Print Magazines vs. Online Magazines

  • Thread starter Thread starter -
  • Start date Start date

OK, let me post from a writer's point of view, since it seems print magazines have been put in the spotlight lately on BFs.

First of all, many of the knives I have reviewed in print magazines were purchased by myself, and not 'writer's samples,' so anyone who incinuates that writers, as a whole, are sucking up for free knives don't know what the hell they're typing about.

True, Sal Glesser sent a Military for our review, but I don't think Sal stooped to a level of picking something special to make sure the review went well. Matter of fact, he specifically requested on BladeForums that the knife be used hard and ALL results be reported. That's exactly what happened with no special interest or 'padding' of results. The same request came from Mike Fuller of TOPS.

I have also received samples from other companies but I continue to write the absolute honesty and truth, and voluntarily defend it here on BladeForums.

I know my opinion on this subject is not the popular opinion on this forum, but so be it. If I followed popular opinion then I might also 'fudge' a review to please the crowd or further my financial status....ain't gonna happen.

Further, if a magazine ever asked me to 'do a good review because these guys spend a lot of advertising bucks,' I would quit writing or submitting anything to the publication.

There are many honest writers out there. Some of them I know personally. For example; you won't find a more honorable and experienced man than Jerry VanCook. In my opinion and personal dealings with him, he writes what he believes and doesn't cater to any editor or advertiser.

I enjoy BladeForums but this trail of criticising print magazines is serving no one, including the manufacturers and readers who use both mediums (Forums and Magazines) to judge the quality of their work or make decisions on their next purchase. In my opinion, print magazines will be here for a long time, so why alienate them. I think Sal Glesser attempted to make this point in a previous thread.

About knife reviews:

ALL reviews are biased, simply from the fact that every reviewer is different in skill, likes, and the way they use a blade.

As an example, I would bet that I could do the same chopping test with the Busse vs. Cold Steel and come up with different results on the same material. This is not a critique against the tester. All I'm saying is until there are calibrated machines doing the testing which takes human error out of it, all tests will be biased based on the reviewer.

As far as magazines not running bad knives, many times it's not the editor as much as the writer. I know I have reviewed knives and decided not to submit the review because I (meaning me and only me) decided the blade served no purpose for me (meaning me and only me). This same blade may serve someone else well. I know a quality knife maker that carries a 5 dollar chinese lock back as an everyday pocket knives. Are these quality knives? No. Do they serve the owner's puropse? Undoubtedly they do or he wouldn't carry it.

I write based on my experiences and knowledge of what I need to do a job. My reviews, and many others, usually list the downfalls based on our use and experience.

In short, if you don't like what the magazines are printing then get involved by mailing a query to the editor, then spend a little time and do a review, type up a manuscript, and submit it for publication.

Again, I enjoy the forums and the expertise here, but I also enjoy the magazines (even the ones I don't write for) and believe there is plenty of room for both without having to choose. - Jeff

------------------
Randall's Adventure & Training
jeff@jungletraining.com

 
Well said Jeff,
I love the Forums, but I'm not going to cancel my magazine subscriptions. I look forward to each new issue. Maybe because computers are still new to me, I like to hold a hard copy in my hands, I do print up photo's and info. that I'm interested in. Old habits are hard to break. I don't question a writers honesty or integrity when I read a review in either medium. It's just information and entertainment for me. I do feel we're in a Technological Revolution, still in it's infancy, a lot of changes are here and more are coming. What remains the same, is the human factor.
 
Hi Jeff...

Being a writer myself I understand what you are saying and agree.

I've wrote many articles about products from Berkley, Spiderwire, Rapala and a few others, and although I was on Berkley's writers program, I never used it. To date I got one spool of line from Berkley which i asked for, but never reviewed, one T-shirt and a few lures form Rapala and nothing from Spiderwire other than stock photos.

I wrote the articles because I believed in the products, not because of being on the payroll...
I will continue to write articles on products I like and use. If I get a spool of line out of it,,great,,if not,,oh well, doesn't matter.

As far as Online vs. Print....

I think they both have their place. There are still hords of knife lovers with the same love of knives as the people here, but don't have a computer.

I for one,prefer this forum to print, because of the interactivity between everyone.

I learn something here everyday, and the vast array of knowledge and opinions is incredible. The selection and amount of knifemakers is mind boggling. I would never have heard about half the knifemakers through print,, not to mention the many friendships I have made...
Including Yours..
smile.gif



ttyle Eric...

