What's the point in reviewing speakers?
|
Bronze Member Username: NoutPost Number: 24 Registered: Mar-06 | What's the point in reviewing speakers? (or audio equipment at all?) The last couple of days I was 'enjoying' myself in reading many speaker reviews. At first selective, speakers I was interested in and are affordable but in the end I was just randomly reading all kinds of reviews of exotic, gorgeously constructed units which I probably never in my life will audition let alone buy. All the professional reviews I read had something in common: NOT ONE was negative. 9 out of 10 reviews spoke of a detailed, revealing though smooth treble and if not: the-not-so-smooth treble gave the speaker at least its own character, so it was a plus rather than a fault. Or it had to be partnered with the right equipment to really sing, by no means the speakers fault. Some speakers are upfront, others laidback, a matter of taste really, though not one speaker was dull or extremely lively at the point of becoming manic. Most had an amazingly deep, 3d soundstage for the money. What kinda money? $300? $6000 as well. A flat sound? No problem, because the imaging is superb for the price and one simply has to make compromises, you cannot get it all for that amount of money. $300? $6000 as well. I can go on and give examples of other sound descriptions: bass, middrange, speed etc, not that interesting, because most speakers did well in every department and every possible weakness is evened or simply not relevant because of a stronger virtue. In general all speakers performed exceptionally well , most of the times in a different, higher class than its competitors at that price level and if not something like "you cannot expect a faultless performance for this price" is written.(no matter what price category, a $3000 pair of speakers can be considered a bargain as well doesn't it? it's all relative) So all I ever read are raves, you cannot go wrong with any speaker. (even if the treble gives you a headache you can still mention with the upmost sincere admiration: "Boy this one has a unique character!" Reviews are meant to give the clueless audio soul a tool to choose the right equipment out of numerous different brands, types and price categories. But they fail in every degree. Read for a quick laugh user opinions on Audioreview.com (I wrote some terible reviews myself, over there) Pick randomly a speaker and read the reviews. The positive ones aren't likely to mention a harsh treble, but inconsistencies emerge soon: One person describes a "nicely rounded treble". 5 stars Another mentions a very revealing one. 5 stars "A warm and rich sound". 5 stars "A very neutral sound: poor recordings will sound like crap, but this is meant to be like that, this speaker is truthful" 5 stars Same speakers. Move on to the very few negative reviews of this particular speaker. One finds the treble very agressive. 1 star. Another one found the highs dull: "puts me to sleep" 1 star. Same speakers. All room conditions where the speakers are reviewed are different to that of your own. All equipment, amps and sources used in the reviews are very likely to be different than yours. Since not one room is the same the sound can differ to a large degree, the upfont speaker may turn out to be pretty laidback, the beefy bass could unexpectedly turn out to sound like a vague image of a pounding nerve in a rotten tooth. What's the point in reading reviews? I am hesitant to end this whining by just saying: trust your ears. It's too easy. Isn't it? There must be a way of accurately trying to review equipment and be some sort of real help, isn't there? A way in which the really good units are seperated from the less stellar. Or is everything just a matter of taste? That means that no poor equipment exsists on this planet... |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5405 Registered: Dec-04 | I give Nout 4 1/2 stars. Smooth, accurate assessment, honest and competent. Not too harsh...an unassuming presentation. His forefront is just a little 'bashful'. not willing to put it all out there. About average.Tepid. But the above average rant on comparative reviews is just beyond immediacy, in fact, just short of shrillness. I can just hear Nout going into full rant mode. Almost lifelike. Overall, a 4.8 Nout, I dearly hope that you have a sense of humour, this is an extension of your most pertinent post. |
|
Bronze Member Username: NoutPost Number: 25 Registered: Mar-06 | Not a bad score...if it means 4 1/2 out of 5  Nice review by the way. LOL Well actually I had some fun writing this, sometimes difficult because English isn't my native language, but reading those reviews sure helped in expanding my vocabulary a bit...though still not close to what I would've written in Dutch. But do you think there's a proper way of reviewing equipment? (I don't think so) |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 3815 Registered: Feb-05 | No one would've guessed that english is not your first language Nout...well done. I was shocked yesterday when I read a review that was critical of a piece of gear in Stereophile. Maybe they've been reading online audio forums. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5409 Registered: Dec-04 | Not this one, I hope. |
