R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8   Go Down

Author Topic: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A  (Read 63377 times)

JamSync

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 460
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #75 on: January 25, 2005, 02:44:54 PM »

ZETTERSTROEM wrote on Tue, 25 January 2005 18:38

"How can you presume to want to change people's tastes regarding something you acknowledge is subjective?"

so.... if you review gear for EQ aren't you trying to do the same??? don't you recommend what stuff to buy and what not??

hmmm...




Not really. If I review something for Mix, I make the determination before I sign a contract whether the thing is worth reviewing. I once refused to review a plug-in for AudioMedia until they added dither. It made the company furious, but 16 weeks later, they added dither and I reviewed it.

I don't waste my time, the manufacturer's time, or space in a magazine on something that isn't worth buying. What would be the point? I look at stuff and if I can get into it, do something with it, and I think it's worth the asking price...then I review it. Otherwise, it's left to struggle in a sea of available products that sell without reviews. I'm not convinced that reviews are that influential these days, either. Most manufacturers will give you a demo of something and that's where you get to make the final decision...and that's where you *should* make the final decision.

Lee Flier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 320
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #76 on: January 25, 2005, 03:22:23 PM »

JamSync wrote on Tue, 25 January 2005 14:44


I don't waste my time, the manufacturer's time, or space in a magazine on something that isn't worth buying. What would be the point? I look at stuff and if I can get into it, do something with it, and I think it's worth the asking price...then I review it.


Agreed, it is so non constructive and not serving the readership, to review a product that you have no use for.  It's like sending a guy who hates country music to review the latest George Strait record.  It's a given that some people just aren't going to like a product no matter what; IMO the mark of a good review is one that tells someone who may actually be interested in it, what they might expect.  Some of that is always going to be subjective, but I try to make that clear as well.

ammitsboel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1300
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #77 on: January 25, 2005, 03:28:57 PM »

JamSync wrote on Tue, 25 January 2005 19:44


I don't waste my time, the manufacturer's time, or space in a magazine on something that isn't worth buying. What would be the point?

So you are only making positive advertising?

This is just the most un natural way to review gear and I'm sure this has a lot to with why many people are "schizophrenic" and don't know what to buy simply because "everything is great", says the magazines!
I once read these magazines... and i refer to that time as "my clouded and depressing days".

Maybe it's not possible to get back to the 70ties ways of reviewing... but could the poor customers please get some more quality put into the reviews??

Best Regards
Logged
"The male brain is designed for ecstasy" -Dr. Harvey "Gizmo" Rosenberg

Lee Flier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 320
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #78 on: January 25, 2005, 04:02:14 PM »

Well I don't mind saying something negative about a product, by any means, and I'm sure KK doesn't either.  But I still have to feel (before receiving it for review) that I might potentially be able to use it.  Let's put it this way: the market is currently flooded with product.  Trying to decide what to review is one of a magazine's biggest challenges.  This was not the case in the 70's.

Nowadays, if a product has not been reviewed, it means no one was interested enough in it to review it.  That ought to tell you something.  By the same token, there IS a lot of gear that's great. None of it will be great for everybody, which is why a good reviewer will try to describe what the product actually does, who might appreciate it and who might not, and why.  Not just "it's great! or "it sucks!"  I agree with you that it's very difficult to make buying decisions these days because there is an awful lot of good stuff on the market as well as a lot of crap.

Samc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1393
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #79 on: January 25, 2005, 05:41:31 PM »

Is it just me, or do almost every review in audio magazines now read like an infomercial?  Some even go as far as using the exact same text used by the manufacturers in their advertising!

And of course there is usually the coincidence of the full page advert. in the same issue.  I just checked my pile of trade mags. (Jan. issue), and could not find one review that had any negetive coments about any of the products reviewed.  Everything is great, a great tool, a worthwhile addition to your arsenal etc.
Logged
Sam Clayton

Lee Flier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 320
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #80 on: January 25, 2005, 05:54:10 PM »

Samc wrote on Tue, 25 January 2005 17:41

Is it just me, or do almost every review in audio magazines now read like an infomercial?  Some even go as far as using the exact same text used by the manufacturers in their advertising!