------------------
Eric E. Noeldechen
On/Scene Tactical
http://www.mnsi.net/~nbtnoel
Custom made, High Quality
Concealex Sheaths and Tool Holsters
Canada's Only Custom Concealex Shop!



[This message has been edited by Normark (edited 19 December 1999).]
 
Great Post Jeff!

Like I said in Mike's BF marketing thread recently, this forum and the standard print magazines are complementary. They work best together. I agree with you that writers of magazine articles (particularly with integrity like yours) are Not especially biased to say only good things. In fact I enjoy reading articles written by folks like you and Ed Fowler precisely Because you write from the biased point of view of experienced and knowledgable knife Users. And because writers of articles usually spend more time composing their thoughts, their words are often better suited to convey the meaning of their message than some of the hastily written posts so common here.

Nor are posters here without their own particular bias (e.g. the Sebenzanistas and members of the Church of Tactical Truth). I've seen a lot of opportunities here in the forums where posters clearly wanted to flame a product or maker, and held their tongue (or fingers as the case may be) because they were trying hard to be polite and civil. So I don't agree that you Only get the Truth here. Everyone has to figure that out for themselves based on the quality of the words they read, the reputation of the writer, and their own knowledge and experience.

Frankly, I'm a little confused by the on-line knife magazine idea. I understand the need to make money to operate this site, and I am willing to pay for the oppotunity to read and participate in these forums, but the on-line magazine offers no more, and maybe less than a print magazine.

This forum does Not replace a well written magazine article by an experienced and knowledgable writer. It complements the print media. They both work together to help all of us learn more about the world of knives. I think a lot of the problem comes from the fact that the e-commerce side of forum operations is new and evolving. Trying to claim that one media is Better or superior to the other is like trying to choose which of my eyes to pluck out. I'm keeping both my eyes because neither of these two means of information exchange offends me. I need them Both to better see and Understand the world around me.

Paracelsus

[This message has been edited by Paracelsus (edited 19 December 1999).]
 
For myself, I would not even know about any of the top manufacturers initially if not for the magazines. BF has given me a more in-depth awareness of what many ELU's feel about certain products, but I get all the knife publications that come out. I enjoy reading them. Plus, in a great deal of articles, esp. many in TK, the writers do point out certain shortcomings they may have found and suggestions to the manufacturer for improvements.

I think there is room for all types of media in the positive promotion of knives in all their varied forms and uses, without one alienating the other.
Jim
 
Online magazines will never replace print magazines. Each has its own place.

Specifically, you can’t read an online magazine in the john - unless, of course, you have a laptop, but I don’t really think it’s the same thing, do you?

------------------
Allbest,

Jim Six
Adventure, Intrigue & Cheap Thrills
jim@six.org
www.jim.six.org
 
I have subscriptions to all 3 major knife magazines, and bought a subscription to the on line version. On line mags wont replace the paper mags, but there is room for both. I honestly dont see why folks are upset with the paper or on line mags, (other than a competition thing) it is up to the reader to seperate the grain from the chaff, and see hype for hype. My dimes worth.

------------------
www.simonichknives.com

[This message has been edited by Rob Simonich (edited 19 December 1999).]
 
Jeff,

Don't know if your post was directed at comments I mader earlier in another thread or not but if so, please believe me that I was not referring to any knife reviewer in particular nor denigrating the character of knife reviewers in general.

I also made the statement that:

"Of course, I still like the magazine format 'cause it's pretty relaxing to kick back and look at some cool pics and new products and there often are good reviews. . ."

For instance, your review of the Tactical Drop Clip Jr. in Tactical Knives March 2000 was great! I enjoyed it immensely. Of course, I knew most of the story already from your website and your comments in BF. But the pics with the story added another dimension.

In BF I've seen you recommend cheap machetes over knives you apparently have a vested interest in and I can't tell you how much I respect you for that. So, in no way was I impugning your integrity (or any other reviewer's).

Lets see if I can clarify the main point (or points) I was trying to make. If we go to Tactical Knives Sept. 1999, there is a review by Steven Dick of Benchmade's Axis Lock.

Mr. Dick reviews the production prototype of the Axis Lock 710. The review was generally glowing. I have no problem with the review. But: I'd like to know more about the knife than what was in the review. I'd like to hear from others that got their knife "off the rack" so to speak.

