CU's view
William Sommerwerck
with a very good pair of Sennheisers falling at #6 on the list (with no
bullet).
I looked at that issue on the stand. (Didn't feel like spending $7 for a
copy.) It turns out that CR listed only the best of the 49 headphones they
tested. Still, it seems that the Grados were the only "good" full-sized
'phones, which is extremely hard to believe. I would like to have seen the
other models and CR's opinions of them.
Browsing the rest of the issue, I was surprised at what CR didn't review.
For example, the DSLR review didn't include the Canon 5D2, which has been on
the market over a year and is one of the best DSLRs available. (It
cannibalized sales of Canon's top models, which cost more than 3x as much.)
Nor did the flat-screen TV review include a Pioneer plasma set. Granted, all
these are fairly pricey products, but... They need to be reviewed to put the
less-expensive models in perspective.
All reviews are biased in some way. CR's might not be biased by financial
considerations, but the magazine definitely has a bias against expensive
products (except autos), and anything that smacks of the esoteric, or that
doesn't lend itself to straightforwad laboratory testing.
--
"We already know the answers -- we just haven't asked the right
questions." -- Edwin Land
Allen
recommendations. We bought a car that they raved about; By the time we
got rid of it, it was on their lemon list. There were a few other things
that left burn marks, but they were small-ticket items that I can't
recall right now.
Allen
GP49
I'm annoyed by how Consumer Reports now publishes many articles that
don't list the complete Ratings, but instead are only summaries with
selected Ratings that already appeared in PRIOR issues (they've re-run
items from last year's dishwasher report twice, now). It appears they
are trying to get more issues (revenue) from less testing (cost).
Making their magazine look like it is full of new, useful information
when it's the old, already-published stuff is just as deceptive as the
items on their page where they make fun of dubious advertising.
Perhaps someone who has already paid for a magazine or for a
subscription could see the complete Ratings of headphones by going to
their PAY website? I don't know; and if this is their motive, their
business practices are bordering on the same kind of SLEAZE in the
marketplace that Consumer Reports decries everywhere else.
William Sommerwerck
> of their recommendations. We bought a car that they raved about;
> By the time we got rid of it, it was on their lemon list.
Not "their" lemon list, the readers' lemon list. It's difficult to judge
whether a new car is going to be reliable.
I'd wanted to buy a dehumidifier for the garage, and looked at their
reviews. I then browsed the Web for customer reviews, and discovered that
almost any dehumidifier you can buy, regardless of brand, is Chinese junk. I
decided not to buy one.
> Perhaps someone who has already paid for a magazine or for a
> subscription could see the complete Ratings of headphones by
> going to their PAY website? I don't know; and if this is their motive,
> their business practices are bordering on the same kind of SLEAZE
> in the marketplace that Consumer Reports decries everywhere else.
I very much agree. If you subscribe to the print edition, you shouldn't have
to pay to view the online version.
In fairness to CR, consumer products have gotten horribly complex, not to
mention the influx of so many foreign brands. Nevertheless, CR used to do a
pretty good job -- and could still do it, if they really wanted to.
It should be noted, though, that CU is a left-wing pro-consumer
organization. (This isn't a secret; they've pubicly admitted it. And I
approve, if anyone out there cares.) The product reviews are less important
to CU than providing consumers with information about insurance, medical
services, home buying & selling, and other areas of significantly greater
importance than who makes the best waffle iron.
Lawrence Chalmers
little ear-fatigue. Are there any in comparable price (or maybe a
little more) in over-the ear (and around - would that mean noise
cancelling - i can hear loud outside noises, traffic construction,
sirens still)
styles I should check out?