Yeah, well that's just plain laziness, and I agree, there's a lot of that going around.

Quote:


And of course there is usually the coincidence of the full page advert. in the same issue.


I think that usually IS just a coincidence.  Reviews tend to come out around the same time as a new product... and so does a full page ad... ergo...

Quote:


I just checked my pile of trade mags. (Jan. issue), and could not find one review that had any negetive coments about any of the products reviewed.  Everything is great, a great tool, a worthwhile addition to your arsenal etc.


See above... there is a lot of great gear out there, and if something sucks, it's not likely anyone will be that wild about wanting to review it.  It ain't like the old days when there were very few product releases, for a very niche market, so EVERYthing got reviewed, even if it sucked.  And a lot of space got filled by trashing stuff.  As it is now, my editors put out a list of everything they have available for review, and I get to choose from a pretty long list.  It's not like I'm going to pick something I probably won't like or can't use.  Would you?  If you've got a session coming up and you're a reviewer, wouldn't you pick something that you think would really benefit your recording in a real world application?  I do.

Now if I think something is gonna be really cool and it disappoints me, I'm certainly going to say so - I think anybody who's read my forum posts for any amount of time knows that I'm quite forthcoming with my opinions Very Happy. And I don't have anybody at EQ telling me that I can't express my true opinions.  Quite the contrary, they KNOW that they're competing with web forums and zines for readership and that readers perceive people are going to be more "honest" on the net (which is not always the case... cuz as we know there's a lot of BS on the net too). But I haven't been disappointed too often.  Usually if I decide I'm interested enough in something to review it, it's probably from a reputable company and it's probably pretty good.  I'll point out whatever negatives I find if there are any, or at least point out applications where it probably wouldn't work, but just about any product is going to have some negatives.  Which doesn't necessarily mean it isn't worth owning.  Again... that decision is up to the reader.

JamSync

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 460
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #81 on: January 25, 2005, 09:04:56 PM »

ammitsboel wrote on Tue, 25 January 2005 20:28

JamSync wrote on Tue, 25 January 2005 19:44


I don't waste my time, the manufacturer's time, or space in a magazine on something that isn't worth buying. What would be the point?

So you are only making positive advertising?

This is just the most un natural way to review gear and I'm sure this has a lot to with why many people are "schizophrenic" and don't know what to buy simply because "everything is great", says the magazines!
I once read these magazines... and i refer to that time as "my clouded and depressing days".

Maybe it's not possible to get back to the 70ties ways of reviewing... but could the poor customers please get some more quality put into the reviews??

Best Regards


If you want to stay in the 70's, be my guest...and take the hairstyles and clothes with you.

What I do is field testing. I've been in the biz for nearly 30 years and I've gone through a lot of equipment as well as studio work, road work, joined NARAS (which means you've worked on stuff for commercial release), gotten a couple of degrees (one in software engineering) and I've been into computers since I used to keypunch cards for an IBM 360. And still I like new music, new technology, new sounds, new interfaces, and I still have fun learning and exploring. In short, I have a lot of experience, yet I'm still open to exploring the future.

So, I think that's the reason why some of my editors have been so willing to put up with me for so long and have let me play with stuff for review.

You sound depressed about the current state of affairs. I'm sorry you feel that way, but I don't see it from my point of view. There is absolutely no excuse for copying marketing drivel into a review and there's no excuse for believing the marketing hype without testing every statement made in a release. There may be some reviewers who write from press releases, but in my experience, they're quickly recognized in the community and they aren't taken seriously.

You should just really read reviews for statements about what the reviewer DID with the product. The rest of it is info about features, which, of course, the reviewer has to describe.  If I like something--sure, I'm going to say "I like it" or "I bought it". Then you go to the dealer or the tradeshow and make your own decision. A review should be more about information than persuasion. I don't make any money if you buy something I review. The manufacturer doesn't pay me, either. So why should I care about persuading you to buy or decline to buy the equipment? The short answer is that I *don't* care if you buy it, so I'm not in the advertising biz. I do care if I've evaluated the piece in enough depth and spent enough time with it to impart information...but that's as far as it goes. My job is to clarify information and field test the product and report on that. End of story.

