Haven't spent some years working as the equipment set-up director for Harry Pearson and The Absolute Sound Magazine, a high-end audio magazine and Harry being perhaps the worlds most revered audio reviewer:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/11/1...ies-at-77.html
The ethics of reviewing audio have been recited to me in both kindness and anger. I know them very well and while you may think that I'm being unfair somehow, in pointing out that omitting critical information about a reviewed products basic integrity and function is a failure of trust, you might look to recent law regarding blog posts and reviews.
These days, even casual reviews are subject to tests of truth and integrity and legally, both manufacturers and interested readers that can prove harm from your posted reviews can take you to court for problems like this.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124287328648142113
I'm glad to see you're following my statistics, DannyG1.
http://ideas.time.com/2013/01/07/yel...-can-get-sued/
While you're not a professional reviewer and aren't required to be aware of this stuff, your reviews do get attention and you'd do well to research it all some.
RicDoug,
You say I've 'earned that mistrust' and that I 'hate Carvin'. These are obtuse (baseless, idiotic) accusations. I'd love to hear your evidence for proof of either. I'd like to point out that more than 75% of your posts(or some number close to it) promote and/or mention Carvin.