Regardless his opinion, and i'm sure Atmosphere is an excellent product, I do not like people mentioned in the development cycle of the product reviewing it at KVR. This is rather like the developer reviewing their own products almost.

Did Fenton lay down his own cash or is he influenced by his association with Eric. I'm not accusing Fenton of anything as i'm sure he is perfectly correct, but it is rather unfair that he should be allowed to contribute to the review process given his close association with the product. His name is mentioned in the manual. There will be enough reviews when its in peoples hands.

Regards,
Bluey.

hehe: he even gave it 100% rating !

well everyone is allowed an opinion. but i see your point. good review tho

maybe he should edit it slightly, just to add that he was involved in some way.

What was the level of his involvement? Wasn't he just beta testing it? If so then who cares?

Funkybot wrote:

What was the level of his involvement? Wasn't he just beta testing it? If so then who cares?

AMEN

As someone who has seen this from all three sides (reviewer, magazine editor, developer), this is a very clear issue to me. The correct position should be obvious to anyone with an ounce of moral scruples. It's this:

Any review by someone who received the synth in any other way than purchasing it should clearly state their connection to the product.

A beta-tester has a skewed view of the product, or at least a view that is different from someone who purchases it normally (presumably, the latter group is the group in need of the review). If a beta tester posts a poor review, he or she may feel that the relationship with the developer will crumble.

I'm sure the omission of the relationship was a simple mistake. After all, he didn't use a fake name or anything. But the mistake should be rectified.

Let's not even start down the slippery slope of bought reviews. The reviews are important to me. I'd like to keep them as honest as possible. Developers can lose out when reviews are seen as biased.

I don't see a big fuss when a 'lesser' synth is reviewed by sombody who has a valued opinion in the community and receives a free copy as a thanks or a means to test.

It's not as if other reviews were bad and David's was a pack of lies. Had his review not been in line with other reviews I would have raised a point myself, but it was.

I don't see the problem here.

I think that if you are involved with a product in any way you should say so within a review. I would not think any less of a review done by someone who reveals a connection, but I would feel betrayed if I depended on a review to make my purchase decision and then later found the reviewer to possibly be biased. I am in no way saying David’s review is not to be trusted or might be biased. After all, he is a respected and knowledgeable person in the music community. Only that anyone should state any involvement up front. This goes for beta testing, contributing patches to the released version, assisting development, receiving a free copy, etc…

Robert

Come on guys..... this is silly

Give David a Chance..... to correct his review..

I dont see the big deal with this... becuase it is Atmosphere... but then Again If I am going to buy something I am going to do a Net sweep and get all the info I can on something.. as opposed to one or 2 reviews on KVR.... if this was a small synth from a no-name comapny... then i can see maybe your points... but this is silly

>>I don't see the problem here.

Nevertheless, it is a problem.

>>Come on guys..... this is silly

It's not silly.

>>Give David a Chance..... to correct his review..

I think everyone is willing for David to edit his review to mention the connection. We're not out for blood, we just want tranparency. That's a very, very small but important thing to ask for.

Guess what, if I think that a company is planting reviews, I won't buy the product. I'm sure SPectrasonics doesn't want that appearance. Do you think they might?

You know I should have never entered this....

2 things.... I have seen more bullCrap on this board when it relates to reviews.... it is almost comical

and if you think that Spectrasonics needed to plant a review.... OMG

now that is silly.... WAIT let me clarify that it is silly to me

now I am off to play with my Atmosphere and have fun!!!!!

and not to debate anymore about reviews....

I go in Peace

So what's the policy with public betas then? Gee everyone who helped beta Z3ta or any of the Linplug stuff now has to state so in their review as well? Was David's copy of Atmosphere complimentary? If he paid for it, than involved or not, his oppinion is valid. Again who cares if he helped test it? I read his review and it seemed entirely fine with me, he made valid points, obviously knows what he's talking about, has contributed fair reviews of other synths, etc. This is just uncalled for bitching IMO. We haven't had any major problems with the review system in what, a whole month? Cant we just leave well enough alone? David contributes enough here that I trust he wouldn't do anything devious in his reviews just because he has some sort of connection to the softsynth. Gee Scot does a lot of testing too, is he next? C'mon now folks just because you tested something doesn't mean it's going to skew your oppinion of it, it's obvious when we've got crap reviews but I don't think this is one of them.