Also, the term is more properly "schizoid", meaning "split in two". Schizophrenia is a fairly complex personality disorder which has been misinterpreted by news media to mean the same thing as "schizoid".

JamSync

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 460
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #82 on: January 25, 2005, 09:16:15 PM »

Lee Flier wrote on Tue, 25 January 2005 22:54


See above... there is a lot of great gear out there, and if something sucks, it's not likely anyone will be that wild about wanting to review it.  It ain't like the old days when there were very few product releases, for a very niche market, so EVERYthing got reviewed, even if it sucked.  And a lot of space got filled by trashing stuff.  As it is now, my editors put out a list of everything they have available for review, and I get to choose from a pretty long list.  It's not like I'm going to pick something I probably won't like or can't use.  Would you?  If you've got a session coming up and you're a reviewer, wouldn't you pick something that you think would really benefit your recording in a real world application?  I do.

.


Definitely. And I've *never* had an editor approach me and say "this really sucks, but they're a big advertiser, so do you want to review it?" That would be so insulting, so off the wall. I'd say, " you want me to basically destroy my reputation, make me feel bad about myself, and LIE for the money you're paying me? Are you kidding?"

Most reviewers got into the biz because they are genuinely delighted when they see something new and clever and elegant, something that works, something that sounds good. It makes them happy, so it's not surprising that's reflected in their writing. People who "don't like newfangled stuff and think the world is going to hell in a handbasket" generally don't review. Good thing, too...that would be a boring read.

Johnny B

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1134
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #83 on: January 26, 2005, 02:09:21 AM »

This is six pages of info, so I hope I can be forgiven for comming on the last page.

Speaking of tests, did anyone accurately measure the three speakers in the thread's title?

If so, where are the bumps and the valleys?  
Logged
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality,
they are not certain; as far as they are certain,
they do not refer to reality."
---Albert Einstein---

I'm also uncertain about everything.

Ralf Kleemann

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 183
Re: Magazine reviews (was: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A)
« Reply #84 on: January 26, 2005, 07:55:12 AM »

Samc wrote on Tue, 25 January 2005 22:41

[...] could not find one review that had any negetive coments about any of the products reviewed.  Everything is great, a great tool, a worthwhile addition to your arsenal etc.

Much is between the lines. After reading the Sound On Sound magazine for a while, you notice pretty well if they don't like something. Also, their target group extends well into the home studio segment, where you don't want to read that your new budget XYZ piece of gear is completely useless. But they never say "this sucks;" there are subtler ways of expressing it. Much like in 'letters of recommendation' from your HR department: "He always tried to fulfill the given tasks with the best of his skills" is the utmost insult, but doesn't look like it on first sight.

Best regards (really!), Ralf

zetterstroem

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #85 on: January 26, 2005, 01:35:00 PM »

so it all comes down to being subtle.....

just like politics..... say something without saying anything at all!

that way you don't piss anyone off.... and nothing changes!
Logged
Noting the music industry's complaints that illegal downloading means people are getting their music for free, he said, "Well, why not? It ain't worth nothing anyway." (b.dylan)

Lee Flier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 320
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #86 on: January 26, 2005, 06:12:46 PM »

Once again you are badly mistaken.  Did you even read KK's post about how she refused to review a product until they improved it?  And how furious (read: PISSED OFF) the company was?  This happens all the time.  Reviewers have a quite a bit of influence over what manufacturers do and often they will change something before it hits the market, because a reviewer encountered a bug or weakness during the review process.  So to say that "nothing changes" would be wrong.

And it IS possible to say things in a subtle way and yet still be saying something.  As opposed to saying things tactlessly but without any substance, as you seem to be doing here.

Samc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1393
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #87 on: January 27, 2005, 03:19:35 AM »

I think it would be interesting if lee or KK (or both) would explain the nuts and bolts of the review process in detail.  I don't think most people knows what happens behind the scenes so to speak.  

