Re: Does ANY audio mag use DBT?

John Atkinson wrote:

> [I]t is clearly understood that review samples remain the manufacturer's
> property.

While true, this is quite a disingenuous statement, John, as it blithely
overlooks the value of the component in the reviewer's possession
beyond the review period. For example, let's say a Boulder amp
that costs $30,000 and took two months from the time the reviewer
received and submitted the article for it for publication deadline,
but held onto the amp for another four months for a possible
"followup" clarification (which in all likelihood would never
materialize). The reviewer is, in essence, enjoying the value
of that four months for free. We can easily quantify this value.
Let's say the resale value of the Boulder amp after six months
is $24,000. We could look at it as being a lease at $1,000 per
month and the value of the four months of free usage is $4,000.
This is payola pure and simple. The manufacturer, of course,
sees it as the cost of favorable publicity and is more than happy
to accommodate. After six months, it's onto a Lamm or ARC or
somesuch for the reviewer. Of course, this accommodation, to
some extent, influences the reviewer's review of the component.
To argue otherwise is just not credible. This is the reason I
never trusted Jonathon Scull's over-the-top reviews of all the
expensive components he got his greedy little mitts on.


GeoSynch