|
Bronze Member Username: NoutPost Number: 26 Registered: Mar-06 | There is actually an interesting site by Arthur Salvatore. Although I think most of you already visited his site. http://www.high-endaudio.com This link particularly is entertaining in a way: http://www.high-endaudio.com/reviewers.html I agree with his intentions, but he doesn't recognizes one essential issue: taste. I am getting, reading his site that to him a "best" equipment really does exsist and is measured objectively by a pair of good trained/developed ears. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5415 Registered: Dec-04 | Nout, thanks for those links. And I must agree, taste is an aquired demon. BTW, Art is correct, and I must concur, your mastery of the brutally stupid English language is superb! My wife and family are of Dutch heritage. They couldnt speak a sentence of Dutch to save their lives. A shame. Here in Canada we have 2 languagues, English and French. I cannot use either with the ease which you seem to be so comfortable with. What makes/models are available close to you? Dealerships? |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 9637 Registered: May-04 | . We've been down this road several times before. The complaint is all reviews indicate the speaker/amp/CD player under scrutiny is a very good performer. Depending on the reviewer, it might be as good as a few other speakers at or near the same cost. Those reviewers generally make comparisons to those other products, such as Stereophile reviewers often will. Other listeners place a speaker with the best speakers they've heard and think it sets new standards for the price range (as far as they know). Correctly, you can find this sort of opinion reading reviews of $300 dollar speakers or $30,000 speakers. I don't get the complaint. Do you expect the reviewer to decide he/she wants to review the crap that they found uninteresting at the audio shows?! The fact is there are quite a few speaker companies out there. Another fact is there are quite a few that are producing very good speakers. Maybe not your particular taste but they are still very good speakers. Your job is to read enough reviews to begin to understand what the sepaker might actually sound like from the written description. For the most part, rotten products don't get reviewed - nobody wants to spend the time with junk. . |
|
Silver Member Username: ExerciseguyBrooklyn, NY USA Post Number: 831 Registered: Oct-04 | Automobile magazines don't seem to have a hard time handing out nasty reviews. Even the video industry seems to be better at it than the audio industry. It's almost like the audio critics sense the industry as they know it is hanging on by a thread, or priorities are changing so rapidly, that they are hesitant, dare I say scared, to be critical of anything lest they bite the hand that feeds them, or in this case, buys their adds. |
|
Silver Member Username: ExerciseguyBrooklyn, NY USA Post Number: 832 Registered: Oct-04 | But like Jan said, there are a lot of competent manufacturers out there building a lot of very good products. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5417 Registered: Dec-04 | CM, do you think that the auto industry isn't changing by leaps and bounds every day? And THAT investment is the 2nd largest one that most of us will make in our lifetimes, behind a home. AND, the auto investment will be made time after time. The Audio investment is expected to last forever(mostly), yet we nit and pick away at details, when lot of us will shell out large for the transportation at extravigant values. Audio is dying, a death slowly administered by a thousand knives. The mass market and Idol shows are only the last throes of a death so desolate, so petulant, that only the few grey-beards among us can even woe the demise of a lost art. Well, that was fun. |
|
Silver Member Username: ExerciseguyBrooklyn, NY USA Post Number: 833 Registered: Oct-04 | Nuck, I'm simply making the point that in between reviews of Bentleys & Vipers there are some reviews for the folks about the good, bad & ugly. I enjoy a super-car review as much as the next guy, but I much prefer reading reviews about cars I might actually drive one day. I'm new to this game, I only own a couple of issues of Stereophile, but critical reviews are few & far between anyway you add it up. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5421 Registered: Dec-04 | Reviewers are whoores, by and large. I would trust a review from Christopher Molloy before most others, in fact. Especially with Zep4 on the platter. