reliable review websites?

[Rothwellaudio]

We haven't really bothered much the magazines for the past few years (the stuff we were making was selling well enough without them) but perhaps our new stuff could do with being reviewed. However, the power of the mags has declined markedly over the past 3-5 years as more and more people search the internet for guidance. My question is which websites have credibility and get plenty of readers? It's difficult enough getting review samples back from magazines here in the UK so I'm reluctant to send stuff out for review if there's a chance it won't come back or the site has no clout anyway.
Any suggestions?

[EdAInWestOC]

Other than the obvious stuff like:
http://www.stereophile.com/
http://www.avguide.com/channel/the-absolute-sound

There is Mike Fremers http://www.analogplanet.com/.

Sources for reviews of gear frequently comes from forums like this one or:
http://www.audioasylum.com/cgi/etv.mpl?forum=vinyl
http://www.audiokarma.org/
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?eanlg&1&ctg&0&50&
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/

If you can get members of forums like those above to review your gear it may be as good as advertising through traditional channels. Obviously, a review via non-professional users is a questionable thing but it can be promising if the member is chosen properly. The review in question should be performed by forum members that have good writing skills and understands what is important to you.

In my view, the fact that users are using the Internet for their information almost requires that a manufacturer utilize these forums to spread the word. Personally, I like traditional channels for information but I also find that the right users on these forums are a valuable a source of information.

The Internet allows a potential buyer to ignore ads (which I find annoying and are totally useless). I am like many users on the Internet. I ignore the ads and go strait for the forums to exchange views. If I were still a business owner (sold my last business in Sept of 2005) I would be concerned about the state of print advertising and the effectiveness of Internet advertising.

Word of mouth is still the best advertising and getting that word out is tricky

Best of luck,
Ed

[Ottermel]

You could try these guys:
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/audioreviews.html

[JaS]

In my view, the fact that users are using the Internet for their information almost requires that a manufacturer utilize these forums to spread the word.

Just be sure to check the T&C before trying this approach. Not all forums accept commercially sponsored/driven posts, and 'reviews' that originate from a manufacturer approaching a forum member could breach the rules on such posts. This type of promotion wouldn't be welcome here, but I have visited forums where it is common. I'm not convinced it would be as successful as approaching a magazine reviewer, but then I'm not in the business

Regards,
JaS

[Dinohyus Hollandi]

How about these guys?
http://www.tnt-audio.com

[EdAInWestOC]

In my view, the fact that users are using the Internet for their information almost requires that a manufacturer utilize these forums to spread the word.

Just be sure to check the T&C before trying this approach. Not all forums accept commercially sponsored/driven posts, and 'reviews' that originate from a manufacturer approaching a forum member could breach the rules on such posts. This type of promotion wouldn't be welcome here, but I have visited forums where it is common. I'm not convinced it would be as successful as approaching a magazine reviewer, but then I'm not in the business

Regards,
JaS

JaS,
I'm not suggesting that users spread intentional "commercials". What I meant that users post honest reviews of a manufacturers equipment. This requires that the user is not bound to say anythng they do not honestly believe.

I hate crass commercialism but the forum is a valuable tool to communicate reviews of products. As long as those reviews are honest and do not include any obligation to say anything that the user does not believe.

Is that within the rules?

Ed

[Ldg]

I'll see your shilling, and raise you half a crown.

The general absence of shilling on this forum is a real plus, IMO. I think it usually stands out like a sore thumb, even when in disguise though. Shills often overplay it, and get uppity when there's fair challenge or disagreement. When it happens though, it devalues the unbiased opinions of those who post without a manufacturer's agenda backing them, as I see it. Personally, I really don't like it, it exploits goodwill and the general openness and philanthropic nature of the forum, as I see it.

BTW, I think I can spot what I believe to be a fairly recent cunning shill in the 'Other' section here, if I'm right it's a good one.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who reviews the reviewers, Rothwellaudio ?

