Jump to content
IGNORED

Reviewers ... reviewing


Guest hifi1
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest hifi1

Hi

Be4 anyone proceed, if u are a follower of Mr Tham (editor of our local chinese hi fi mag and columnist of our Chinese newspaper sunday supplement), I apologized if I 'offend' u in questioning his reviewing process and intended conclusion. If Mr Tham read this, do not sue me. I hope u see my point of view.

 

Anyone familiar will know Mr Tham to be someone who doesn't change his hi fi system often, an act certainly worthy of mention and have my admiration. Today his column speaks of the Marantz CD 6000 LE cd player, a $500 plus player that is 'unbeatable'(?) in her price range. He used the player in his megabucks system (FM acoustic pre/Jeff Rowland 8T power and German Physics Carbon speakers with Harmonic Tech cables and line filters). We can safely say the cd player prob cost less than 1% of the price of his system. His original digital system consist of some megabucks components as well (Sony SCD 1 tpt etc).

 

He uses the stock Marantz CD 6000 LE power cord plugged into the Harmonic line conditioner (? ) and made comments on the performance of the sound. Essentially the performance is not as good as his reference but is great for her price and conclude the superiority of the player (which I cannot comment becos I have nor heard it be4).

 

Some questions came to my mind.

 

Q1. How many people will spend 1% on the source so they can listen to something similar to the reviewed sound?

 

Q2. What other similar price player has he reviewed using the same setup?

 

Q3. He just 'inserted' the player in without any further 'tweaking', cable changes etc. So are we lsitening to the 'best' the Marantz player is capable of? Maybe Marantz do not goes well with the expensive Harmonic Tech cables???? Or Harmonic Tech cables are so good that they are 'universal' in their appeal (and check their PRICES!!!)

 

Q4. His comments that the expensive reference setup will show any weakness the Marantz player has is good for the buyer's ears but tells nothing in real life becos most people will match the Marantz with 'lesser' components and hence may not be able to listen to the 'weaknessess' and 'strengths'.

 

So my conclusion is it is better to review the said player in a 'real' world setup so that the strengths and flaws will be shown clearly and heard 'easily' by any interested buyer. Unless comparisons are made with other similar priced products (which is unlikely and the other product will never be named cos commercial consideration), conclusion that it is the best in the price range is not convincing enough. The 'shiok' factor is there but the informational value is sadly lacking...

 

Maybe next week, he will use his full reference digital setup, pre and power amp and then drive a $300 Mission speakers and blah blah blah.... but how does that help the poor souls buying the speakers?? That the mids is so alluring etc etc and when the buyer plays through the NAD system he owns, he heard nothing of the sort and will never hear such 'allure'.

 

Just my thoughts becos there seem to be just too much COMMERCIAL message in the reviews. Forgive me if I am wrong and I did not say that the Marantz does not deserve the praise, just that it should not be done this way.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I think review using the best and familar system is the right thing to do. So you can hear how good the component you're reviewing can be (you can't blame other components).

 

But giving the comment without referent of the same price components is not right.

 

How do you know it's best for this price range if you'ver never listen to others?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...
To Top