FINALLY - Revel Performa Series 3

[RGA]

Ajani

I'm not sure there is any point because the awards thing is business - big sellers. The reviewers at these magazines do not hear every component - they hear the ones they get for review - and some hear a lot more than others and they have to remember what they heard over the years to try and slot the product into some sort of rating scheme. I have tried but it still boils down to an incomplete selection at given price points.

Hi-Fi Choice at least does blind level matched session but that still is only against the competition for that particular issues. So an amp that finishes say in 3rd place - might have finished first in a test three months later in effect it could be that that amp beats a recommended amp in a different issue.

Even my argument - "what did the reviewer actually buy" - this IMO is telling in that the reviewer spent his own cash on the speakers and if he has heard a lot of speakers over the years then that speaker is the best he has heard in that price range (and under) on the market. BUT, he may like a speaker better at 4 times the money - just can't afford it (even with a reviewer discount - which often just the price you could pay for it on the second hand or demo market).

I am often curious about lists because they don't make much sense most of the time.

Speaker 1 is class B.

Stereophile reviewers and technical article contributors

Reviewer 1 (one of their 5 most experienced reviewers) bought the speaker and says he would give it A++. (long time Quad panel owner)

Reviewer 2: (one of their 5 most experienced reviewers and well versed in technical issues - "for sheer emotional delivery, timbral clarity, dynamic agility, and, yes, the highest fidelity, the [speaker 1] system may have been the best hi-fi I have ever heard." (long time Dynaudio, Revel, Wilson owner and yet speaker 1 beats them all in his very own words)

Reviewer 3: (one of their 5 most experienced reviewers and recording engineer and technical writers) "Dunno 'bout "best," but here's the most memorable....Now, the last movement of the Wheeler completion is longer than many whole symphonies of the Classical era, but all of us were entranced.../...I later analogized it by saying that most hi-fi gave you a clear view of an animatronic dummy, while that system give you a somewhat foggy window with a real person on the other side..../...But that [speaker 1] system did things I have not heard since.

Technical Adviser contributing editor bought the speakers.

Speaker 2 (class A rated) - no one bought a pair - no one extolled any such verbiage on them - claiming "best they ever heard or most memorable sound etc). And there are a LOT of class A rated speakers where no such verbiage and no reviewer bought a pair. Indeed reading the review of some of them the noted issues in the treble or lacking dynamics makes me want to puke a little in my mouth. Best of the best and it's bright or is dynamically anaemic - probably the two most important aspects of sound reproduction - bright means you can't listen long - write-off. Dynamics is the lifeblood of music.

So you tell me how exactly that makes any sense.

The only thing that makes sense for a consumer is to find a particular reviewer you agree with when it comes to sound reproduction. Follow the reviewer not the magazine. You won't even get reviewers on the same staff to agree with each other on the sound. I may agree with them on politics and some products but not every one of them. Two writers at Stereophile are complete opposites - one preferring SET the other thinks it's terrible and believes you need 1000 watt amps as some sort of minimum reading between the lines. How could they possibly come up with class A - unless of course they "settle" on the mediocrity middle ground where they both give something a pass. (judging by just about everything I have heard that gets class A it would not surprise me if the mediocrity rises to the top.

I'll give you an example - Movie reviews - There may be a movie that 100 critics see - 90 of them give it 3/5 which is a pass. 5 hate 1/5 and 5 liked it a fair bit 4/5- so the rating is 95% fresh

Looks great that is definitely a Class A race to the theater movie - but wait - in fact 90 out of the 100 really only marginally liked it with a 60% score and the 5 on each end cancel each other out. No one felt the movie was GREAT.

Film 2 gets 80% fresh rating - 60 out of 100 reviewers give it 5/5 thinking it's one of the year's or decade's best- 10 give it 4/5 and 10 give it 3/5 and 20 give it 2.5/5 (marginal thumbs down) but no one disliked it and 60% absolutely loved it and many are going to want the deluxe boxed set Blu Ray and are happy to shell out the cash for it.

The overall rating places this film in the second tier down list even though you have a real good chance of LOVING this movie - while the 95% class A rated movie most people like but none of the critics LOVE it and none of them want to buy the Blu Ray or even the DVD in the cheap bin.

What I want to know is would they buy if they could buy it and why not. Movie X was pretty good but I would never want to watch it again. I liked reviewing X component but I would never want to live with it long term. Or if he would buy it but didn't then explain why not. For instance had I had a different system and money - I would have bought the Grant Fidelity Rita amp or even better the Shengya monoblocks which are absurdly good. The OTO is simply better with the AN J not necessarily that the OTO itself is a better amp.