[JaS]

What I meant that users post honest reviews of a manufacturers equipment. This requires that the user is not bound to say anythng they do not honestly believe.

Obviously I don't have any issues with members giving honest, unprompted opinions about equipment they own, but if it's a manufacturer sponsored review, ie the member didn't personally purchase the component and the review was arranged by the manufacturer, then it's too close to being just another form of product promotion, which is probably best left to other forums? Even if it was a well regarded member doing the reviewing I'd rather it was done outside of the forum itself.

Some forums positively encourage manufacturer participation and might be worth approaching, but I'm not a fan of this sort of post myself and wonder if it's the best way to promote a brand?

Regards,
JaS

[EdAInWestOC]

What I meant that users post honest reviews of a manufacturers equipment. This requires that the user is not bound to say anythng they do not honestly believe.

Obviously I don't have any issues with members giving honest, unprompted opinions about equipment they own, but if it's a manufacturer sponsored review, ie the member didn't personally purchase the component and the review was arranged by the manufacturer, then it's too close to being just another form of product promotion, which is probably best left to other forums? Even if it was a well regarded member doing the reviewing I'd rather it was done outside of the forum itself.

Some forums positively encourage manufacturer participation and might be worth approaching, but I'm not a fan of this sort of post myself and wonder if it's the best way to promote a brand?

Regards,
JaS

JaS,
To be honest I never really thought about this issue before (hence my incomplete description) but as soon as I read the content of the original poster my business owner hat was on again and my feeling about advertising on the internet snapped to the forefront.

It would be a good thing if you could figure out a way where manufacturer's gear could be reviewed by user's even if that gear were on loan for review purposes.

The original poster expressed it in his text. There is a decreasing value of advertising in traditional media and the internet is where most people go for their shopping and product information. If you allowed reviews of gear on loan for review and the review specifically stated that this was the case then the amount of reviews could potentially increase.

If manufacturers saw the value of such reviews in this forum then it would not only benefit the members of this forum but this forum could become that much more important (like you needed more to do).

The fact that you have a captive audience that are interested in the gear and that the forum is specifically dedicated to audio use gives this approach a bit of an advantage.

Again, manufacturers would have to consider this a viable approach. But damm it would be a great resource to have a significant volume of reviews done by people who you respect on a site you are familiar with.

Still...lots of issues have to be worked out and I apologize for even starting this issue. Advertising on the internet is a thorn in this users side and I strongly believe it is a poor way to get potential buyers interested in a product. I have the habit of skipping any ads on a page and I believe others operate in a similar fashion.

Your site is great and has amazing potential if certain careful step are taken.

I'm sure you have other points of view on this issue and I would be interested to hear what issues lurk behind such a change.

Ed

[Alec124c41]

Frankly, I have enjoyed, and been influenced by, opinions expressed be various members of this forum, regarding various pieces of equipment. This is already a valuable resource. There are many members whose opinions I respect, and I know they are being quite spontaneous in their reports. The things I have bought, I have not been disappointed with. And there a few things that apparently sound fabulous, but are too finicky for me to desire.

Cheers,
Alec

[Ldg]

It would be a good thing if you could figure out a way where manufacturer's gear could be reviewed by user's even if that gear were on loan for review purposes.

Reviews already happen, as Alec posts. And it's generally spontaneous, not with an agenda promoted by a manufacturer, and that is of enormous value as a reader. It might not suit manufacturers/dealers seeking to promote products, but that is exactly why spontaneous reviews, or responses to requests are far more interesting and valuable to read.

If you allowed reviews of gear on loan for review and the review specifically stated that this was the case then the amount of reviews could potentially increase.

Already, I can see a line forming to send me cables for review No, that really just wouldn't ever happen, because manufacturers naturally seek favourable reviews, and always target reviewers for this with fingers crossed. It illustrates the automatic bias and obvious agenda that is part of the baggage with manufacturer initiated reviews.