How are the pieces selected for review, do you or the magazine(s) only review equipment that are submitted by the manufacturer and/or do you/the magazine approach a manufacturer if you think a particular piece of equipment might be interesting?

Do you try, and if so how do you verify claims made by the manufacturers regarding the technical performance of said equipment?  What are your obligations to the magazine and to the manufacturer when doing a review?......etc etc.

Best regards,
Sam  
Logged
Sam Clayton

zetterstroem

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 765
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #88 on: January 27, 2005, 05:00:42 AM »

"As opposed to saying things tactlessly but without any substance, as you seem to be doing here."

what kind of substance would you like?
Logged
Noting the music industry's complaints that illegal downloading means people are getting their music for free, he said, "Well, why not? It ain't worth nothing anyway." (b.dylan)

Lee Flier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 320
Re: Genelecs 8050A vs Mackies HR824 vs Adams S2.5A
« Reply #89 on: January 27, 2005, 11:24:00 AM »

Samc wrote on Thu, 27 January 2005 03:19

I think it would be interesting if lee or KK (or both) would explain the nuts and bolts of the review process in detail.  I don't think most people knows what happens behind the scenes so to speak.


I'd be happy to talk about it... thanks for asking and not just presuming. Wink  

Quote:


How are the pieces selected for review, do you or the magazine(s) only review equipment that are submitted by the manufacturer and/or do you/the magazine approach a manufacturer if you think a particular piece of equipment might be interesting?


Both.  If they submit something, the editors look for someone who's interested in doing a review, and if anyone at the magazine is interested in something specific, the editors contact the manufacturer and try to get hold of a unit.

The editors and a lot of the writers of course frequent the trade shows to get an idea what's coming down the pike and network with each other.  I don't get very involved in that part personally, since I'm a freelancer.  I figure the editors and other folks I talk to regularly will let me know what's coming out that might be cool.  EQ specifically also has a policy that they don't review vaporware; if you can't go into a store and buy something, it won't be reviewed. They might send advance stuff for review but the review won't be published until the product is on the market.

Quote:


Do you try, and if so how do you verify claims made by the manufacturers regarding the technical performance of said equipment?


Well it's impossible to verify EVERY claim, but I personally read the manual from cover to cover and attempt to 1) try out every feature and verify that it works as they describe, and 2) if something doesn't appear kosher in terms of the specs, I'll say something to the editor first so that we can verify that I don't have a defective unit (in which case they'd get me another one), or an incompatibility with my setup (which would be mentioned in the review).

When I say something "doesn't appear kosher" it's a fairly gut level judgement based on experience.  If a manufacturer claims a mic is flat out to 22K and it isn't, I can hear it and I'll say so.  I don't generally sit there and actually measure specs myself (or ask my editors to if I don't have the test equipment) unless I have good reason to think the manufacturer is full of it.  There just isn't enough time to do that, and in any case I don't think I've ever come across a case where the manufacturer outright lied.  They might (and often do) say something misleading in their marketing, which is usually something subjective or misleading by omission, in which case I may well attempt to fill in the blanks.  If something doesn't work as advertised, that should become apparent during the evaluation process.  And we do try to beat stuff up pretty well - that's another benefit of doing this, we get to abuse gear in a way that somebody who paid for it probably wouldn't dare!

Quote:

What are your obligations to the magazine and to the manufacturer when doing a review?......etc etc.



My obligation to the magazine is to do an honest and thorough review, of the length and format we've agreed upon, and to turn it in on time. Smile  Our obligation to the manufacturer is that we send the review to them before it is published for fact checking. Basically that means if we've misstated anything they have the chance to point it out.  And as KK and I both mentioned, oftentimes when they read a review they will hasten to correct something before it goes to publication, in which case we will amend the review.  I think this is a valuable part of the review process which most of the buying public isn't really aware of - I know I wasn't before I started reviewing.

And that's about it really.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8   Go Up
 

Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.039 seconds with 17 queries.