|
Post by mulmany on Apr 30, 2018 11:51:31 GMT -6
Funny that it just came out in February 2018.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 30, 2018 11:56:35 GMT -6
I don't think I've ever seen a "bad" review on SOS.. Just saying..
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 30, 2018 16:35:13 GMT -6
I know what you mean, but so far, the reviews have paralleled my experiences with the gear being reviewed.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Apr 30, 2018 16:47:28 GMT -6
I don't think I've ever seen a "bad" review on SOS.. Just saying.. I was just thinking that if I'm SOS, I'd avoid reviewing gear that I'd have to outright pan.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Apr 30, 2018 17:17:34 GMT -6
Found this.. www.soundonsound.com/reviews/art-scl2Read the last three paragraphs - Not exactly a ringing endorsement. Actually, it's pretty much a pan if you're at all capable of reading between the lines. I think another part of the reason we don't see reviews like this is because we would never consider bothering to read a review on gear like the scl2 in the first place. I think Ward 's point still has merit. Where does SOS receive the lion's share of its revenue? I honestly don't know the answer, but I'll bet if I guessed I'd be right. Their reputation as an impartial and unbiased reviewer of gear is important, but I don't doubt for a second that it does not get trumped by other concerns at times.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 30, 2018 17:52:12 GMT -6
I recall a few reviews of plugins where they were clearly panned. I think we've reached a point where most gear for sale is pretty good, so it's not surprising reviews are typically good. It's the details we really look for in reviews. Mainly, is it better than product X,Y,Z, or does it have the features you want.
I have a friend who's the senior editor of the major audiophile magazine, and he's gone through extraordinary lengths to maintain credibility, but he may be the exception and not the rule for all I know about SOS.
So, does anyone know if Matt at Dizengoff is OK? I'm concerned maybe something happened. Dizengoff seemed to be easily selling as much gear as they could make.
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Apr 30, 2018 18:40:59 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by mdmitch2 on Apr 30, 2018 20:45:23 GMT -6
I don't think I've ever seen a "bad" review on SOS.. Just saying.. I was just thinking that if I'm SOS, I'd avoid reviewing gear that I'd have to outright pan. When I was first starting, I made the mistake of trusting SOS and ended up with a Rode NT1a and KRK Rokit monitors.... Two things to keep in mind when reading magazine reviews: 1. They typically only discuss the positive attributes of a given product 2. They're always reviewing each product relative to other products in the same price range. So when you combine these two things, you get a great review of the KRK Rokit, which is probably the worst speaker I've ever heard. But it doesn't sell magazines when you truthfully say "All cheap monitors are garbage" so they cherry pick one or two relatively superior qualities about one garbage monitor versus another, and that forms the basis of the review.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on Apr 30, 2018 20:55:35 GMT -6
Found this.. www.soundonsound.com/reviews/art-scl2Read the last three paragraphs - Not exactly a ringing endorsement. Actually, it's pretty much a pan if you're at all capable of reading between the lines. I think another part of the reason we don't see reviews like this is because we would never consider bothering to read a review on gear like the scl2 in the first place. I think Ward 's point still has merit. Where does SOS receive the lion's share of its revenue? I honestly don't know the answer, but I'll bet if I guessed I'd be right. Their reputation as an impartial and unbiased reviewer of gear is important, but I don't doubt for a second that it does not get trumped by other concerns at times. The lion share of any publication or web site that excepts ads is wait for it... ADS! So almost every review comes across as positive, you don’t bite the hand that feeds you!
|
|
|
Post by stormymondays on May 1, 2018 2:27:11 GMT -6
I’m a big SOS fan. I’ve never been led astray by any of their reviews. With limited space in the mag, I can understand they don’t want to devote it to bad products.
However, they are not afraid to “bite the hand”. They panned Slate’s virtual mic (and they were running full page ads!) on their cover review. A purple site argument ensued, with Steve doing his usual thing, which ended with a SOS writer being banned from the thread by J. And then me!
|
|
|
Post by M57 on May 1, 2018 4:12:44 GMT -6
I honestly don't know the answer, but I'll bet if I guessed I'd be right. Their reputation as an impartial and unbiased reviewer of gear is important, but I don't doubt for a second that it does not get trumped by other concerns at times. The lion share of any publication or web site that excepts ads is wait for it... ADS! Well Damn; you ruined it for me.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 15,011
Member is Online
|
Post by ericn on May 1, 2018 4:50:28 GMT -6
I’m a big SOS fan. I’ve never been led astray by any of their reviews. With limited space in the mag, I can understand they don’t want to devote it to bad products. However, they are not afraid to “bite the hand”. They panned Slate’s virtual mic (and they were running full page ads!) on their cover review. A purple site argument ensued, with Steve doing his usual thing, which ended with a SOS writer being banned from the thread by J. And then me! m In some ways dissing Slates mic muddler is play to a bunch of advertisers with much larger budgets, think Shure, AT, Sennhiser. Those 3 spread a ton of money around, oh how I miss those spiff checks!