Eventually I will make a league table of gear. I have to think it through and I want to listen to several things several more times to be sure. I like Audiofederation's classifications of amplifiers and how they rate each company's top of the line amps against eachother - they have a list for tubes and one for SS. But it doesn't help those of us in the 'sane prices" camp.

[Ajani]

Speaker 1 is class B.

Stereophile reviewers and technical article contributors

Reviewer 1 (one of their 5 most experienced reviewers) bought the speaker and says he would give it A++. (long time Quad panel owner)

Reviewer 2: (one of their 5 most experienced reviewers and well versed in technical issues - "for sheer emotional delivery, timbral clarity, dynamic agility, and, yes, the highest fidelity, the [speaker 1] system may have been the best hi-fi I have ever heard." (long time Dynaudio, Revel, Wilson owner and yet speaker 1 beats them all in his very own words)

Reviewer 3: (one of their 5 most experienced reviewers and recording engineer and technical writers) "Dunno 'bout "best," but here's the most memorable....Now, the last movement of the Wheeler completion is longer than many whole symphonies of the Classical era, but all of us were entranced.../...I later analogized it by saying that most hi-fi gave you a clear view of an animatronic dummy, while that system give you a somewhat foggy window with a real person on the other side..../...But that [speaker 1] system did things I have not heard since.

Technical Adviser contributing editor bought the speakers.

Speaker 2 (class A rated) - no one bought a pair - no one extolled any such verbiage on them - claiming "best they ever heard or most memorable sound etc). And there are a LOT of class A rated speakers where no such verbiage and no reviewer bought a pair. Indeed reading the review of some of them the noted issues in the treble or lacking dynamics makes me want to puke a little in my mouth. Best of the best and it's bright or is dynamically anaemic - probably the two most important aspects of sound reproduction - bright means you can't listen long - write-off. Dynamics is the lifeblood of music.

LOL... I've damn near had the same reaction reading those kind of reviews... IMO, a Class A component should be free of such nasty limitations... In fact, that's where my definition for Class B begins... Class C or lower can have obvious flaws...

I like Stereophile's Class system as it is rare to see a mag have the balls to try rate each component on an absolute scale... So a $1K amp might be rated Class B and a $5K rated Class C...

However, I agree that the system is seriously flawed. The most obvious problem being the execution - Why does one product get class A versus another? Is it all down to the Editor's decision?

The only thing that makes sense for a consumer is to find a particular reviewer you agree with when it comes to sound reproduction. Follow the reviewer not the magazine. You won't even get reviewers on the same staff to agree with each other on the sound. I may agree with them on politics and some products but not every one of them.

Well this point actually ties in to my suggestion of having each reviewer rate the product on his own scale.... So If I have similar tastes to Art Dudley; then I know that a product rated Class A in his review (within my budget) is a MUST audition... I can always put products rated Class A by Mike Fremer or John Atkinson at the bottom of my audition list (assuming I generally don't share their respective tastes in equipment)...

[Mash]

Use a Pugh Matrix.

I use these for real estate, because houses can be so variable and impossible to compare, and one needs a tool that measures each house's CTQ's on a level playing field.

1. First you define your list of CTQ's (Critical to Quality). These define what is important to YOU.
2. Then you assign a weighting factor to each CTQ. Say 1,2,3,4 or 5.

Steps 1. & 2. will consume the majority of your time.......

3. Now you evaluate each unit by giving a score for each CTQ. I use 1, 3, 9
............ 1 = less than I expected; 3 = what I expected; and 9 = significantly better than what I expected.

When you look at each house you will focus only on YOUR list of CTQ's. Sometimes you have to rebuild your list of CTQ's to get your goal(s) correctly defined.

You wind up with "Score = Sum of {CTQ W.F.} times {score for CTQ.}

To wit:

1. 3 x 3 = 9
2. 1 x 4 = 4
3. 9 x 2 = 18
Score = 31

Some CTQ's for houses:

1. Traffic Pattern (how do people move through the house?)
2. Quality of Construction
3. Landscaping
4. Location - w/r/t Work
5. Location - w/r/t Schools
6. Location - w/r/t is it on a busy street/road?
7. Basement (Dry?)
8. Storage
............. and so forth.

At this point, comparisons become easy.

You can calculate

COST = "Price / Score", and "Price / Square Feet"

QUALITY of Sq. Ft. = "Score / Square feet"