- Joined
- Jan 30, 2011
- Posts
- 13,315
- Likes
- 24,354
So a review whether positive or negative is still publicity, therefore bad products probably shouldn't be covered at all unless the writer strongly averts buyers. And since most reviewers are very time constrained, and I assume this is the case for others too, we tend to gravitate towards models of interest or things that seem to possess some quality from initial impressions while blocking out the junk. Resultantly, only capable items get reviewed and scores look overly positive, but these products are objectively well-performing compared to products uncovered and unmentioned in the review.
I definitely don't have the time to look at all of the products I get sent (not always on request or to my knowledge), so I just feature the good stuff that I think people will value. Any thoughts on this? Of course, expression of thoughts on these products can easily become hype but I think it's a pretty common trend that should be addressed.
And a note on scoring, due to the aforementioned phenomenon, ratings are skewed positive, with the vast majority of products sitting on 4-stars or very negative around 2-stars. Is it fair to raise our standards and give products like the Kinera H3 and Simgot EN700 Bass 2-3 stars because it's just average in its price category, or does it get 4-5 stars because, as a product, it is quite fully-featured?
I can only tell you how I do it - others will have their own methodology.
- If I receive something I think is seriously flawed, most of the time I will let the manufacturer know, and check to see if it is actually a fault. I've had a lot of samples with mis-matched drivers etc over the years. It happens. Most of the time I simply review the gear, and point out good and bad. I've had excellent gear and some not so good gear from both FiiO and Dunu. To their credit, both companies asked me to carry on the reviews with the gear I had issues with. They have been really good - preferring a review warts and all. Neither company tries to influence me - and both appreciate the feedback.
- I review whatever I get sent. And it doesn't matter if its $10 ear-buds from VE or a $1300 DAP from L&P. They all get the same treatment - same care, same measurements.
- Scoring can be done anyway as long as you explain how you do it. I take value into account. So when I'm reviewing a $100 IEM, I'm scoring it alongside other $100 IEMs, Some don't - but I find that if I review everything on the same scale, then only the expensive stuff would get the high scores, and any cheap stuff would be getting low scores. Thats not fair. people shop in different brackets. Value is just another feature / scoring point for me. The FiiO F9 scored high despite it's narrow treble peak because it was easy to EQ, had very good fit and build, and for a $100 IEM punched way above its price point. The Kinera H3 scored lower because it had significantly lower value to me. I didn't have to just apply a basic EQ - I had to EQ them extensively to correct their faults. And the treble peak wasn't narrow - it was wide and really unpleasant. That was the bit I struggled with - how other people couldn't notice.
I haven't heard the Simgot EN700 Bass, but I have the Pro, and it is very good. Its coloured (mildly v shaped) but its done really well. Its build is excellent. And for $150 I can't really fault them. Good sound, good build, good value, good fit, good comfort.
At the other end of the scale are IEMs like the RE800. its actually a very close to reference IEM tuning. And if you EQ the treble peak out, iits a really nice IEM to listen to. But I can't score it highly because of the price. IMO a $700 IEM shouldn't have those issues. Hopefully that makes some sense.
Some people do scoring really well IMO - break it down and be very transparent with weightings etc. I just try to give reasons for the way I score.