If someone buys or otherwise obtains gear, and thinks enough of it to post a review here that is far more interesting and valuable as a reader, methinks. Such things are devalued by manufacturer initiated reviews, as I see it.

If manufacturers saw the value of such reviews in this forum then it would not only benefit the members of this forum but this forum could become that much more important (like you needed more to do).

'More important' in the sense of a marketing channel for manufacturers perhaps. And it depends on one's perspective as to whether that is a good thing, personally I think not. Besides, there are already plenty of such forums where those channels exist, and personally I find them far weaker than here and not a place where one is likely to readily find independant review opinion or feel good about posting content.

The fact that you have a captive audience that are interested in the gear and that the forum is specifically dedicated to audio use gives this approach a bit of an advantage.

Advantage as a sales/marketing channel, disadvantage as an interested reader or poster of independant content I venture. Captive ?

....Your site is great.....

I agree, part of which is due to stance on commercial neutrality, IMO.

B_50 et als 'bicycles' are very good, precisely because the initiative is independant, the review list is ad-hoc and diverse.

[EdAInWestOC]

It would be a good thing if you could figure out a way where manufacturer's gear could be reviewed by user's even if that gear were on loan for review purposes.

Reviews already happen, as Alec posts. And it's generally spontaneous, not with an agenda promoted by a manufacturer, and that is of enormous value as a reader. It might not suit manufacturers/dealers seeking to promote products, but that is exactly why spontaneous reviews, or responses to requests are far more interesting and valuable to read.

If you allowed reviews of gear on loan for review and the review specifically stated that this was the case then the amount of reviews could potentially increase.

Already, I can see a line forming to send me cables for review No, that really just wouldn't ever happen, because manufacturers naturally seek favourable reviews, and always target reviewers for this with fingers crossed. It illustrates the automatic bias and obvious agenda that is part of the baggage with manufacturer initiated reviews.

If someone buys or otherwise obtains gear, and thinks enough of it to post a review here that is far more interesting and valuable as a reader, methinks. Such things are devalued by manufacturer initiated reviews, as I see it.

If manufacturers saw the value of such reviews in this forum then it would not only benefit the members of this forum but this forum could become that much more important (like you needed more to do).

'More important' in the sense of a marketing channel for manufacturers perhaps. And it depends on one's perspective as to whether that is a good thing, personally I think not. Besides, there are already plenty of such forums where those channels exist, and personally I find them far weaker than here and not a place where one is likely to readily find independant review opinion or feel good about posting content.

The fact that you have a captive audience that are interested in the gear and that the forum is specifically dedicated to audio use gives this approach a bit of an advantage.

Advantage as a sales/marketing channel, disadvantage as an interested reader or poster of independant content I venture. Captive ?

....Your site is great.....

I agree, part of which is due to stance on commercial neutrality, IMO.

B_50 et als 'bicycles' are very good, precisely because the initiative is independant, the review list is ad-hoc and diverse.

LD,
Of course this type of thing can get out of control, and I would not like to see that happening. I can't help but believe that this type of thing could happen and the reviews in question can remain neutral.

Manufacturers already lend out gear for review to "professional" reviewers with the supposed understanding that this arrangement does not obligate said reviewers to provide favorable reviews. One could also argue that owners of equipment are not impartial since they have just spent their own money on the equipment in question and therefore have the "rose-colored-glasses" view of their new gear.

The argument could go on indefinately as to whether "review gear on loan" or "owners of gear" tend to be more impartial. Either way the internet will continue to become more important when it comes to the buying public making decisions.

If the infrastructure were in place and that infrastructure set guidelines as to the rules of reviewing gear, then this site could stand to benefit. At least the possibility exists.

I think we need to step back. Just because a piece of gear being reviewed is a "review loaner" doesn't mean that review is tainted. This is an alarmist position and we could be missing an opportunity if we over react. Reviews could be plainly marked whether that review is by an owner or via a review loaner. Furthermore any pressure by manufacturers on reviewers could be punishable by removable of their gear from the review section (if said section were dedicated to such use). Reviewers could also receive punishment if they took part in tainted reviews.

