Axiom-Is the hype to be believed?

[RGA]

Completely nonsensical analogy because the Lemon Aid guide is entirely based on reliability and recall history, nothing to do with performance or value. The Ford Focus is one of the better compact cars I've rented, but since, like most auto reviewers, I don't own one, the recall history and reliability mean nothing to me so long as it stays tight for the one or two days that I have it..

Biggest reason to have a car is to get you from one destination to another...The Ford Focus apparently comes in pretty close to dead last...which mean the design and/or the build of the car is totally incompetant. I know three owners(directly and indirectly) of this car(popular) and all three have had MAJOR problems with it. Quality control for a car should be recognized in the review...if you know what to look for you can find them...but then who owns the review magazine is question 1. Question 2 is what is the competance of the reviewer.

That was not an analogy by the way...that was talking about reviews...don't assume.

Again, we're talking about speakers, so more off-topic nonsense. When you refer to "limitations" what are you talking about? "Most consumers" don't care about the "limitations" that you refer to because the receivers meet their needs and their budgetary restrictions. It has nothing to do with their lack of knowledge on the subject as you assert. They know that better stuff is out there, and they frankly couldn't give enough of a rat's behind to pay an extra $2k+ to step up to home theatre separates. Count me in that same category. Stick to your own opinions and don't try and assume that people out there make the choices that they do because they just don't know better..

Stick to my own opinions is what I've been doing...and not everyone does know better...if they did they would not need to come to a forum to ask question...they'd already know. Silly.

Why don't you take a guess? It's got about as much worth as anybody else's, unless you got some inside information that you're jealously guarding from everyone. All you're doing is bringing up inneuendo so you can make a point without really making a point.

Well in the case of UHF they are not sent certain products - Arcam is a proven example of a distributor that refuses to send them gear after an accurate negative review of an older Integrated amp...though i'm sure they got raves by the everything gets a rave club. If you're a speaker or any other product maker...as businessman...why would you take the risk of a negative review? Much smarter to send your product to the everything gets a good review people. Some do both because they want the coverage, smaller companies are forced to send to the tougher reviewers because their dealer base is too small and don't have the $$$$ to buy advertising space in the some of the big magazines. Which is not to say the big magazines are going to be dishonest necessarily either. Like i said...I agree with them a whole bunch and disagree with my more "liked" magazines.

Where's your proof of this? Listening tests done by Floyd Toole (which have a lot more bias control built into the research design than your sighted/biased listenings) and others have demonstrated that the top criteria for speaker preferences were even frequency response in the midrange, freedom from distortion, and wide dispersion. Those criteria sound to me like they would be part of a speaker design that sounds realistic. Where does it say that exaggerated bass and treble are preferred criteria?

I looked at the measurement of the 100V2 by Stereophile...exagerrated speaker at 6, 10 and 26khz...the latter outside the normal range of hearing the other two most certainly not...was this speaker done in the NRC...we'll never know...what we do know is a fe generalizable claims that some people liked some speakers with graphs that seem to resemble a flatter line more than others in an A/B test that is totally different from the way a normal person would buy/set-up/and listen to music over the next several years with that person's room and that person's ancillary equipment. No validity problems there.