Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

RE: Nordost's new employee ....

Posted by Alan Sircom on May 27, 2009 at 10:07:49:
Roy's move is not without precedent in the UK. However, those who write and work in other fields within the industry choose not to disclose their interests in print. I will not allow that, hence my demand to 'out' Mr Gregory in my editorial.
I have also decided to make two of the more inflammatory features I am publishing in Hi-Fi Plus anonymous, in part to protect the interests of those who chose to write them. The first - called Anger Management - is a random rant from anyone, whether in the industry or not. Just so long as it stays the right side of the libel laws in the UK, it can be as vitriolic and as angry as the person penning it decides to make it. It allows people the anonymity of an non-specific identity on an audio forum.
The other - The Hi-Fi Heretic - column is a method of applying balance to what's seen as the outlandish concepts held by audiophiles, and is written by someone within the audio industry who chooses not to disclose his or her name because the words they write are entirely at odds with the company they work for. We have precedent for such an anonymous column in the UK audio press - it was known as The Curse of the Claw. That was more of an in-joke, where this is more of a challenge to the perceived wisdom of audiophiles (cables make a difference, CD vs MP3 and so on).
As to ethics in audio journalism, it's a very difficult subject. We have a lot of professional reviewers in the UK and - if this were 1986, that would be a very well paid job. Unfortunately, it's 2009 and many full-time reviewers earn about as much as a McManager. And yet, they are expected to be able to buy tens or even hundreds of pounds worth of products at full retail prices (as an interesting aside, the people who shout loudest about this are, in fact, often hi-fi retailers who buy their own equipment at accommodation prices). I see no problems potentially with those writing about products being able to receive the same advantages as other people in the audio industry.
The difficulty with reviewers who buy is they often stick with a reference point long since withdrawn from the shops. Comparing a shiny new amp with a reference point you bought is fine, but if it's a product bought in 1994 and discontinued three years later, the review helps no-one really - especially readers, who have no frame of reference to compare the product to in the current market.
A more touchy problem is long-term loan stock. On the one hand, it allows the reviewer to have an ever-changing 'winner stays on' pool of equipment at a range of prices available to hand. On the other, it smacks of 'freebies'.
My take on this is a watching brief; I do not get worried about what products the reviewer has and how they got them unless they begin to use them as filler in every review they submit. But I'm open to suggestions...
-
Editor, Hi-Fi Plus magazine, from sunny ol' Englandshire