Hiya Srajan, I know how you like to keep tabs on goings-on in the industry so assume that you've followed the various Vienna show reports closely. Last year I pointed you to a Roy Gregory post on the Munich show where he, in the lingo today's kids love, absolutely destroyed the Æquo Audio exhibit. This year he has very unhappy things to say about Clarisys, Alsyvox and Aries Cerat amps that "punked out" while in the same breath admitting that using show impressions to form firm conclusions is a fool's errand. Then why single out certain exhibits that didn't meet his standards? Why not just focus on those exhibits which he found exciting? What's your take on doing pseudo reviews at shows? Best, Mark
You're correct, Mark. I've canvassed many Vienna reports, Roy's growing one included. I do remember the funky Æquo incident of last year and had sent the link to their principals. Once again I agree that publishing negative comments from a show serves no purpose I can see other than perhaps shining up the writer's golden ears or perceived objectivity. It's one thing to walk up to presenters and share that to us things don't seem right; or as we expected or know them to be possible. Perhaps they can still fix it. Perhaps they know it and can explain what went wrong. But that's off the record. Why Roy opted again to go on record I don't grasp. But it's his site and he does as he sees fit. As far as conducting pseudo reviews at shows, that's exactly what they are – pseudo. Yet some high-profile reviewers continue to do them and manufacturers certainly love getting their 'Best of show' awards. Srajan
Hello again. I just read the final updates on Roy's show report and surprise, surprise, this time he held back from his usual 'Duck for Cover' mentions because the venue itself was new and problematic. I think that was the perfect approach and if he read our little exchange which predated his final pages, perhaps it helped steer him in this better direction. Best, Mark
I have no idea whether Roy reads my site or took note of our exchange. But I do agree that particularly given the improvisational nature of Vienna's first show where exhibitors had to deal with unfamiliar conditions warranted a lighter touch on his usual criticisms. That some exhibitors managed to make good sound regardless then becomes noteworthy stand-out fodder whilst those who failed will have a better-informed second chance next year if they manage to secure the same space and didn't get shamed for a miss this year. Accentuating the positive whilst laying out the venue's various challenges for those who didn't attend but might contemplate next year was a fine decision. Roy's report is one of the very few I read which documented the various venue issues plaguing the exhibits whilst Jason Victor Serenius' intro to Stereophile's show coverage was the only one which documented some of the issues would-be exhibitors encountered in their interactions with show management prior to the event. That's proper hifi journalism – unlike some of the superficial fawning and photo-dump madness practiced elsewhere. So kudos to Roy & Jason for digging deeper than the competition. Srajan
