One thing that has always bothered me about multi product reviews at many websites & magazines is the juvenile 'Shootout Format' where units are tested in a competition to the death. It seems that there has to be a winner & a bunch of losers.
Because speakers are such a subjective preference, I can't see how shootouts are valid at all. The 'winner' will not necessarily be a 'winner' to me or many others. Rating products in that manner is really irrelevant to me whether it is speakers, automobiles or whatever.
This type of extensive test over at HTS being done by a panel of testers with no numerical ratings/standings in the end is just about ideal, IMO:
http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/h...tion-event.htmlTAM
TAM - I prefer that type of a process as well. A lot of people want a "number" assigned, which I have attempted to be a sport and try the "numbered" approach, and it tends to end up with people fighting over the numbered results.
The "worst" of these was a GTG at our place in 2007. We had about 15 people, all listening blind, all posting notes and tallying scores before we revealed the speakers in question.
Where this testing will be different than the current review on HTS is this process will not be over a couple of days - it will be over a period of months.
Discussion will he had about things like true, in room, comparative efficiency of several pairs of speakers, using, say, pink noise at the same volume setting on a receiver.
For an example, let's say one pair of speakers managed 88 dB at the listening position, and the next only 82 dB using the same volume setting, we know that the first speakers would have appx. the same SPL with a good 50 watt amp as would the second with a 200 watt amp.
THAT is useful information - as most budget (think $600) receivers will deliver 50 watts per channel with 5 channels driven.
