Ok, so this might seem like a strange title for a blog post but I have an issue that I need some insight and input on from my Neffmusic readers. Here’s the issue and then I will pose some questions at the end.
Mouthpiece Reviews and Morality: Nine years ago I started what is now neffmusic.com. It started innocently enough. I had a Barone tenor sax mouthpiece and was describing how it sounded and played on SOTW (Sax on the Web) when the idea occurred to me to record it and try to figure out a way to post it so everyone could hear what the mouthpiece sounded like. I immediately got a lot of positive feedback and people seemed to appreciate my short review of the mouthpiece and what I played on the sound clip.
I had a bunch of people email me asking about certain parts of the clip and what I was playing so I came up with the idea of recording a short audio lesson on the subject instead of trying to answer everyone’s emails separately. There was a great response to that short audio lesson and a bunch of players said that I should do more and they would be happy to buy them. So I did more and put a price on them and the site took off………..
I was searching for a mouthpiece during this time so I started posting more reviews and sound clips to get feedback about what people thought about each mouthpiece and sound clip. I actually learned a lot from the feedback and responses I received back. Soon, I was reviewing more mouthpieces but it was getting a bit expensive. I’m sure many of you have been there. I kept having to find ways to afford the next mouthpiece to be reviewed and many times I wasn’t ready to let go of the last one…….You know how it is………
Soon, I started having mouthpiece makers contacting me asking if I would review their mouthpieces also. I was excited! I get to try all these expensive mouthpiece for free! Send away. I was in heaven! Pretty soon however I had a dozen mouthpiece on my desk with more coming in. I was getting better at the reviews and adding more details but that was also adding to how long it took to do a review. There were many weeks where I spent all week on reviews. 40-50 hours just doing review after review and then sending the mouthpieces back.
So let’s get to the crux of the matter, after awhile I started getting sick of doing mouthpiece reviews. I’d spend half my week working on reviews and I’d see a lot of traffic to my site to read the reviews but I wouldn’t see much profit from a review of a mouthpiece besides maybe selling a few books on the side. Many times I would hear back from the maker about how many pieces they sold after my review or how busy they were because of my review. Meanwhile, I just spent 10-20 hours working on these reviews but had nothing to show for it.
One day I was discussing this with my wife and she was surprised that I didn’t keep the mouthpieces. She told me that it was common in the review site world of the internet for top review sites to get free products sent to them just to get a review on their popular websites. I did some searches on Google and found that this was indeed very common and most review sites were run this way. (Amazon even sends free products to people for reviews actually)
At around the same time, I started having different mouthpiece makers offering to send me a free mouthpiece so that I could review it. This was their idea and they were surprised every mouthpiece maker didn’t do it. They felt it was just respectful of my time and supportive of my work. I was thankful for their support and encouragement. I always made it clear that I appreciated it but it in no way was a guarantee of a review and that I might send it back if I didn’t like it. My policy has always been to do positive reviews that help the saxophone community to find the right mouthpiece for them. I always felt that I wasn’t interested in doing negative reviews. You might ask why?
1.) Reviewing mouthpieces and their playability and sound is mostly subjective. I’m talking about my experience, my feelings, my opinions, etc…..It isn’t like I’m reviewing an iPhone and talking about facts like processor speed or screen pixels. Here I am talking about what I perceive for the most part. Although I might believe something strongly, it can never be defined as a fact. So writing negative reviews based on opinion is already a gray area in my mind…….On the other hand, writing a positive review based on my opinion is something I’m happy to do………..
2.) I have played mouthpieces that I absolutely hated that another player has loved and sounded killer on. How many times have you heard a great player and asked if you could try their mouthpiece only to find that you hated it. It has happened to me a number of times. Is it fair to write a negative review that might hurt a business forever when my subjective experience might not be true for everyone?
3.) Writing a negative review will be on the internet forever. Many times, my site comes up on the first page of a google search when you search for any of the mouthpieces I have reviewed. Sometimes my site comes up before the manufacturer’s site even does. Writing a negative review based on my subjective experience would forever hurt someone’s business. I don’t want to do that!
4.) Some of these mouthpieces that I receive are from young mouthpiece makers trying to figure out their craft and pathway. They are experimenting and learning as they work on their craft. Is it right for me to write a scathing review that destroys any chance they have to succeed before they even figure out their niche or hit their stride. I think it is better to send the mouthpiece back to them and say it didn’t work for me and maybe a few reasons why so they can try again………
5.) I hate playing a mouthpiece that doesn’t work for me. I hate it so much that if I had to review mouthpieces that were bad I would quit doing this immediately! It is too painful! You have all been there and no what it is like if you have a horrible reed. It’s the worst! A bad mouthpiece that doesn’t work for you is the same thing. It’s just painful. I want that thing off my horn and out of my house as fast as possible.