I don't really care if David paid for Atmosphere or not, his opinions are informed and valuable. "Ah, well," you may be saying "Scot beta-tests, does patches, too, so OF COURSE he'd think so". Not so. There are a lot of people around here who beta-test tons of stuff, and their opinions are just as valuable to me. It doesn't matter HOW involved I am with something, I will right a fair and honest review. Period. I have no doubt that David has the same integrity. Quite frankly, if we stopped allowing beta-testers to review here, we'd lose a LOT of reviews, not to mention the insight that someone intimate with the program might have. Honestly, I think that beta-testers and patch writers are a welcome breath of fresh air when a new synth comes out. We need them to counter all the over-excited folks who pen their reviews within seconds of cracking open the shrinkwrap. At least they are familiar enough with the product to offer some REAL information, not "This thing rocks!" KVR is a community of developers, testers, musicians who have a very cool relationship and dialogue going. We are here to swap information and opinions with each other. I very much doubt that most of us would risk that by an overly positive or negative review of something we are involved with in some way. I know I wouldn't. As for David getting his copy for free, do you REALLY think that biases him? I doubt it. Quite franky, I have seen a lot more people who won't admit that they might have made a bad, very expensive purchase. David has nothing to lose or gain by writing his review. If the product sucked, why would he care if he risked his beta status with Spectrasonics? He'd likely not want the next product anyway if that were the case. If it kicked ass, then why not say so?

It comes down to why you read a review. Are you looking for information or opinion? Honestly, if there is lots of opinion, and little information to back it up, you need to take the review with a grain of salt anyhow. I read the reviews to see if the product in question might have features or flaws that I may have missed from the press or whatever. That is their value to me. I like the open process here, and I hope it does not change. I want to know what the beta-testers feel about a product, and I want to know what the guy who ponied up $399 feels about it as well. Look, as long as the developers themselves aren't writing the reviews, I think the opinions are valid. Hell, I think even some of them would tell it like it is, you know?

You guys are missing the point. All I want is for people to state their relationship is to the developer if they didn't purchase the product through the channels I could purchase through. THAT'S ALL. That's not whining or freaking. It's expecting and demanding ethical business.

I don't see the point in defending what was clearly a mistake on this poor guy's fault. Why not just let him fix it instead of claiming it wasn't a mistake?

Just because he tested it does not mean he didn't necessarily get it through the same channels. Again I don't think this is a mistake of any sorts at all.

I see your point, Mistertoast, and for the record, I WILL state my involvement in any product I review in the future. No problem. I think it will be most useful to know as well. As I say in my post above, I LIKE the idea of knowing that the reviewer might be a beta-tester. That person will be the one who's opinion on, say, the stability of a brand new synth, will matter most to me. It is not your post that worries me. It is the air of "conspiracy theory" that pops up sometimes around here that prompted me to post (but not, I emphasize, in YOUR post). I don't want KVR to risk losing the trust we all have in each other, you know? Yes, David: edit the review, but Ben: let's continue to allow an open review policy, eh?

:Sigh:

Now I know why so many people bought stocks their brokers were hyping.

This is simple. Example A:

This is a great synth. I have been lucky enought to work with it during development and I've begun to rely on it to provide something special in just about every new song I make.

Example B:

I really like this VSTi. It's the best. Note: I was a beta tester on this product, but I'd pay for this synth.

Example C:

This is a great synth. I provided some of the patches that shipped with it, and I had a great time making them!

Hi Guys,

Some very good points raised here. David Abraham is a Spectrasonics beta tester, and he tests compatibility with Sonar and Cubase SX after we do the Windows port (our plugs are developed on the Mac). So his total involvement was about three weeks of testing on Atmosphere before it was released...he wasn't actually involved in any of the development of the instrument. (just FYI).

Also, he has made it clear that he was testing Atmosphere on numerous threads and forums, so he isn't hiding that fact....it just wasn't presented in his review.

I agree that it's a good idea that anyone connected in any way with a company (even as a short-term beta tester) should state their affiliation in their review. One thing that bothers me sometimes about KvR is that I know a few company people that pretend to be end users and completely independant KvR members, without letting people know who they are. There are numerous reviews on KvR done by beta testers and people affiliated with products, so this needs to be a standard for everyone who writes a KvR review. I also agree that beta testers shouldn't be barred from giving reviews (often the best beta testers and review writers are the same people....like Scot Solida for example), but in fairness, everyone should state their involvement in the product, in the text of the review.

I'm sure Ben will guide the way here soon....

(Oh, and give David a second to respond too...it is a holiday weekend after all!)

spectrum

>>As I say in my post above, I LIKE the idea of knowing that the reviewer might be a beta-tester.

Scot! We're of the same brain here! I LOVE to know that! It's useful information! In fact, I might trust the beta tester much, much more than the novice who is still on the first thrill of working through the patches at 3:00am the same night he buys it! Absolutely! I agree with you 100%. I just want to know.

mistertoast wrote:

All I want is for people to state their relationship is to the developer if they didn't purchase the product through the channels I could purchase through.

