Discussion in 'Audio Visual' started by Hi-end Head, May 22, 2022.
I consider him a good fellow, and appreciate his work, but still, speculation.
Not from my perspective... but I can understand others having a differing view without the knowledge I have of the situation. Let's just put it this way... he doesn't need money from anyone, he's rather well off after a lot of years of hard work for Microsoft as VP of digital media (he and his team designed WMA for e.g.) and is now retired. In fact Amir wrote a very successful book on Unix a long time ago too.
This is EXACTLY the sort of thing I was referring to. Adopting a true sceptical POV means assuming guilty until proven innocent; trust but verify; etc etc etc. Most people in this thread and on this forum will be doing that, but we're used to dealing with the sort of person that DOESN'T. Assumptions about who you're talking with that arise can make this whole topic a little sticky to navigate.
Have a beer and put some music on, guys. It's Friday.
Fair enough, but that's not entirely helpful, and realistically, would probably leave you blinded for some time if his agenda did change from your perspective.
People change and do funny things all of the time, sometimes, yes, it could be money driven. Other times it's pure ego.
Appeal to false authority.
This is my relaxation from packing boxes for a move tomorrow. Good 'ol off-topic chin wag.
What Hi Fi are notorious for exaggerating the truth when it comes to publishing reviews. It was once stated, If you pay enough in advertising fee's. What HiFi will make it product of the year Most audio publications are the same, Stereophile . HiFiplus, HiFichoice, TAS, are all the same, About the only exception is HiFi Critic which is devoid of advertising. And is published four times a year, Cost is around $35.00 a copy depending on exchange rates.
So he's on the dole and works for nothing. Let me tell you no reviewer / tester works for nothing, and they all give glowing reports, If they where to tell people that the product under review was a load of crap, they would be down the job center the next day.
As I said they never show a bad review. I sometimes think they get paid by the word printed, Most of the time they just waffle on. That's why I gave audio magazines the chop some years ago.
Well that's total rubbish for a start, Reviews get products for free from manufacturers, to review, In some cases they get to keep the product after the review.. No reviewer anywhere buy's the product to review, the only exception is Jay, of Jay's Audio Lab. [on youtube] And all the reviews are glowing, write a bad review and it's curtains, no more samples. But if you can name a reviewer that can spend 100 grand on an amp, so he can write a review. let me know
You seem to have missed the part where I said he is well off and retired, he certainly doesn't require unemployment benefits... this is a hobby and something to dig his teeth into during retirement.
It may be prudent to read about about the man or even get to know him personally somehow before casting such aspersions, as to me it is rather disrespectful.
Amir is also well known for joining small forums like this to defend himself too, being a public forum and all anyone can read... if drawn to his attention. It's often not a good look to make comments about others that are not present to defend themselves.
I mean its not audio so much but LTT often buy gear directly off the shelf rather then get samples so they can review it properly. They are also investing heavily into their own lab so they can properly review as much tech as possible
I get to sit on the veranda, and watch the world go by. They take my walking frame away so there's no chance of escape.
Your the one who named names.
It's no secret that Amir operates ASR, Prof. Wolf operates L7Audiolab, Erin operates Erin's Corner and we know where Goldfinger, Marv etc. are... regardless, your comments stand, are quoted and not able to be removed now. Anyway, I'm off home to listen to some music... not the equipment, that's for analysers.
He has all of his own equipment, tests products sent by forum members and seemingly isn't afraid to call a spade a spade. He does though, accept donations.
I have vague memories of a manufacturer being caught swapping components inside a "review sample".
Heading aid counter clockwise, volume control clockwise. They might just bring it back
One would think your attempting to make threats,, Most unwise.
Just small member donations, which is used to run the site and buy the odd item for testing... it's not unusual for members to contribute to hosting on a forum.
Shirley you're not serious... now your just being ridonkulous, plus you were the one being offensive that Agg and others had to mention earlier in the thread.
Can't we have a proper discussion without this kind of crap and baiting? Out of all the forums I frequent, this only happens here. I'm sharing info to help people that may be stuck on old audiophile mindsets and myths to move forward in their audio reproduction. It's a great era for audio right now, as "high end" performance no longer is an exorbitant cost. It's truly not a challenge... typing this listening to music on my nice and transparent, well measuring system and am content.
Although the specific instances evade my memory I can remember hearing over time more than a few cases where the review samples were dressed up. Either as 'pre-production' but the actual to the market were worse or actually hand worked.
This used to happen a fair bit, but mostly on the cheaper lines and AVR' especially. Parts where exchanged for high quality components. And in some cases power supplies where, shell we say modified.
I've never read or heard it happening on high-end brands, where short construction run's are produced
I'd personally like to see citation highlighting dressed up review samples, especially in the case of AVR's.
It doesn't matter who is doing the reviewing, some bias is unavoidable. Even in these very forums, the bias is obvious - Myself included. However if they perform physical testing and publish the results, such testing is going to be as unbiased, or at least as scientific, as you can realistically get.