorrectly and not have it do it's potential but it's hard for me to imagine a system of that cost in it's worst set up not sounding better than an Onkyo with, whatever, speakers. That's not a slam against Onkyo, they would be at the top of my list if I had to choose a mass market receiver.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Kex, I'm with you for the most part. A $500.00 receiver would not have the resolution to benefit from high end cables and could account for some of the comments as well. I haven't been taking names, well except Terrence, but some here have been absolutely irresponsible with their inaccurate statements. If they were as careful in their replies to newbies as you were to mine we wouldn't have a problem.

Sorry Mr Peabody, but there is nothing in any of my statements that are irresponsible. Once again I will assert(and you can prove me wrong if you can produce it), I have not read of a single, credible DBT test that proves unequivically that one wire sounds better over the other. Not one single test. Every test on the subject that I have read either proved there was no difference, or the difference was engineered into the cable which made the cable sound much less than transparent(it had a sonic signature as opposed to sounding neutral)

In the absence of any evidence to your claims, it would seem that your statements that expensive cables make a sound system sound better totally irresponsible. So my challenge to you is to prove your statements, or wallow in your fantasy. Since the acoustics of a room have FAR more impact on sound reproduction than cables do, you are majoring in minors focusing on that instead of the thing that is most important. In other words, your focus is misdirected.

Each upgrade was more money and I could definitely tell where my money was spent. You can see right in this very thread that Terrance makes wildly misleading statements like " I have heard $500k equipment that don't sound any better than my custom speakers and HT setup" (yes I para-phrased).

We can justify just about anything in our own minds. One can beleive that because they spent a great deal more money on their system than another has, and therefore it is better is just one justifing their own expenditure, not sound quality at all. Without any prior knowledge to the quality of my custom speakers, or to the quality of my HT system overall, your statements are once again not built on facts. Well chosen equipment that is designed and implemented to work well together in a properly treated room, produces good sound. Everything begins with the room, not the equipment, nor the cables. I treated my room first as a good listening space, then I purchased or had designed the right equipment to fit my specifications personally, and 5.1 music and film sound principles already adopted in professional recording, and filming mixing suits all over the world. You know so little about my system( kinds and sizes of drivers, what there made of, frequency response, dynamics and imaging characteristics etc.) that there is now way in the world you could come to any conslusions about the performance of my system versus others regardless of price range, right?

At 500K you have far reached the price of diminishing returns based on equipment price versus performance gains. The 500K system I was speaking of didn't have 500K worth of equipment, but an overall price tag based total cost including infrastructure, room, and equipment. That system cost WAY more than mine, but performance wise it wasn;t even a 50% gain in overall sound quality. Any performance gains acertained were so subtle as not to be even noticed by anyone but the most acute of listener. That to me is not a super big improvement over my own system based on price.

Although I agree that set up is very important but posts like that read to me that there is a denial of benefit to better, and yes more expensive, gear. I could add, with all things being equal. I guess it could be possible to have a system set up incorrectly and not have it do it's potential but it's hard for me to imagine a system of that cost in it's worst set up not sounding better than an Onkyo with, whatever, speakers. That's not a slam against Onkyo, they would be at the top of my list if I had to choose a mass market receiver.

There is no denying that high end gear can sound superior to mass market stuff(and maybe not in some cases). However, it is pure and adulturated ignorance to pretend you could come close to ascertaing the quality of my system without actually hearing it, wouldn't you say? I use only the pre-amp section of my Onkyo. A situation just like yours. I do not use its enternal amps, so I do not have to include the quality of those in my listening experience. I have chosen pretty high quality dual mono amps(two seperate mono amps in a single box) to handle my amplification chores. They happen to work very well with my speakers.

Armed with the knowledge that all Dolby digital and Dts chipset specifications are standardized(as is the quality of bass management, delay curcuits) no matter what price processor you put it in, it will sound pretty much the same if the same amps and speakers are used in the evaluation. The only audible difference that can effect the listening test are how curcuits are implemented upstream, and downstream of processing. In my processor there are no extra curcuitry between the processor and the preamp outputs when they are used. Based on that, how different would my processor sound than another more expensive processor doing the same thing? The way my system is designed, I use no delay or bass management in my system. How much better would a more expensive processor sound if it had to include that circuitry in the downstream path of the system? Any extra processing even if done digitally can degrade sound quality. My reciever may be mass market to you, but the way it is implement within my system is far from the mass market thinking. Before you turn up you pointed little beak at my system, pay attention to how it is used together, not just one piece.

You sound more and more like Florian every exchange we have. He pokes fun at Paradigm and B@W, and you seem to have this thing with my Onkyo receiver. Both of you have this predilection toward the price of the gear comensurate to the performance of the gear. Since this is not a proven fact, then your assertions are singular opinions, and not points of fact. It is not wise to make statements that you cannot prove. It is also not wise to indirectly make negative comments about someones's system before acutally hearing it. That is a purely ignorant perspective, a position that you have not mind taking on both occasions that we have interacted.