I like what this author says about listening and reviewing. Reading and hearing it from a magazine or any other venue where audio and music are discussed. Wise words.
In a message dated 2/12/07 15:21:53, bl_ls35a@lloyd.com writes:
> Again, does it matter? Regardless, people who write professionally
> for magazines are compensated for writing things that cause the
> magazines to sell, not to rigidly disseminate the truth. Consider --
> when the truth is not at hand and the deadline looms, one must still
> produce the article.
>
> There are facts and there are opinions. Facts we can garner from
> references and then we can form informed opinion based on logical
> conclusions drawn from the facts. Did Trevor Butler get his "facts"
> from original references, reminiscence, or speculation?
>
There's a great part of me which prickles when someone alludes to writers or
reviewers 'being compensated for writing things which cause the magazines to
sell'.
I have written honestly and without bias for over thirty years, and have
never had cause to write anything other than as I have found. This stance is
because I value my integrity, and that is soemthing which to me has an
uninpeachable value. It is NOT for sale.
This stance has caused me many problems in the past, including having to
resist being 'forced' to write a favourable review in order to keep an advertiser
on board, writing a 'better review' because the manufacturer needed to be
'kept happy', and withdrawing a review 'because it was not favourable to the
product'.
As with any review, one person's findings may well be very different from
another's in the same room. This does not mean that either view is invalid, nor
that either reviewer is 'telling untruths'. People are different, and their
opinions are similarly different.
Reading a review is akin to reading a crossword. Once a reviewer or writer
has established themselves, one can read the review with a 'deeper' or 'more
informed' level of understanding in the same way that one person will set a
crossword in a very different way from another.
As for 'compensation', for the amount of work which goes into doing a review
properly far outweighs any semblance of 'reasonable pay rates'. I have always
regarded the privilege of writing reviews as an opportunity to convey to the
listener / reader the joy which can be had from listening to music on a good
system at home. Despite the huge number of reviews I have written I have never
earned enough not to have a proper 'day job'. Nor have I ever taken the view
that 'I know better' than anyone else. Sure, I may know 'a lot', after all I
have been doing this for a long time, BUT I don't know everything, nor would I
ever profess to. I know some. That's it. All I have written is the truth about
what I have found or heard in the context of my own system, which for reviewing
purposes remains unchanged except for the item under evaluation.
And, as I have said, time after time after time, I have no agenda other than
to encourage people to listen to music, and find a way which makes it
enjoyable and an enduring pleasure for them.
That some publications 'propound' a series of views is up to them, and I feel
sorry for those folk who believe what they read and not what they hear. You
only have your own ears, and theywill be your only reference. If something
sounds right to you, stick with it.
That this has come up in this particular forum suggests that a great many
still believe in the performance and attributes of the LS3/5a. There's absolutely
nothing wrong in that, BUT you should still allow those who gain enjoyment
and satisfaction from a £10 pair of speakers on an electrical wholesaler's shelf
to enjoy music in their own way. As long as they are 'happy', and you are
'happyl', then let's just get on and enjoy music.
At the end of the day, even the very best - whatever that is - system falls
far short of a real lve performance, but as long as we each find a system which
'does it for us', then that's the best we can hope for. The magazines are
'for guidance only', and should be labelled as such.
Chris Beeching
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Database | Polls | Members | Calendar
For more information:
www.ls35a.com Post message: ls35a@yahoogroups.com
Subscribe: ls35a-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe: ls35a-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
List owner: ls35a-owner@yahoogroups.com
) could'nt allow for the Jo Ki method but both CIA and I agreed that We weren't hearing the full potential of the Ls3/5a they way it's owner would hear it at home.