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5422 Registered: Dec-04 | CM, www.windingroad.com |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 9639 Registered: May-04 | . "I'm new to this game, I only own a couple of issues of Stereophile, but critical reviews are few & far between anyway you add it up." Not really. When you read enough articles from the reviewers you like and trust, you can sort out the "critical" reviews. You learn when the reviewer is not being swept away with enthusiasm for a partiuclar product or a certain product's performance in a specific area. However, a lack of capacity in "soundstage width", to give an example, might not mean the product is unsuitable for someone else's taste. Maybe they prefer "soundstage depth". "Taste" in this case being based upon a realistic expectation of performance and not just, "I want big. I want loud. I want something that will rock my house off foundation. I want something that will cause my plexiglass window to look like a TV tube." Why should a reviewer state that a particular product is crap when there can be merit in what it does for another listener? That seems to be what most of these threads about reviews boil down to, that there are so few reviews which suggest burning down the factory and hanging the designer upside down in the plaza isn't the best approach to this product. Read the reviews and learn from what you read, you will eventually begin to sort out products you might prefer and which products are likely to not be on your short list. Why so many products get good reviews can be discussed and discussed, just as it has many times here on the forum. Taking a look at how product reviews have changed over the years would he helpful to some people starting these threads. I suggest you go back to the archives of a few magazines such as Stereophile and read some of the earliest reviews available. If possible, read a review from the 1970's and read from various magazines. Read reviews from Stereophile, Stereo Review and HiFi News. They will be quite different depending on the editorial approach of the magazine. If you can find a review from Stereo Review, you will find today's Stereophile to be quite "critical" of most products. If you can find a review from HiFi News, you will find a review quite different in tenor from today's magazine. For one thing, the standards for comparison have totally changed over the decades. The reproduced sound discussed in today's reviews is held in a vacuum encapsulating the momentary response to the "sound" of the product under review. There is no longer a standard of live reproduction to which equipment must match. Today's gear, while in some ways being more faithful to the original event is also free to be whatever the designer and consumer want it to be. The final sound in your room does not have to transport you to the event nor does it have to bring the musicians to your room. That was a classic debate in the '70's & '80's; which is more faithful to the original? The "I am there" or the "They are here" schools fought over the right to be called most accurate. That debate has vanished from the reviewers' lexicon and been replaced by words that decribe the imaging and soundstaging prowess or the width, depth, lateral spread, etc. of the product's reproduction. When was the last time you read a review that actually conveyed a sense of the reproduction living up to the original event? Only ocassionally does that happen and then only when the reviewer was at the original event. Which is quite rare and quite meaningless to most readers. This idea of standards goes back to a long departed and often reviled thread called, "Do you listen". It is my particular bug about how equipment is reviewed and purchased. People seldom hear live music today and when they do it is most often through the filter of electronics. Most people don't have a clue as to whether a cello is being reproduced accurately or an oboe is faithful to the original sound. The "soundstage" most people hear is created in post production studios with more electronic devices and not by the event itself. When I asked if forum members listened to live music, many were insulted that I thought such a reference important when choosing equipment. The "I like what I like because I like it" approach to choosing equipment is far more prevalent than choosing equipment because it transports you to the original event. Therefore the only way to make a review "meaningful" is to review a product isolated from the reality of what it is reproducing. When you take most half-way decent products, you can find enough things any single product does well enough to write a review that doesn't suggest burning down the factory. Should reviewers returned to listening against a standard of live, acoustic music created by all the musicians playing together in a performance hall, then more equipment would get lesser reviews. As is, if the designer can create "depth" from a speaker or "width" from an amplifier, it can be declared a good product - for someone who doesn't know or care what the original event sounded like. . |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 9640 Registered: May-04 | . That said, what do you, Nout, Nuck, CM, want from a review? What are you looking for the reviewer to say? Good or bad. What would a bad review look like? How would a good review read? |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5442 Registered: Dec-04 | I want honesty. Truth be told, most of the high end reviews that I read are dealing with infintisimal nuances, any of the gear would blow my mind. Like a few years back, Linn, Bryston and Wilson speakers. How could I, lowly Nuck have an opinion on this stuff? I had an opinion on the music and the recording itself. But, hey, I don't do cello that often. I do, however, do Meatloaf, and that voice determines a good kit right away. And that assessment will pisss JV off, no doubt. I liked it. But I like meatloaf anyhow. Powerful voice. Great arrangement. Great band. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5443 Registered: Dec-04 | And unwittingly, I have fallen back(?) to just the music. Dammit, there is the jest of it? |
