Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Jens Raethel, Mar 14, 2002.
What do you think of this pruduct?
Bedini Dual-Beam Ultraclarifier
In my personal view, this article compromises Secrets of Home Theater's credibility. Particularly where the reviewer described the "fine" home theater he owns. (Though he DID "take the rap" for it in the article.) Bedini claims this new product treats the video side of the system, too. So why didn't the Editor-in-Chief get the product to a reviewer with a system capable of evaluating ALL the claims? That's careless journalism.
Even if you sign into the concept of the product (which, I admit, I do not), I remain suspicious of a product with such a poor track record of performance. (Two previous Bedini versions damaged discs or broke down so we should believe this new third version is too cool for school? PUH-leeze.)
And "dual beam" of what? Why not just open the damned thing and tell us what is in there?
Secrets is a site I visit every day to see what's new. But this article, coming on top of Andrew Jones' blathering, shallow fanboy epistle to the B&O Avant 32 Home Cinema System, makes me think that EIC Johnson is becoming pretty undemanding on the quality of his editorial content. In future, I'll watch for those individual writers I trust. But my trust no longer extends to the entire site.
I have actually tried the Bedini Dual Beam Clarifier.
It's worthless. No apparent changes at all.
Wow their credibility just took a huge hit with me too. I mean come on he said it improved his sound on DVD-Video discs? That is whack.
I mean come on Ric doesn't even believe in this tweak.
That is saying alot.
Maybe your system just isn't high resolution enough?
Can you say, "Placebo effect"? I knew you could.
I have not used the Bedini Clarifier, nor did I take the time to read the online review, but I am quite certain that if one were to post a question about the validity of this product on Audio Asylum, the responses would be quite different. You will find a number of people that believe in every sort of tweak on Audio Asylum.
I was just looking in to this product at Secrets. It sounded too good to be true, so I emailed Jason Serinus (the reviewer) and here's how that went...
I just read your review for the Bedini Clarifier. First of all, I can't believe this thing! It's almost as if the Clarifier is necessary. My two questions are:
1) Should one use the Clarifier with new CDs/DVDs/etc, or is it only good for a disc that has significant play time on it?
Thanks for writing. All discs. Playtime is irrelevant.
2) Are the improvements only noticable with hi-end systems consisting of powerful amps, expensive transports and preamps, precison cables, and fine speakers?
Chuck, I have a high-end system. All I can tell you is that
Audioquest once did a demo at a Stereophile show where they rigged a boom box to accept their interconnects. Everyone heard the difference as they progressed up their cable line. If you can hear the difference between cables on a boombox, I can only assume you would hear the difference the Bedini makes as well.
My DVD video player is a cheapo Pioneer from Best Buy. I have outfitted it with a removable powercord, which makes a difference. Nonetheless, the improvement in sound quality and veracity was astounding.
Chuck, that story about the Audioquest demo with the boombox sounds dubious to me. Color me skeptical. I say this being a happy user of Audioquest Diamondback interconnects.
I also note that the article has been revised since it's appearance.
Apparently they received a lot of comments on this piece. Richly deserved, IMHO.
I respect Jason Serinus for not backpedaling on his opinion -- even if I find his observed results hard to believe. However, I'm not so respectful of his rationale for not opening the device and finding out what's in it. It's $180 bucks, guys. Not a fortune. "Secrets" should be prepared to purchase one and make the effort, unless they think their editorial integrity isn't worth spending $180 over.
If some of you think I have a bone to pick here, you're right. But that bone doesn't reside with "Secrets." It's with the too often tawdry, careless, amateurish state of "journalism" on the Internet.
Even the worst print publication makes some attempt to measure performance. But so many Internet "reviews" of product are just anecdotal chatter from an individual who has no background as journalist, writer, or technician. (And I DON'T include "Secrets" in that group because that site has some VERY capable individuals.)
Print and broadcast journalism is littered with idiots. The mediums, themselves, are no guarantee of quality or integrity. But the cost of entry to those media enforces some modest level of professionalism. (At least copy editors will correct spelling and anchormen will occasionally pronounce foreign names correctly.)
But the accessibility and affordability of the Internet enables the widespread proliferation of idiots. Any loser with a modem and a little online storage space is suddenly an international expert without so much as awareness that "loser" isn't spelled "looser."
And to clarify once again this sermon isn't directed at "Secrets of Home Theater," a site that has published some very good and very responsible reviews of equipment.
OK. I'm spent.
well not everything that is reviewed goes back to the manufacturer. they are upon occasion sold at an enormously discounted rate, or given gratis, to the reviewer of some other individual. it can then be kept or resold by the individual for a profit. certainly opening the case would void some potential warranties, wouldn't it, and decrease the resale value. I think you've hit upon some salient points Bob.
Yes, it's true. Some reviewers resell equipment and CD's and DVD's that they receive for review. In my career as a professional critic, I NEVER did this. I felt it was a conflict of interest. I either sent large items back to a manufacturer, kept them for future use in reviews (as with game consoles, for instance), donated them to charitable organizations (with LP's or CD's or software), or destroyed them (mostly PC software.)
When I was an editor-in-chief, if I found out that a reviewer was selling review items or profiting from them in any way, they would automatically be taken off my freelance list and get no more work from me. Similarly, if I found out an individual was soliciting product for my magazine on their own they were off my list.
Hard line attitude? Damn right. I had magazine and newspaper reputations to protect.
Similarly, I always made sure that my writers were paid market rates for their work. Some magazines and, I suppose, websites feel that the reviewer's ability to keep the software or CD or whatever constitutes payment for their writing. You can imagine what kind of quality you get with that kind of slipshod transaction.
Ryan said:"Although I have to wonder if the AA folks would really care about the Bendini, since you can't shove an LP into it..."
Are you taking a jab at the good folks on another forum?
Perhaps I could interest you in some speaker wire and signal cable tension balancers to further align your sound.....
Not everyone at Secrets agrees with that review. Jason falls into the AA and Stereophile crowd. There are people who believe in that type of stuff.
The author says:
"Skeptical readers may ask why I did not perform double-blind tests, summon a panel of experts, or obtain two copies of the same CD, one treated with the Bedini and one not, play them in an unannounced sequence, and then ask people to guess which one had been treated. The answer is simple. I did not find the extra work necessary because I could easily hear the difference. However, because of the criticism that was sent to the Secrets Editor about my original review, we will try to run this experiment to prove that the Bedini does indeed work, and report the results subsequently."
Should be interesting to see those results, to say the least.