the looks maybe in the cons list for the reviewer because he's not a fan of the looks.I find is somewhat strange you give the looks an entry in the cons list as you actually say
'Now, as I’ve said before, looks are subjective. Things person A likes are not automatically going to be what appeals to person B'. Could we not then give every speaker, or piece of hifi for that matter, an entry in the cons list.
sound preferences are subjective. everyone's ears are different.I do not entirely agree. A review should primarily be based on facts, some measured and yes some subjective. Speakers are probably the hardest part of a hifi system to judge objectively.
Connectivity and features both get an 8 what would need to be different to get a higher score?
Can look up plenty of speakers reviewed here that get 8 for both and have twin posts and ports.sound preferences are subjective. everyone's ears are different.
lack of twin binding posts?
lack of the option for the listener to experiment with ported or blocking ports?
Ironically, it's because I do like the looks, I've flagged it. Their apperance is very distinctive and thus likely to be more subjectively regarded.the looks maybe in the cons list for the reviewer because he's not a fan of the looks.
8 is a default value; easy and logical to connect via a variety of speaker cable terminations to. The two higher point values then exist to acknowledge specialist extra features like crossover bypass, star earths and other unusual fitments.Connectivity and features both get an 8 what would need to be different to get a higher score?
shouldnt you have awarded it 4 out of 5? lol