KVR Audio

Numanoid · Post by **Numanoid** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 4:00 pm

This was a bit funny or strange

I had added a review of a synth on a developers webpage.

When I now see the review published, it seems the developer has edited the review, keeping the positive points I had made, but leaving out the point I had made that could be interpreted as negative (I had mentioned that the synth came with few presets).

So is this common praxis or what is the deal

penguinfromdeep · Post by **penguinfromdeep** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 4:20 pm

Yeah if you put it on developers webpage I guess he can do whatever he wants with it ... I mean who developer in their right mind would post any even slightly negative things about their own synth on their own page where they sell the synth? The reviews are just used for advertising

bob bobwood · Post by **bob bobwood** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 4:51 pm

Time to write a review where they can't edit it. On KVR Reviews perhaps.
"If you want to review something, find the product's KVR page and click the "Reviews" tab".

Numanoid · Post by **Numanoid** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:01 pm

bob bobwood wrote:Time to write a review where they can't edit it. On KVR Reviews perhaps.
"If you want to review something, find the product's KVR page and click the "Reviews" tab".

Synth is not listed in the KVR database so can't do that.

Sendy · Post by **Sendy** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:03 pm

Numanoid wrote:This was a bit funny or strange

I had added a review of a synth on a developers webpage.

When I now see the review published, it seems the developer has edited the review, keeping the positive points I had made, but leaving out the point I had made that could be interpreted as negative (I had mentioned that the synth came with few presets).

So is this common praxis or what is the deal

What a crock of bull! If you're going to ask for reviews from people, you shouldn't bend them to your own will to suit your purpose! They might as well just fill the page full of "OMG BEST PULGIN EVAR!" or are they too cheap to even give away a few copies to industry figures in exchange for unrealistically good reviews?

If reviews can't effectively be objective on a company website then why bother at all? Just post your blurb and let the real evaluation happen elsewhere

tehlord · Post by **tehlord** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:03 pm

As long as reviews have been written this practise has been common and widespread.

CapnLockheed · Post by **CapnLockheed** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:10 pm

Really....If I'm trying to sell ANYTHING I'm not going to post a review on MY OWN website that says: "This guy's product sucks don't buy it!"

And to a great extent the same is true of trade magazines. A LOT of their "reviews" read more like advertizements...and why is that? Because the manufacturers pay for advertising space...you don't bite the hand that
feeds you aye? Even on official support forums it's not uncommon for
moderators to censor or even remove negative posts.

That's EXACTLY why there are public forums. You got a gripe? B*tch about it here or on GearSluts or one of the many other PUBLIC audio forums. The OP complains that there's no developer forum for this synth KVR so he can't say anything.
That's nonsense the title of this thread could have very well contained the name of the synth involved. But the OP didn't mention the name of the synth, the developer or even what he felt he didn't like about said synth. He did nothing but whinge about general industry wide practices.

xamido · Post by **xamido** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:11 pm

I don't get why the op angry about it. This is a common practice. Ever seen those five star and exaggerated comments on movie trailer? It's just like that. The good part is there for promotion.

Sampleconstruct · Post by **Sampleconstruct** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:13 pm

I buy a lot of Hardware and Instruments at Thomann's Cyberstore and always review my purchases - some reviews are negative and they won't be published. It's a common thing.

Kriminal · Post by **Kriminal** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:16 pm

Sendy wrote:
What a crock of bull! If you're going to ask for reviews from people, you shouldn't bend them to your own will to suit your purpose! They might as well just fill the page full of "OMG BEST PULGIN EVAR!!!

They do that too, lots of them.

Numanoid · Post by **Numanoid** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:19 pm

xamido wrote:I don't get why the op angry about it. This is a common practice. Ever seen those five star and exaggerated comments on movie trailer? It's just like that. The good part is there for promotion.

I'm not angry about it, but rather amused.

Note that my review was not cut from some other site. I posted it on the developer site.

It would be like if you were working in a newspaper, and had written an article given it to the editor, and noted the next day in the newspaper that the editor had rewritten it to suit his/the newspaper's view.

CapnLockheed · Post by **CapnLockheed** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:25 pm

Numanoid wrote:
xamido wrote:I don't get why the op angry about it. This is a common practice. Ever seen those five star and exaggerated comments on movie trailer? It's just like that. The good part is there for promotion.
I'm not angry about it, but rather amused.

Note that my review was not cut from some other site. I posted it on the developer site.

It would be like if you were working in a newspaper, and had written an article given it to the editor, and noted the next day in the newspaper that the editor had rewritten it to suit his/the newspaper's view.

That's about the most ridiculous analogy I've ever heard. YOU don't work for the developer. A journalist works at the pleasure of his editor and it is the editor's JOB to EDIT. And again...it's a common industry wide practice!

Numanoid · Post by **Numanoid** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:32 pm

CapnLockheed wrote:That's about the most ridiculous analogy I've ever heard. YOU don't work for the developer. A journalist works at the pleasure of his editor and it is the editor's JOB to EDIT. And again...it's a common industry wide practice!

I wouldn't really call it ridiculous or more misleading than if somebody would fix my review of their product

And how can you know I don't work for the developer?

hakey · Post by **hakey** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:43 pm

Numanoid wrote:It would be like if you were working in a newspaper, and had written an article given it to the editor, and noted the next day in the newspaper that the editor had rewritten it to suit his/the newspaper's view.

That's pretty much what happens - it's called sub-editing. It has been known to piss off the odd hack now and then.

I agree with Capn', crap analogy.

Tricky-Loops · Post by **Tricky-Loops** » Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:44 pm

Numanoid wrote:It would be like if you were working in a newspaper, and had written an article given it to the editor, and noted the next day in the newspaper that the editor had rewritten it to suit his/the newspaper's view.

This isn't impossible at all, BTW. I've heard about some similar cases...

Regarding the Synth review, I think it would be better for the developer then to delete the whole post, not only the negative points... And there's even a possibility to block the comment's feature.

It is unfortunately common to remove negative posts and comments, everywhere in the world (and ESPECIALLY on newspaper online news). Even Amazon does it if the producer/entrepreneur/seller demands it.

Some month ago I wrote well meant styling tips for a German singer, and some days later he removed it - and then he even deleted the whole guest book because there were so many negative comments...

IMO, if someone really needs a guest book, he/she should accept critical posts, too. If not, then simply delete the guest book! A guest book SOLELY with good comments is unbelievable and ridiculous.

Developer fixing reviews of their own product?