wrote in message
oups.com...
Consumer Reports (et al) is probably okay for appliances but
worthless for discerning the differences in serious audio or other
things requiring a higher level of discretion. This applies to some
simple things as well.

So they are OK for rating "appliances" but not simple things? Is a TV an
appliance? How is "serious audio" defined?

They rate a Sears Craftsman wrench the same as a
Snap-On for example. One is a mediocre product that meets a minimum
federal buying spec the other is pretty close to the best that can be
built for its intended purpose. Since their tests only determine
whether or not they met a specification, both are equal.

Consumers Union develops its own tests and subjects the tested items to the
same test. Frequently, testing involves a test to failure. In addition,
products are evaluated on the basis of cost so that a product with the same
performance but cheaper will rank higher. My response to the O.P. was in
reference to TV displays. Perhaps you could read the report in question and
determine specifically where it is deficient. I know "audiophiles" poo-poo
CU's tests of audio equipment probably because they don't generally test the
boutique components that audiophiles drool over.

A Craftsman
wrench is suited for its intended purpose but it is not as good as a
Snap-On, it's as simple as that.

I suppose Snap-On wrenches are "serious" tools. I get the distibct
impression that "serious" to you is determined by the price tag.

Consumer testing organizations deal
with a lowest common denominator mentality.