What is interesting is there’s a NY Times drama critic who does a similar thing: she will leave a performance early if she doesn’t like the show and then write her review on the performance. And she matter of factly wrote about it, seeing nothing wrong in doing it.
> On Mar 30, 2015, at 1:57 PM, Steven Smolian <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> It has always been my belief that the critic of sound recordings stands-in
> for the consumer who does not have access to what is under review. It is
> his job to describe what he hears for that person. Opinions can be
> integrated into the review but it should be clear what is fact and what is
> In this case, the listener should be made aware that there is a best file,
> sometimes publically accessible, sometimes not, and that what is being
> reviewed is a derivitave, with a list of its limitations as compared with
> the original or the highest quality availble option, a way to decide how
> important these differences may be to them, and what other options there may
> be as well. And to write in short, punchy sentences.
> Steeven Smolian