My complaint does NOT mean that Mr. Dick's review was bad or wrong or any of those things. But the advantage of Bladeforums is that I get to hear many and often different stories about a particular knife. One review is OK. Many reviews are better, especially if they come from people who have been using the knife for a long time, and bought it as one of a slew of production knifes. That was my main point. It was NOT that knife reviews in magazines are bad. But they are only a subset of the database that we now have access to. And that's especially true IF the knfe that is being reviewed is not an "off the rack" knife. If this really is a rare event, then I stand corrected on that issue. Nevertheless, I've seen the issue of quality control raised on this forum quite a few times. It is an issue for some people.

Additionally, a single reviewer has their own set of prejudices and preferences, whether they want to admit to them or not. Isn't that true of all of us? For instance, some people just don't like bead blasted blades. Some people hate stainless blades, some hate 440C or ATS 34 etc., etc. Will that affect the review? Maybe it will and maybe it won't. No matter. The best antidote is to read as many reviews as you can and then make up your own mind.

Did I buy an axis lock? You betcha. And I love it. But before I did, I did a search on BF to find out what others had to say about the knife to complement the information I had from Mr. Dick's fine review of a prototype. While Mr. Dick is a bonafide knife authority, it doesn't mean that I have to accept his opinion as gospel, even though I might be inclined to. Knife authorities are known to disagree. And it's often the rule, not the exception. Yet, how often do you see knife reviews in magazines describing a particular knife as a POS? Seems like a rare event to me. But I've seen what looks like pretty substantial complaints (right or wrong) in BF about some fairly high-end knives. Specifically, the issue of liner lock failure comes to mind.

As I read back over your post you seem to be addressing issues that I did not raise in my post in the other thread so I may be unaware of comments by others that you may be directing your response to.

At any rate, I just want to reiterate that I am not insinuating the lack of integrity by anyone, nor do I think knife reviews in magazines are useless. I just want as much information as I can gain access to before I run out and make a substantial purchase.

Clearly, I'm not going to run out and cancel my subscriptions to the magazines. Just the opposite. The more the merrier! We've been living in a knife drought for years but that is now changing. Let's celebrate the fact that the industry seems to be growing and as consumers we now have more access to information about knives than ever before.


------------------
Hoodoo

When you arrive at the fork in the road, take it.
Yogi Berra



[This message has been edited by Hoodoo (edited 19 December 1999).]
 
Hi Jeff,

Thanks for the very well thought out post. The last thing I would want to do is have a war with the mags. In fact the reverse is what I asked for in the first place. In my talks with people from both mags, each said they view us as competition. Well as much as I tried to get them to have some sort of mutual relationship with us they said no. I even offered to do on-line subscriptions for them and/or host their forum.


In my opinion, print magazines will be here for a long time, so why alienate them.
Click to expand...

I agree with you here. I would like nothing more than to work with the magazines, even though they have told me in no uncertain terms that they NEVER will.

I say now in public that they are very welcome here. I would love to host a forum for them and maybe do a ad swap. Whatever they want I am willing to entertain. I think that if you call them about this issue Jeff, you will get an earful.

The forums are a very tricky medium. It is entirely "to open" and it's real time nature is not very condusive when it comes to controversial subjects. The magazines will see this as a liability. I do not and see it's potential as we have a well groomed goup of people here who can look past problems for content.

If fact I just deleted a post a moment ago that Dexter (write for Tactical Knives and Blade) brought to my attention in the spyderco forum. No big deal, as people will use this site as a form of graffiti when given the chance.

The new "enterprise" version of this software will give us a lot of new features which will help us run a clean site.

Everyone is welcome here. The on-line magazine is just a way for us to generate revenue to offset costs.

In the trail issue I tell people that I will have "no bs or fluff". I understand some writers do not do this but you and I would be kidding no one here to suggest that it does not happen. In fact one writer recieved a specific knife from a manufacturer and actually had to go through several before he got one that worked well enough to write a story. This is not to say the knife did not deserve a write up and it is not an indicator of the writers credibility. You will obviously not see that in the story however. You will in mine.

Are tests biased? You betcha! That is why I choose tests that can be easily replicated. Most of my tests are merely observations based on my perspective. The difference here is that I will do tests in front of anyone who wishes to attend. In fact I even did my last test by driving to Orlando to meet with a member and even had him do part of the test. He got the same results I did and we even used his knife
smile.gif



All in all the forums are good for everyone. I will do my best to keep this forum ahead of the pack. We are competing to some extent with rec.knives, Tactical Forums, Benchmade's forum and Knife Forums. Just like Tactical Knives is competing with Blade, KI, Tek Knives and others. We are only competing for members at the moment. Before long we may start competing for advertisers dollars as well. That is when it we will be viewed much different.