It is common practice for developers to give out so called NFR-copies or licenses to professional reviewers. Receiving such a license does not create any obligation to the developer, nor does a negative review means they will stop giving out those licenses. Most developers are respecting the views of the reviewers and take it as constructive criticism if a review shows negative points. The other way around, a reviewer should respect the developer and write an objective review. Most do

Spectrum,

Thanks much for your message. My position comes from some painful review experiences. It's just so much better to have a policy that people can trust, even when there are good people involved.

Not really on topic, but I remember ages ago reviewing a Macintosh game that got ported to the Amiga. I complained a bit about it because it still had some hints of Macintosh about it. Next thing I know, the guy that ported the game is on the phone telling me about his kids and how he had to feed them, pay the rent, etc. I didn't sleep for a week.

By the way, I'm reading the Atmosphere reviews carefully. It is very appealing to me. It's a lot of money, but I am...tempted.

ner0z wrote:

now I am off to play with my Atmosphere and have fun!!!!!

i'll bet spectrasonics paid him to say that

funkylime wrote:

ner0z wrote: now I am off to play with my Atmosphere and have fun!!!!! i'll bet spectrasonics paid him to say that

funkylime wrote:

ner0z wrote: now I am off to play with my Atmosphere and have fun!!!!! i'll bet spectrasonics paid him to say that

Why do think we have to charge $399?

Paying off these KvR members gets pretty expensive!

spectrum

It'll be $1000 a copy after you pay me off. :->

I agree that it should be stated in the review if there is any involvement with development or beta testing. It's good for you to know and factor that in with a grain of salt. What I mean is that on the one hand you'll definitely get some deeper information because if they beta tested then they really spent some time with it. But, also you know that if they give it a ten out of ten review in every category that there's a good chance they want to make the company they beta tested for happy (I cannot imagine a beta tester ripping on the product they tested). I am not saying there's no validity to this review though. Just something you would probably think of when you read the review... some biases perhaps but worth it for the good accurate information it offers.

I also don't believe in planting fake K-v-R names from company reps for reviewing. We've never done that despite the fact that Sonic Synth has almost as many reviews as Pentagon on K-v-R. I think that ruins the validity of what real users have to say. I don't do this and I don't think Eric would either. Mind you I would ask our beta testers not to review our product to avoid this situation.

Another thing to consider if a biased beta tester (but nice and friendly- I feel bad for Dave who is such a cool guy BTW) does review a product is that if enough regular users buy and review the product here it becomes only one review of many. If Atmosphere gets more end user reviews then it will tell you a more accurate perception from a variety of user's perspectives.

LOL...this is hilarious.

Yes I'm a beta tester for Atmosphere (I thought that was widely known? sure I'll add a disclaimer for you Bluey

However Atmosphere is my favorite synth ever, no question about that. Maybe something will top it next year.

..hey Squids no need to feel bad for me, I've been in some unbelievably acidic/hostile flame wars through-out the years, it would take a -lot- more than this to get me down....

At the same time I have no problem removing any reviews, there are plenty of outlets to express how I feel about quality software.

Or possibly beta testers can review, but the score is not factored?

Ben: give me your perspective and I'll abide...I'll abide....ma bruva, I'll abide


lemme know,
-david abraham

spectrum wrote:

I agree that it's a good idea that anyone connected in any way with a company (even as a short-term beta tester) should state their affiliation in their review. One thing that bothers me sometimes about KvR is that I know a few company people that pretend to be end users and completely independant KvR members, without letting people know who they are. There are numerous reviews on KvR done by beta testers and people affiliated with products, so this needs to be a standard for everyone who writes a KvR review. I also agree that beta testers shouldn't be barred from giving reviews (often the best beta testers and review writers are the same people....like Scot Solida for example), but in fairness, everyone should state their involvement in the product, in the text of the review. spectrum

It is only because you have been honest enough to name Fenton in your manual and Fenton has the integrity of not hiding his KVR nick that this matter has arisen. As mentioned this has not always been the case.

However there are many forms of "Beta Tester", and it sounds like Fenton was unique in Atmosphere product development cycle. Other forms of beta test are just sending the product to 100s of people and just receiving feedback, I wouldnt call this category a beta tester, as people here have been pointing out "yes I too was a beta tester".

Ben can enforce some sort of policy, but the end result that it is virtually impossible to enforce. But it is nice to see that if somebody is listed in the product development cycle, then at least they are honest enough to mention this as Fenton has.