|
|
|
Post by jeremygillespie on May 1, 2018 6:11:02 GMT -6
I was just thinking that if I'm SOS, I'd avoid reviewing gear that I'd have to outright pan. When I was first starting, I made the mistake of trusting SOS and ended up with a Rode NT1a and KRK Rokit monitors.... Two things to keep in mind when reading magazine reviews: 1. They typically only discuss the positive attributes of a given product 2. They're always reviewing each product relative to other products in the same price range. So when you combine these two things, you get a great review of the KRK Rokit, which is probably the worst speaker I've ever heard. But it doesn't sell magazines when you truthfully say "All cheap monitors are garbage" so they cherry pick one or two relatively superior qualities about one garbage monitor versus another, and that forms the basis of the review. I got had on the Rode NT1a as well. I remember being excited when it showed up at my door, opening it up and plugging it in. It took me about 10 mins before I realized I just purchased a complete piece of junk. Sold it shortly after and got a 414 to have as my first proper condenser.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on May 1, 2018 6:42:05 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 1, 2018 6:59:49 GMT -6
I'm just don't buy into the cliche` that magazines accepting ads can't write honest reviews. I've seen so many "caveat emptors" in mags like Stereophile, Sound and Vision, and yes, SOS which disproved the notion.
Are the reviews sometimes a little jollier than they might have been sans advertising, I think so, but purists wanting a review not touched by advertising have the internet and places like realgear now. It pays to learn a reviewer's style and eventually you learn who to trust. Tape Op is pretty good, cheery, but they will say beware of one thing or another.
As for too many positive reviews, well last's face it, a $1,400 preamp isn't likely to sound bad.
We've gone off topic, anyone know anything about Matt Newport? Is he OK?
|
|
|
Post by kilroyrock on May 1, 2018 10:37:50 GMT -6
When I was first starting, I made the mistake of trusting SOS and ended up with a Rode NT1a and KRK Rokit monitors.... Two things to keep in mind when reading magazine reviews: 1. They typically only discuss the positive attributes of a given product 2. They're always reviewing each product relative to other products in the same price range. So when you combine these two things, you get a great review of the KRK Rokit, which is probably the worst speaker I've ever heard. But it doesn't sell magazines when you truthfully say "All cheap monitors are garbage" so they cherry pick one or two relatively superior qualities about one garbage monitor versus another, and that forms the basis of the review. I got had on the Rode NT1a as well. I remember being excited when it showed up at my door, opening it up and plugging it in. It took me about 10 mins before I realized I just purchased a complete piece of junk. Sold it shortly after and got a 414 to have as my first proper condenser. I'm starting to think I should sell my 2003 behringer truth 2031a monitors..
|
|
|
Post by m03 on May 1, 2018 11:33:30 GMT -6
I'm just don't buy into the cliche` that magazines accepting ads can't write honest reviews. I've seen so many "caveat emptors" in mags like Stereophile, Sound and Vision, and yes, SOS which disproved the notion. Are the reviews sometimes a little jollier than they might have been sans advertising, I think so, but purists wanting a review not touched by advertising have the internet and places like realgear now. It pays to learn a reviewer's style and eventually you learn who to trust. Tape Op is pretty good, cheery, but they will say beware of one thing or another. As for too many positive reviews, well last's face it, a $1,400 preamp isn't likely to sound bad. We've gone off topic, anyone know anything about Matt Newport? Is he OK? His LinkedIn profile states this about his tenure at Dizengoff: Looks like he's involved in other ventures, but it's hard to say based on the info there.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on May 1, 2018 20:01:50 GMT -6
I googled them. It appears that they still sell hummus and other Israeli food in NYC and a couple other cities.
|
|
|
Post by pope on May 2, 2018 1:34:58 GMT -6
I googled them. It appears that they still sell hummus and other Israeli food in NYC and a couple other cities. With saturated fat?
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on May 2, 2018 5:09:13 GMT -6
I know MAtt had a couple of other ventures he was involved in, but don't know any specifics.
|
|