|
Silver Member Username: ExerciseguyBrooklyn, NY USA Post Number: 834 Registered: Oct-04 | Thanks for the link Nuck, I'll make good use of it. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5447 Registered: Dec-04 | I love free stuff. David E davis is still alive, despite Maseratti's best efforts. Cheers! |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5448 Registered: Dec-04 | Jan, the reviewer is limited in effect, just for the gear, not the music. Probably a tough job, and doubly difficult when re-reviewed by one's peers. Luckily, I do not suffer the same scrutiny. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5449 Registered: Dec-04 | Hopefully. Baby we can cry all night, but that ain't getting us nowhere... |
|
Bronze Member Username: NoutPost Number: 27 Registered: Mar-06 | What makes/models are available close to you? Dealerships? Nuck, Well mostly the well known brands like B&W, KEF, JMlab, Quad, Monitor Audio. Epos is more difficult to find and to my knowledge Magnepans, Paradigms and Totems for instance aren't sold over here. But that's not an issue anymore, because my speakers have arrived, the Acoutic Energy EVO 3's. I will post my findings in the thread I started a couple of days ago ("Acoustc Energy EVO 3 or JMLab Chorus 714S") I don't get the complaint. Do you expect the reviewer to decide he/she wants to review the crap that they found uninteresting at the audio shows?! No I don't expect that, but it never turns out to be a disappointment either I agree that there are lots of good speaker companies, exactly reason enough to wonder why to ever read a review again. The obvious will be written down No. Not true. It can be helpful to know if the speaker needs much space, how difficult it is to drive etc... And I honestly don't doubt the reviewer's integrity and competence. |
|
Bronze Member Username: RyukyuPost Number: 20 Registered: Dec-06 | I think I know where nout is coming from. I've been researching speakers for the past couple of months. Almost every review I've read, at some point, says that the speaker being reviewed sounds better than anything in it's price range and as good as others costing X times more than it. How can that be true of so many speakers being reviewed? The best you can do is take the reviews for what they are. One person's opinion. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 9643 Registered: May-04 | . "I agree that there are lots of good speaker companies, exactly reason enough to wonder why to ever read a review again. The obvious will be written down No. Not true. It can be helpful to know if the speaker needs much space, how difficult it is to drive etc... " Then it would make sense to ignore reviews that don't cover that topic, i.e. learning to read to the reviews for what is important to you. Joe Schmoe doesn't know from measurements, so what's the point of reading something that doesn't inform you with relevant facts? Other reviewers are all about the measurements and summarize all amplifiers, CD players, pre amps, etc. as sounding "competent, as would be expected from a successful design". That doesn't seem to be helpful either unless you assume all components sound alike. I don't, however, understand your comment regarding "needs much space". Most speakers unless designed for a specific location will work better with more "space". Until they don't get the reinforcement from the walls to give "enough" bass response. But, that same "weak bass"* position might make the speaker more open and expand the soundscape the music occupies. The amount is relative to the room and the desires of the listener. How can a reviewer determine such things? Your complaint seems to be about speaker reviews. Yet it is the room you place them in that determines much of what you hear from a speaker. Is this possibly what you are reacting to? That a speaker cannot be qualified in a manner that might be applied to an amplifier? If you keep reading that every product is "better than anything in it's price range", do you really believe that? Surely it doesn't take much effort to filter out the hyperbole and read for the information that truly informs. I suggest you ignore such statements and focus on facts or opinions that reflect a reviewer's desire to describe what is heard, not what will please the owners of that product. If a reviewer tells me the product has a wider soundstage than any other experienced in a competitive price range, that is one thing. To suggest a single product is vastly supperior in all respects to