Bluey.

Look regardless of Mr Fenton's review - (Do you realise how rude your above posts reads?) - I have no doubt that Atmosphere rocks. Why you may ask? Because Stylus does!! Spectrasonics have too big a reputation to release turkeys and most importantly bluey do you actually know of Eric Persing's reputation and his contribution to electronic music making?

Fine ask for a reviewer to put something in their review. But the quality and reputation of Eric Persing & Spectrasonics other products should give you a clue to how good this *might* be!!!

I'll be buying it AND Trilogy too when that comes out.

Moz

Mr. Persing ,

Just want to thank you for your hard work in bringing us an exceptional product. This is in a class by itself.

One thing I would like to mention are the patch names. I get a kick out of these names . Great stuff. They really help alot when trying to find a certain sound. Some are funny as hell . Did you name these?

Anyway , I agree totally with David Abraham Fenton's review.

Looking forward to Trilogy

Mush

Mozzer wrote:

Look regardless of Mr Fenton's review - (Do you realise how rude your above posts reads?) - I have no doubt that Atmosphere rocks. Why you may ask? Because Stylus does!! Spectrasonics have too big a reputation to release turkeys and most importantly bluey do you actually know of Eric Persing's reputation and his contribution to electronic music making? Fine ask for a reviewer to put something in their review. But the quality and reputation of Eric Persing & Spectrasonics other products should give you a clue to how good this *might* be!!! I'll be buying it AND Trilogy too when that comes out. Moz

Actually I didn't find bluey's post to be that rude. Even Eric himself seemed to agree in part with the point being made.

I thought this was a pretty mild post from bluey and was followed up with some very moderating remarks in a future post.

eh ? I have no intention of being rude to Eric nor David Fenton as I know they are above board. I know of Erics work and indeed have his Distorted Reality 1 &2 series, Bizzare Guitar and others. Atmosphere is sure to be of stellar quality and perfection based on the past products of Spectrasonics.

Bluey.

bluey wrote:

However there are many forms of "Beta Tester", and it sounds like Fenton was unique in Atmosphere product development cycle. Bluey.

Hi bluey:

this isn't the case. I had nothing at all to do with Atmosphere development. You probably already know this, but beta testing is generally a software related endeavor, and is about using the product like a user would, finding as many bugs as possible, and reporting them.

It is in this process of beta testing Atmosphere that I was blown away by the sounds.... Serious.

-david abraham

>>Spectrasonics have too big a reputation to release turkeys...

I don't understand this statement. If it's true, we don't need to have any reviews of the product at all. But, if we're going to have reviews, it's helpful to know something about the connection between writer and product.

anyway, It seems to me that this issue has already been sorted out. The parties involved have already stated that they're happy with a policy of disclosure. (And why would they fight against that?) It's in the best interest of everyone--publisher, writer, reader. It's simple.

And as for reputations, I think Ford had a pretty good reputation before the Edsel.

Mozzer wrote:

Spectrasonics have too big a reputation to release turkeys

a drum synth with a single pair of outputs is turkey-assed enough for me.

I agree with the posts about people who are SOMEWHAT involved in any way, should say so..........BUT for me, audio demos, and or video demos and I go by this.....plus a companies reputation......to me, it is the SOUND that makes me buy, not someone saying "this is the shit!!!".......even if it really is

Yeah, the audio demos and program demos are key for me, too. And presets are incredibly important with a program demo. If you have less than 64 patches, they'd better all be good. The patches should really work out the products. Seems like some companies spend all their effort on the synth and ignore the value of the presets. Understandable from a programming point of view, but deadly from a marketing point of view.

Well I see that David has already amended his review to state that he was involved in the beta testing, although to be quite honest I don't see the problem with people reviewing an instrument that they have beta tested without disclosing this beforehand, but I guess it’s always better to know ANY affiliations a reviewer may have.

BTW apparently I'm mentioned in the Atmosphere manual also, would I have to state that this if I were to write a review?

Ben,

The fact that people demand professionalism here is a compliment to you. You've done a great job building KvR into THE place to come for plug-in and host reviews.

Mushroom wrote:

Mr. Persing , Just want to thank you for your hard work in bringing us an exceptional product. This is in a class by itself. One thing I would like to mention are the patch names. I get a kick out of these names . Great stuff. They really help alot when trying to find a certain sound. Some are funny as hell . Did you name these? Anyway , I agree totally with David Abraham Fenton's review. Looking forward to Trilogy Mush

Thanks Mushroom...naming is part of what keeps me sane in the process I think! Sometimes its the names that are harder than the sound design....

Best,

spectrum