That type of infrastructure would setup a framework that could help ensure neutral reviews. To be totally honest here anyone could register on this forum and post a review as the owner of that gear. Nothing prevents this from happening and the review appears to be an honest assessment of the gear in question. I hope that this type of thing doesn't happen but with advertising in traditional media being less effective things could change.

No one wants this site to get commercialized. It would take away from the usefulness of the site and make everything here suspect. Personally I would avoid coming here. What I am thinking about is something that puts a review framework in place and sets up rules to keep honest people honest.

I don't know how to achieve all of this but it could be done if some time were spent to consider rules.

Ed

[Ldg]

....I can't help but believe that this type of thing could happen and the reviews in question can remain neutral......

There we disagree, Ed. The mere act of a manufacturer choosing the reviewer creates the potential for bias. Simply because the manufacturer seeks a favourable review and would seem likely to select reviewers with that in mind. Foolish to do otherwise. The example I cite is how many times would I be selected to review cables ? Really Which is surely bad, unless one happens to have financial interest in the outcome.

Manufacturers already lend out gear for review to "professional" reviewers with the supposed understanding that this arrangement does not obligate said reviewers to provide favorable reviews

Of course, but it would be foolish not to choose even "professional" reviewers on the basis of those most likely to be empathetic, and to do whatever is possible to foster such a relationship and facilitate a result.

One could also argue that owners of equipment are not impartial since they have just spent their own money on the equipment in question and therefore have the "rose-colored-glasses" view of their new gear.

Yes. But at least those reviews are spontaneous, randomly selected, and the poster's investment is already made, without commercial motivation, presumably posted with philanthropic motive and in good faith.

The argument could go on indefinately as to whether "review gear on loan" or "owners of gear" tend to be more impartial.

The issue is not just the whether the review process is conducted impartially. It's also whether the underlying motivation and initiative is philanthropic, or commercial. Not of the review itself, but of what provoked it.

If the infrastructure were in place and that infrastructure set guidelines as to the rules of reviewing gear, then this site could stand to benefit.

If 'benefit' is defined as open as a sales and marketing channel, well yes. But as per previous posts, that devalues other forum content here, IMO.

Reviews could be plainly marked whether that review is by an owner or via a review loaner.

Surely that's effectively carrying promotional content by the manufacturer. Where's everybody's 10% ?

Reviewers could also receive punishment if they took part in tainted reviews

Can I watch ?

[EdAInWestOC]

LD, Sure you can watch...but you have to be a good boy first

Anyway, you are taking a stance and viewing this as necessarily a bad thing since a review on a loaned piece of gear must be compromised since the gear is loaned by a manufacturer. Of course that can be the case but it does not have to be.

There is nothing that makes a review on a loaned piece of gear necessarily a bad thing. It is possible to make that review impartial. Manufacturers have review gear that gets passed around to reviewers all of the time. The fact that gear is loaned does not guarantee that the reviewer is obligated to the manufacturer in any way. It is much better for everyone if the reviewer is not obligated in any way.

This takes cooperation by manufacturers and it also benefits the manufacturer. An impartial review of a piece of gear can be the best thing that can happen to a manufacturer. It can also be a very bad thing. The manufacturer must be willing to take the chance that they have done their homework and produced a quality component. Let the gear do the talking...so to speak.

A review that is not impartial is detrimental to a manufacturer. No matter what the reviewer says about the gear, if we get the feeling or have a reason to believe that the review was not performed impartially, we will not believe the reviewer and the gear in question will not be on my or your list of components to consider.

It sort of takes care of itself if the manufacturer is ethical...or not. They benefit the most from impartial reviews. They have to take the chance that the reviewer will like the gear. And again, of course there are manufacturers that are not ethical. This could be a win-win if done properly. If they don't play by the rules their gear will not be represented in this forum's list of reviews and they lose.

Ed