any other in a similar price range is foolish and should be dismissed along with the author of such garbage. "I do, however, do Meatloaf, and that voice determines a good kit right away. And that assessment will pisss JV off, no doubt." No p!ssing here. As long as you have a concept of what is musically important to hear from Meatloaf. I find it vastly unimportant to know a speaker lets me feel the amount of spittle spewing forth from the corners of Mr. Meatloaf's mouth. I do find it informative to know a speaker lets me hear the way a vocalist bends a note, hestitates, moves forward or inflects a word in order to create an artistic effect or intent. I know I've mentioned it before, but when I was selling, I kept recordings of Elvis and Frank Sinatra in my reference file. (Remember this is a time when people actually heard these performers live, even if just on TV.) I would start someone off with those two voices when they said they had no idea where to begin picking a speaker/system. Almost everyone at that time could have some idea what they thought one of those two performers "sounded" like. Once the idea of "that reminds me of what I've heard from this performer" had been established, the rest could follow. If I sold soundstage depth, or the amount of bass, or driver dispersion another dealer might have easily beat my demonstration with nothing more than a better room. Some performers are never going to be heard without amplification. That doesn't preclude using them to judge a component. I cannot hear a violinist who recorded in the 1920's playing live today, that doesn't mean I can't use that music as a reference. But what does Meatloaf's voice tell you about the soundstage width? The focus of too many reviews has become the artifacts of the system and not the performance they convey. People want to read they can "hear new details" when they purchase a new component. That leads to a concentration on something that might not reflect a musical truth and is really just a frequency response anomaly. What I would rather read is that a component will let me hear the performance in a new light, not that I will hear more spittle hitting Meatloaf's mic's windscreen. *My speakers sit seven feet into the room and away from the walls. That would be "weak bass" to some people, but I prefer the space the performers occupy when the speakers are in that position. That space generally suggests to me what I hear at a live event. For the music I prefer, a close wall placement that gives slightly more bass is less acceptable. . |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5457 Registered: Dec-04 | Sinatra would be spinning in his grave, Elvis is still too stoned to do so. Meatloaf is one of the most exciting vocalists in the last 30 years. Transitions from Alto to Soprano to Falsetto are amazing, when a speaker delivers the spittle, the transitions(subtle) and the emotions that Mr. Loaf inflects, that is a very good speaker. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 9645 Registered: May-04 | . " ... when a speaker delivers the spittle, the transitions(subtle) and the emotions that Mr. Loaf inflects, that is a very good speaker." That spittle delivery is desirable is an opinion. That a speaker delivering nuance and emotion is more informing and more involving, therefore more desirable, is a fact. Unless you are a complete moron. There, see how to read a review? . |
|
Bronze Member Username: NoutPost Number: 29 Registered: Mar-06 | That spittle delivery is desirable is an opinion. That a speaker delivering nuance and emotion is more informing and more involving, therefore more desirable, is a fact. Unless you are a complete moron. There, see how to read a review? This spittle performance is registered in many reviews, well of course not necessarily using the exact word "spittle" It tells me nothing, because how do I know if Mr Meatloaf will spill this desirable emotions the same way in my room and with my gear? Reading user opinions at audioreview.com shows me a lof of inconsistencies in how sound is registered. For all I know Mr X will describe a spitting treble with this speaker and Mr Y a dull and lifeless one. Both are true. I have encountered this phenomena in professional reviews too, when a very informative, revealing and dynamic speaker, in a single review was reviewed again 3 months later in a "grouptest" There the same speaker turned out to be a bit bland, warmish and cosy. I am not saying that I don't believe this or that I question the reviewer's capabilities, but it turns out that there are numerous conditions in which a speaker can perform differently, the most obvious one of course when directly compared to similar priced speakers. But it might even be possible that the reviewer's mood was an influence on how he percieved the music that day in that first single review. A person can decide on basis of that first review to audition that speaker and he might like it or may be dissapointed, which is fine of course: the reviewer has achieved his goal in both scenarios, for a review is only meant to be an indication, a way to put likely candidates on a short