------------------
Best Regards,
Mike Turber
BladeForums Site Owner and Administrator
Do it! Do it right! Do it right NOW!

Support BladeForums! Check out the BFC Store!
www.bladeforums.com/store
Subscribe our NEW online magazine!
www.bladeforums.com/magazine
Enter our Raffle!
www.bladeforums.com/raffle
 
Jeff :

ALL reviews are biased
Click to expand...

No they are not. While it is tossed around very easily by many on the forums, biasing an experiment is a very serious matter and it is not an accusation that should be made lightly.

simply from the fact that every reviewer is different in skill, likes, and the way they use a blade.
Click to expand...

All of which can and should be taken into account. Just because you cannot do something do not assume it is beyond the ability of everyone else. There are many people who take data collection very seriously (the standard guys being light years ahead of everyone else) and I have had the pleasure of working with some of them. Don't be so quick to make such statements which in many circles is professional slander.

As for the mags, I do agree that the promotion of Mike's new mag is a bit too "us against them", comparing the online against the printed versions. However it probably is that way because the standard question is "why would I buy that instead of XXX" . If Mike's mag is better then that will become obvious very quickly, as will it if it is not.

-Cliff
 
I think I speak for many when I say that all knife information is welcomed and valued, whether in print or electronic form.The magazines and this forum compliment each other to a great degree,and I predict that eventually they will come together in a significant way.

------------------
AKTI Member #A000934
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws."-TACITUS (55?-130?)

 
The subject was brought up here about advertisering. I think this a very important factor in the success or failure of any publication. Readers are very important, but lets face it, more readers mean more advertisers, means more revenue. Quality of subject matter, articles and many other factors will mean more readers, and therefore more advertisers. I am an advertiser both on Blade Forums, and in Blade Magazine. I will state very clearly that as a reader I love the quality that I see in both Blade Forums, and Blade magazine. As an advertiser, I have a limited budget. Media needs to keep quality of there product high, but there is another side. The other side is the advertising prices. Fact is both the online and offline medias are going to price themselves out of advertisers, if they are not careful. No advertisers meant now revenue. No revenue means no money to stay in business. Which means no media for me and others as readers to read. I hope that Mike Turber (very likeable guy btw), Blade Magazine, Knives Illustrated, Tactical Knives, and all these other medias are reading this. You put out a great product, you have lots of readers. Your advertising is a benefit to those that advertise with you But if you keep raising the advertising prices you will go the way of the dinasuar.

Just my two cents, and it is realitive to this whether you agree or not.


------------------
Lynn Griffith-Knifemaker

My website
GriffithKN@aol.com


 
I agree with you there Lynn. I just cancelled my ads with TF because the more than doubled my ad price
frown.gif


Now if they had more than doubled the readership since we negotiated the last ad I would go for it.

The banners here started at $99.95 for a year. At that point we had 400 members, 1,000 lurkers and 20,000 hits a day.


Then they went to $199.95 a year. We then had over 1,500 members, 5,000 lurkers and 50,000+ hits a day.


Now they are $499.95 per year, 49.95 per month. We now have 4,200 members, 25,000 lurkers and 250,000+ hits a day.

The $499.95 is fixed through next year so even when we grow, your ad dollar stays the same. If we keep growing at this pace, or even slow down for that matter, we will have higher readership then all the magazines combined before the end of next year. I am not talking about members, I am talking about "unique" readers per month. This means our $499.95 per year is a bargain when compared to the ad rates in the magazines.

Of course a magazine could BUY BladeForums
smile.gif


------------------
Best Regards,
Mike Turber
BladeForums Site Owner and Administrator
Do it! Do it right! Do it right NOW!

Support BladeForums! Check out the BFC Store!
www.bladeforums.com/store
Subscribe our NEW online magazine!
www.bladeforums.com/magazine
Enter our Raffle!
www.bladeforums.com/raffle
 
Cool your shorts off Cliff.

I quoted: "ALL reviews are biased, simply from the fact that every reviewer is different in skill, likes, and the way they use a blade."

I think everyone would agree that 'biasing' a review to make a knife look better or worse is wrong, but as Mike Turber agreed, all tests are UNINTENTIONALLY biased by the fact that not everyone is the same, or uses a blade the same.