So, what is my policy on reviews? I only write reviews of mouthpieces that I think are good. These are mouthpieces that I can play and they work for me. They might be darker or brighter than I like but if they play well and I feel like I can really play and get around the horn then I will do a review.
Now, back to the topic at hand, what soon started happening is that I started getting requests from mouthpiece makers I had never heard of before. When these guys started contacting me asking for a review I would say “Sure, send me a free sample and I’ll check it out”. I figured, if they are bad I can just send them back, if they are good or great then I just discovered a great mouthpiece. This is how I found out about great new mouthpiece guys like Liu Shizhao, Benjamin Allen, Ken Okutsu and Lawrence Waldron for example. They would send me a mouthpiece or sometimes mouthpieces and if I liked them I would review them. If I couldn’t play them then I would send them back.
Asking for a free sample mouthpiece had two affects, it would help me be more excited about the review because if the mouthpiece was awesome I could keep it for myself. Secondly, it would allow me to perhaps sell it at a later date and get some income for my labor which I could use to pay some bills and feed my family. This was a much better system and I was much happier because I had something to show for my hard work. I could keep paying my bills, eating and continue to do mouthpiece reviews. I always joke with my wife that my mouthpiece stash will eventually pay for a few years of our retirement hopefully.
Getting a free mouthpiece was not in any way affecting the results of the review because in my mind I was still only reviewing the mouthpieces that played for me and I thought were good. Any others, I would send back to the maker. I don’t know the exact count but this year I have sent back close to 20-25 mouthpieces to different makers. Many of these were mouthpieces I could have kept and sold if I was unethical but I could not do that. I’m not saying these were bad but that they just didn’t work for me. I couldn’t find a good reed, the tip opening felt too small, the tip opening felt too wide, I just didn’t feel comfortable on it, etc……….
Anyways, I say all this because a few weeks ago a certain mouthpiece maker wanted me to do a review on my site. I said what I have been saying for awhile now. “Sure, send me a free sample and I’ll check it out”. This person responded that there was no way that they could do that to which I said I understood and I wished him well. I thought the subject was over and assumed we were on good terms but then he started sending more emails and posting on Facebook publicly saying I was unethical, that my reviews were bogus, that it was outrageous to ask for a free mouthpiece and implying that I was getting paid to write good reviews and my site was a farce. He told me that the only way to do impartial reviews was to not accept any mouthpiece nor money in exchange. That would be ethical and right in his opinion. (That would also get him a free review at no cost to him so I wasn’t totally clear what his true motives were…….)
Just to be clear, most of the reviews on my site have been done for free. In the last month I did a review of the Bill Evans mouthpiece, the Retro Revival New Yorker and the Ted Klum London model, The Navarro Bop Boy and the Lamberson J7 1920 all on my own time and dime because I was interested in those mouthpieces. No mouthpieces were given for these reviews. They were either bought or borrowed by me because I was interested in these mouthpieces.
Other mouthpieces I have reviewed in the last month were at the request of the mouthpiece makers and I accepted a free mouthpiece for those. I would say 80% of the mouthpieces on my site were reviewed with no mouthpieces given in exchange. I have never ever accepted any money for a review and never will.
So at the end of the day, I guess my questions to all of you is:
- Is it unethical to take free mouthpieces to review on my site?
- Is it ok to ask that of makers who want a review?
- Does my accepting of a free mouthpiece affect your view of the review?
- If one review is of a mouthpiece I received for free and one isn’t would you weigh the reviews differently?
- Is not doing negative reviews ok? Or is that unethical also?
I honestly have not seen the conflict of interest here but maybe that’s because I feel I am being honest in my reviews. The reason I am posting this is similar to when I posted my first mouthpiece clip. I want to get your opinions and other perspectives.
I am very open to any and all opinions you all might have on this. If what I am doing is wrong or unethical I would like to know. I’m actually perfectly happy not doing reviews and just working on transcriptions and teaching as that is what I love most. Let me know what you think…….in the comments below. Thanks, Steve
Is it unethical to take free mouthpieces to review on my site? No. Considering what the mouthpiece maker gets in return at this point, it’s very fair. As you said, your site shows up high in Google search results and a favorable review can = $
Is it ok to ask that of makers who want a review? Yes for the reason above.