list. True isn't it? But you may all the same decide not a read a single review again and just go out and listen for yourself, the results will be the same and possibly with less doubt ("how come I don't like it as much, it was a grouptest winner???") and possibly with less obsessive behavior, traveling 500 miles to audition some "best for the money speakers" your local hifi store unfortunately doesn't sell. I don't, however, understand your comment regarding "needs much space" Well if a speaker needs lots of free room for instance. You don't want to order a very small speaker to put on a bookshelve and only later to find out the bass is too boomy, because it was designed to put on a stand, 3 feet from the back wall. Most reviews, if not all, do cover this |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5469 Registered: Dec-04 | Nout, I put speakers in the most unconventional places and find some amazing detail. But that's just me. JV has a lot of input here on this thread, but do not be mistaken...JV's ears ain't yours, and mine are useless. Mr.Loafs audables are as sharp, crisp and powerful as Pavarotti's(IMHO),and a very good gauge of a speaker's delivery. Gee whiz, this could go on forever. Hasn't it already? |
|
Bronze Member Username: NoutPost Number: 30 Registered: Mar-06 | Nuck, I am not questioning Jan Vigne's ears and yours which will probably be way better than mine. I'm not questioning the reviewers ears, but mine, a pair of ears wich probably like and hear different things. That's the whole issue. I should have named the topic: "What's the point in reading reviews" instead of "What's the point in reviewing speakers" But you're right, this has gone on long enough already. Not to come back from what I believe, but I just wanted to say that I most definitely would read reviews again when I am on the "quest" for something new, if only to check out what beautiful equipment is out there and what could be a candidate to put on a short list. It never was my intention to ridicule the mostly well-written findings of passionate music lovers, the audio reviewers. They didn't yet help me, but they might be helpful to others. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 9652 Registered: May-04 | . Pick up the February issue of Sterophile and read Art Dudley's review of the Cayin A-300B integrated amplifier. Dudley's been around for decades and this is how a review should be written, in my opinion. Pay some attention to the fact the objective measurements do not scream state of the art design as most people reading measurements would be put off by the amplifier's 2% T.H.D. spec. The amplifier under consideration is, of course, a S.E.T. and such measurements are typical of the breed. Typical of S.E.T.'s the subjective comments regarding the amplifier's strength, "the manner in which it let solo voices and solo instruments pull themselves out of the mix to appear before me with a presence unequaled by other amp technology", is also consistent with the circuit topology. Dudley's "dynamic shadings" replaces the more ubiquitous "micro-dynamics" of most reviews. "Clarity" and "precision of stereo imaging" inform me more completely the amplifier has the capacity to involve me in the music than a dozen references to "soundstage width and depth" or "'palpability'of the holographically 3-D effect". If I were shopping for such a product, I would definitely want to audition this amplifier after reading the review. Although, I've never driven five hundred miles just to hear what someone else thinks is "best for the money". . |
|
Bronze Member Username: NoutPost Number: 35 Registered: Mar-06 | If I were shopping for such a product, I would definitely want to audition this amplifier after reading the review. Me probably too, if I would stuck to only a few magazines instead of the many reviews on the internet...this is something I delibarately left out of my post, otherwise it would have been useless to post my critique on reviews (which I was writing with much fun). Eventually, after been blown away by the amount of reviews, various brands on the internet you will (be forced to) get selective in what you read...well I did finally (when my head was starting to explode because of the endless stream of useless information) Although, I've never driven five hundred miles just to hear what someone else thinks is "best for the money" Hahaha, no I would be surprised if you actually did. I don't think anyone ever has or will. |
|
Bronze Member Username: NoutPost Number: 36 Registered: Mar-06 | this is something I delibarately left out of my post, otherwise it would have been useless to post my critique on reviews which I was writing with much fun) ...and which I almost had finished, I didn't want to throw my 'hard' work down the drain. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 5498 Registered: Dec-04 | I figgur Art's Thd value is expected t be quoted, Cayin's value is useless, as usual. Cayin dosesn't care a whit about THD. IMD, however might be more telling. But still does not mean all that much, as Cayin amps are quite good. |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics