Call Search

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Friends Remembered
Survey Question

DX Cluster Spots

Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   Go Down
Author Topic: The Validity Of Reviews  (Read 21969 times)

Posts: 43

« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2011, 07:00:21 PM »

I also "enjoy" reviews that slam a rig for something it doesn't have EG: Icom 7200 doesn't do FM, really...last I checked that fact is listed on EVERY web site, Icom, etc. So as others have stated, take the reviews with a grain of salt, those that slam" as product for no "good " reason, as well as 5/5 with little or no explanation as to why it's "the best thing since sliced bread". Furthermore, if  a call sign isn't listed, I ignore the review!!! If you're a licensed Ham, "show your colors", don't hide behind some pseudonym! A call sign should be mandatory, if your licensed!

I also feel a "better" rating system would also be of use, 1 -10 for example, to get a more "accurate" spread. I give many 4/5's that I'd like to give a more appropriate 4.5 (or 9).

Your mileage may vary, etc, etc........

Posts: 10248


« Reply #16 on: January 20, 2011, 12:53:27 PM »

When I first started this thread, I was concerned that some unscrupulous folks (I use that term because I can't really call them what I would like to) were padding the results so to speak. I was hoping that it was is isolated case. However, after looking over about 50 different product reviews, I'm not so sure. I can't validate most of them, obviously, but two I can easily prove.

I just hope that the old cliche is true....

What goes around, comes around!


Posts: 1454

« Reply #17 on: January 23, 2011, 09:59:26 AM »

The unproven implication concerning planted reviews is like government conspiracy theories and the aluminum foil hat wearers that spout them. In addition, it looks like someone has way too much spare time on his hands.  Roll Eyes

Name, names and show us some proof! Otherwise, your statements are only accusations that according to the responses, no one is really interested in. Wink
« Last Edit: January 23, 2011, 05:04:22 PM by KI4SDY » Logged

Posts: 402

« Reply #18 on: February 22, 2011, 07:43:58 AM »

One thing a review here is good for is revealing design or parts issues. Anyone can tell if a rig is broke or not. If a device has recurring design or parts reliability issues it normaly shows up in the review, several reports of them usualy. So to me that means if a rig has design or parts issues that rig should be overlooked. For an example look at the ft100, ic703, and a few other rigs reviews that seem to have at least one part over and over again that just gives up the ghost for whatever reason.

If you have a clumsy child, you make them wear a helmet. If you have death prone children, you keep a few clones of them in your lab.

Posts: 7718

« Reply #19 on: February 24, 2011, 08:19:30 AM »

I haven't noticed any planted reviews. I want to see some proof.

And when doing a review please use proper English, spelling and punctuation. Many of the reviews sound as if they were written by an illiterate drunk.

Posts: 2243

« Reply #20 on: February 24, 2011, 12:20:32 PM »

I think the notion of "planted" reviews is silly.
Indeed, break out the tin foil hats.

About as silly as certain reviews that say "I don't own one of
these radios, but from what I've read, they sound terrific!". DOH!

I agree with N0SYA, they are good for seeing the same issue(s)
pop up multiple times, i.e. the notorious "mic grounding"
issue (and others) with the FT-100, etc.

73, Ken  AD6KA

Posts: 43

« Reply #21 on: February 27, 2011, 07:38:44 AM »

OK,  here are more of my OPINIONS, Re: reviews. Some may be redundantly repetitive... Roll Eyes

1- Believe it or not, Eham is not the only Ham site on the NET (albeit a GREAT one), research, surf, ask an "Elmer" <if such still roam the planet? Wink >, go to your local "Ham Radio Heaven" & play/compare, most larger ones have a bunch of "powered up" RIGS siitng there just waiting for YOU...& by ALL MEANS take all subjective reviews, as most are, with a LARGE grain of salt... Then form your own opinion, after all, isn't what you like & not what someone else "thinks"..... Cool

2- I just ignore many of the reviews, as others have expounded on, those 5/5s with real no info, 0/5s or 1/5s, that apparently bash a product in favor of another, "reviewing" without actually having owned or at the very least, used the item for a reasonable length of time. Saw one that claimed "my father had one with an issue, so I sold mine" .. Huh AND My ALL TIME FAVORITE, <Drum roll please> are "Anonymous/Pseudonym" posts/reviews ..."Who was that masked man"...well .... personally, I don't believe they're the "Lone Ranger", "kemosabe"!! Are they really that "paranoid", is there a "Spook" (Cold War term) around the corner, lurking ready to "get them", should they "divulge" their true "identity", "This tape will self-destruct in 10 seconds" <sorry I couldn't find a clip of the Theme song  to paste here> Wink

These are my OPINIONS, ......your mileage may vary...etc, etc, etc...Cool
« Last Edit: February 27, 2011, 07:42:15 AM by KB3RPE » Logged

Posts: 94


« Reply #22 on: April 06, 2011, 07:21:48 AM »

I'm posting this here for reasons which will become apparent.

In other words, how are the powers that be supposed to know what is a legitimate review, and which isn't?

Since one can't separate these three sins (good, bad, and ugly), the rest of us must take them with the proverbial grain of salt.


K0BG    Rating: 5/5    Apr 16, 2006 06:57    

Send this review to a friend

The Best!     Time owned: 6 to 12 months

The HiQ series of antennas are ruggedly built, perform as advertised, and of a unique design. Unlike other brands of remotely tuned antennas (aka screwdrivers), the HiQ is sealed from the ravages of the environment, and it doesn't change length as the frequency is adjusted. Are there drawbacks? Yes.

First, they cost more. But weighed against their superior features, the extra cost is easily justified.

You have to keep the unit clean. This isn't a problem if you follow the HiQ's suggestion about using Rain-X.

Operationally, the only problem is inherent in the basic design. When the coil is positioned at it highest frequency, there is still some active coil left in the circuit. If you use an 8 foot whip as I do (to maximize performance), you can just use 17 meters. To use 15, 12, or 10 meters, you either have to install a shorter whip, or tune to a harmonic which isn't easy.

Lastly, they are heavy and proper mounting is a necessity.

Posts: 2483

« Reply #23 on: April 13, 2011, 12:24:49 PM »

Take 40 meters for example:

Someone who never had an antenna will think a paperclip is a great antenna.

Someone who used a paperclip for an antenna then changed to a 36 inch long wire will think the 36 inch wire is a great antenna.

Someone whe used a 36 inch wire then changed to a 10 foot tall vertical with NO counterpoise will think the 10 foot vertical  with no counterpoise is a great antenna.

Someone who used a 10 foot vertical with NO counterpoise and then installed a few radials of the proper length will think that is a great antenna.

Someone who used a 10 foot vertical with a few radials then changed to a half wave dipole up at least one wave length, will think the dipole is a great antenna.

Someone who used a half wave dipole up one wave length then changed to a 4 element full size monoband yagi two wave lengths high will think the monoband yagi is a great antenna.

And so it goes.

Dick   AD4U


Posts: 270

« Reply #24 on: April 13, 2011, 01:24:24 PM »

Somebody who has a couple of million in the bank will think a 80 foot tower and a huge beam + a couple of beverages + phased arrays is childs play........ Wink

Men can only be happy when they do not assume that the object of life is happiness.
George Orwell

Posts: 5081

« Reply #25 on: April 13, 2011, 04:08:57 PM »

I don't have a problem with the reviews.

Reviews are flavored by the reviewers own personality and I agree some times there is an agenda.

But it does not really matter because I doubt any of us go by any single review and I think most of us can read them and realize who has an axe to grind and who is just plain wrong or stupid.  Hence why the OP wrote this post, he picked up that something was wrong with some of the reviews! Well so do most of us, we see the good ones and the plain old stupid ones and we sift through looking for recurring themes in the ones we think are good.

“A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”  (Mark Twain)

Posts: 1254

« Reply #26 on: April 14, 2011, 09:50:50 PM »

Well said.  I also like to look at reviews when shopping at Amazon.  It doesn't take too much experience to figure out the reviews that offer meaningful information.  And the rest can be downright entertaining.  Same with the reviews here.  Some are useful and some can be taken with a grain of salt, but overall reviews can be very helpful. 


Posts: 66

« Reply #27 on: April 18, 2011, 09:05:15 AM »

Just look at the review of the sgc sg2000 adsp. The clown give the tuner a zero when he rates the radio. That review should be deleted.

Posts: 283

« Reply #28 on: April 24, 2011, 09:05:47 AM »

I agree that the negative reviews are more helpful because they generally will point out a specific flaw or problem with the reviewed product. 

Posts: 103

« Reply #29 on: June 03, 2011, 08:53:37 PM »

I read the reviews carefully if the author has had "it" over 3 or 12 Months, and give them "weight" assuming the author appears creditable.
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   Go Up
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!