Cliff quotes:
All of which can and should be taken into account. Just because you cannot do something do not assume it is beyond the ability of everyone else.
Click to expand...

Thank you for making the exact point I was attempting to make in my 'slanderous' "all reviews are biased" paragraph.

Cliff, either I'm too dumb to understand what you're saying or you just agreed with what I said in my original post.

Care to explain? - Jeff

------------------
Randall's Adventure & Training
jeff@jungletraining.com

 
Lynn. I meant TK (Got Mad Dog on the brain and he runs TF
smile.gif
)


Jeff -VS- Cliff
smile.gif

I think the term bias is somewhat misleading to most who view it out of context. Bias, in most peoples minds, means that the tester may have feelings towards a particular maker and therefor that makers knife would do good in a test, especially in a head to head test.

That is why Mad Dog will never win in any head to head test I do. I will make certain he loses each and every time even if I have to fudge all the results. In fact while I was testing in Orlando with Nam watching, I was able to swing harder with the Mission knife than I did with the Mad Dog. They could not even tell the hit sounds were louder with the Mission.

Also while they were not looking I would run the edge of the Mad Dog on the concrete floor, which dulled it pretty well. This was hard to do as it made a lot of noise when I did it. So what I told everyone was that they would need to wear hearing and eye protection while I chopped.


I was also even able to use my Jedi mind trick on Nam to make him believe he was weak. This way when he would test the knives himself, the Mission would come out on top. It worked very well in the Hemp rope cutting test. Wait till you see the pics!

Of course we all know I fudged the 7" testing with the Busse winning. In fact I made certain that I got a "notched" knife just to create havoc on our site here. I knew it would generate controversy and that means magazine subscriptions! Learned that trick from the people in Lantana Florida, you know who I mean, the National Enquirer!

OK, Enough. I am obviously joking here. I am sure the first few sentences got ya and I blew it with the Jedi Mind tricks!

Yes in the context you used, all tests are biased. I could talk till I am blue in the face to try and prove mine are not, but there are those who would never believe me. I could create a 100% machined, robotic test but then someone would figure out that Jerry Busse has a degree in computer science and fronted the material for me to make the robot out of INFI
smile.gif


Tests are always going to be ridiculed. What I like is when manufacturers actually listen to what is said and make improvements based on test results without making excuses. I point out Benchmade and Camillus in this regard. They are class acts.

Cliff's tests are very well done and in many ways better than mine. I try to keep my tests simple and easy for nearly anyone to duplicate. I also keep them consistent in such a way I can test a knife 5 months from now and compare it with previous results.

No one should make a decision based on my tests alone, Cliff's or yours. But if you have 3 testers making the very same observations, and none are affiliated with each other, then I would take that into consideration.

I would never take the manufacturers own claims into consideration. Busse and Thompson know my thoughts on that subject.

Also the Busse #9 and Trailmaster are now going into second level testing. Rust and a 3 inch vise bend are next.

I would like to apologize for the 9" tests not being out yet. I have been snowed (Florida talk) under and I have not been able to finish them. I plan to do that this week if I can.

Testing is fun. I will post ALL results and if a maker does not want to see the results then they can look away if they want, call my character/integrity into judgement, create strange theories or whatever. What is important to me is that I do the right thing.

I don't make the news, I just report it
smile.gif


------------------
Best Regards,
Mike Turber
BladeForums Site Owner and Administrator
Do it! Do it right! Do it right NOW!

Support BladeForums! Check out the BFC Store!
www.bladeforums.com/store
Subscribe our NEW online magazine!
www.bladeforums.com/magazine
Enter our Raffle!
www.bladeforums.com/raffle


[This message has been edited by Mike Turber (edited 20 December 1999).]
 
Coupla notes --

On this "bias" issue, I must admit to being a little taken aback every time someone on bladeforums mentions how all reviews are biased. In this context, I believe "bias" is correctly used if I'm testing knife A vs. knife B, and I chop harder with knife A, making it appear to have better performance. "Bias" is not correctly used, in my opinion, if I test knife A and B using as close to the same methodology as possible, but due to the fact that one handle fits my hand better than the other, one knife does better than it otherwise would. This result may be subjective (e.g., someone with bigger hands might get different results), but it sure isn't biased. Your-mileage-may-vary factors in a test should be called out, but these factors are not necessarily "bias". Bias is a serious accusation of systematic unfairness in the test.

Jeff and Mike are apparently using "bias" to mean subjectivity. I believe Cliff (and I) are using it as it's used to critique scientific work. The dictionary isn't always accurate on these kind of subtle distinctions, but in this case, at least Webster's has it right: "systematic error introduced into sampling or testing by SELECTING OR ENCOURAGING ONE OUTCOME or answer over others" (emphasis mine). Bias is not "simply the fact that every user is different in skill, likes, and the way they use a blade." Those are subjective factors in the review, but are not bias -- in my opinion! (I'm more than willing to be schooled here by someone who has engaged more in the publish/critique process than I have).

Anyway, the use or misuse of the term "bias" is just a side issue anyway; I understood what he meant in any case. Just thought I'd make clear what I felt the difficulty was. And so to answer Jeff's question:

Cliff, either I'm too dumb to understand what you're saying or you just
agreed with what I said in my original post
Click to expand...

I think the problem is clear now. You are somewhat sloppily using a term that in Cliff's profession, is a serious accusation of purposely distorting the data collection or interpretation. Cliff's tests may have subjective elements to them, but there's no evidence whatsoever to believe they are biased.

I now return you to our regularly-scheduled ranting!
smile.gif


Joe
 
Joe, I'm not the only one that used 'biased' in this thread out of it's dictionary meaning. Hmmm, you wouldn't think Cliff is biased would you?
smile.gif


Cliff, I still like you and I will do my best to project a more professional post and perfect English from now on. This way I won't have to explain (to those who don't understand) the intent of my wording like I did in the original post.

God knows I don't want to be a professional slanderer.
smile.gif


------------------
Randall's Adventure & Training
jeff@jungletraining.com

 
Joe :

tests may have subjective elements to them
Click to expand...

All data is effected by the observer in this manner. The difference between unbiased and biased data is that unbiased data will have the subjective part accounted for. No matter the method this is always the case. Simply because you can measure something very precisely (get a lot of numbers) does not mean it is very accurate (close to the actual value). The latter is the hard part to figure out.

What is even worse than trying to get unbiased data is trying to draw unbiased conclusions from the data you have collected. Now you have to make decisions on what methods to use to draw information from the data and all methods force you to make decisions because they all involve statistics which cannot be used blindly. These aspects do surprise many when they are introduced to them as many seem to think that "scientific" work means without judgement.

What is most important, is that you report in as much detail as possible what you have done. This will allow someone to put your findings into context and as well gives them the ability to repeat it themselves. Also it is of a huge benefit to discuss technique variations and similar and how they could influence the end results. This allows people to get a feel for the differences they can expect to see.

So very basically, yes knife reviews contain subjective elements, however this does not bias the data collected, the conclusions drawn or invalidate the work. This can of course happen, however it does not have to.

Jeff, my intention was simply to clarify the issue being discussed (subjective vs biased) as very strong terms were being used incorrectly, nothing more. It takes far more than what you said to bother me and that is really only possible if I have run out of Guinness (which is usually enough in and of itself).

-Cliff


[This message has been edited by Cliff Stamp (edited 21 December 1999).]
 
Cliff,

I think you did an excellent job of summarizing scientific method. However, most knife reviews I've seen in magazines seem more like book reviews than bonafide tests of null hypotheses. There is no analysis of variance to control unexplained error.

Even the chopping tests seem fraught with uncontrolled error (see Blade Janurary 2000, "Knive Tests: Slicing Through the Hype").

So I agree with your depiction of scientific method. I just don't think that most knive reviews "account for the subjective part" although I don't doubt that most reviewers attempt to do so. Nevertheless, given the format of most knife reviews, I would argue that the subjective part is only partially controlled and therefore a source of bias or uncontrolled (unknowable) experimental error.

For instance, how a knife looks and feels in the hand is often almost entirely subjective (if everyone's hands were the same size, maybe part of the error would be removed). And knife tests in general are to be taken with a grain of salt. Thus, my plea for plurality. The more tests the better.

Knives are often more like comparing paintings rather than say comparing CD players. And beauty is always in the eye of the beholder, isn't it?

BTW, have you tried Guiness in the cans with that weird that little CO2 producer inside?


------------------
Hoodoo

When you arrive at the fork in the road, take it.
Yogi Berra

My kingdom for a spell checker on this forum.
frown.gif


[This message has been edited by Hoodoo (edited 21 December 1999).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top