Does my accepting of a free mouthpiece affect your view of the review? No, because you add a clip which helps back up your claims plus you’ve been part of this community long enough that you’re very trusted and I know that I personally value your opinions.
If one review is of a mouthpiece I received for free and one isn’t would you weigh the reviews differently? Not at all, for the reasons above.
Is not doing negative reviews ok? Or is that unethical also? I’m on the fence about this, but lean toward staying the course with how you do it now, for the reasons you state in your article. I’ve tried pieces that didn’t work for me that other people have loved, and vice versa.
Steve,
You have done and continue do an incredible service to the saxophone community. Mouthpiece makers/sellers, whose product you review, should give you a free mpc each and every time, imo. I am totally ok with it and it does not affect at all my impressions of mpcs reviewed. I am surprised that you would not be given the mpc as the cost of doing business.Your time and talent is worth the cost of a mpc each time that you do a review, for sure. I’d love to see some negative reviews as well.
Is it unethical to take free mouthpieces to review on my site? No
Is it ok to ask that of makers who want a review? yes
Does my accepting of a free mouthpiece affect your view of the review? no
If one review is of a mouthpiece I received for free and one isn’t would you weigh the reviews differently? no
Is not doing negative reviews ok? Or is that unethical also? I agree you should send them back and say it didn’t work for you.
You could keep a master list of mouthpieces on your site. If it has a review then people will know that you felt it was good. No review with it on the list means it didn’t work for you.
Love the reviews. Love the lessons. I refer people all the time to your site. Thanks
Nothing to add… except keep up the great reviews! I have spent many an hour perusing your site.
I am surprised that you have not received a free mpc each and every time you have done a review, Steve.
You should insist upon it. The cost of doing business.
I would love to read some negative reviews.
My views of your reviews are my own, as are others and remain unaffected by anything.
Is it unethical to take free mouthpieces to review on my site? Not at all. As others have mentioned, many companies do this.
Is it ok to ask that of makers who want a review? Absolutely. You’re providing a service both to the company and the saxophone-playing world.
Does my accepting of a free mouthpiece affect your view of the review? Nope, not at all. In fact, I’m quite surprised that companies haven’t sent you free mouthpieces to review and keep.
If one review is of a mouthpiece I received for free and one isn’t would you weigh the reviews differently? No. I believe that you’ve proven yourself to be ethical, impartial and objective. My opinion is that if you’ve gotten a free mouthpiece out of a review then you have actually been reimbursed for your time and expertise. Lucky you!
Is not doing negative reviews ok? Or is that unethical also? This one is a bit grey for me. I think a reviewer should feel free to be honest about their opinions, regardless of whether these are positive or negative. However, I also believe there is always something positive to be said about anything, and that a review can be worded in such a way that it’s clear that the mouthpiece isn’t for you but it may be good for others due to x, y, z. But if you really don’t think you can do a review like that, it wouldn’t bother me as a reader if you sent the piece back and nobody is the wiser.
I think the company/person who had a go at you for asking for a free mouthpiece in order to review it is nuts and living in la-la land. As mentioned, many companies send free products to reviewers and I’ve seen many negative (but well-worded and informative) reviews. In some cases, the reviewer even mentioned that they’d given the item away to someone who wanted or appreciated it. I think I may even regard your reviews more highly (if that’s possible) if there were some negative but informative reviews.
I’ve spent quite a bit of time reading your reviews and I even recently bought a Warburton Modular Neck for my tenor, largely based on your thoughts and recordings. I’m in Australia and there’s no way I would have spent the money upfront due to the general lack of information about these necks if I hadn’t found the review on your site. I (and Warburton) have you to thank for my purchase.
Is it unethical to take free mouthpieces to review on my site? No, but it could affect your opinion. If you pay for something one tends to be more critical.
Is it ok to ask that of makers who want a review? Sure, but see the above.
Does my accepting of a free mouthpiece affect your view of the review? yes
If one review is of a mouthpiece I received for free and one isn’t would you weigh the reviews differently? yes
Is not doing negative reviews ok? Or is that unethical also? Of course that’s ok. I don’t see why it wouldn’t be.
Your reviews are great plus you give examples. Keep up the amazing work.
I worked in journalism for many years (back when that was a thing). I know a few professional critics. I can tell you that people who write reviews for a living rarely pay for the items they review, and it’s perfectly OK for you to ask mouthpiece makers for mouthpieces to review. When you do so, you’re providing publicity for their product. If they are astute business men and women, they know that a good review can generate sales and is worth the cost of comping you a mouthpiece. If they don’t want to comp you a mouthpiece, that’s their choice, but it surely makes it less likely you’ll write about their work. All that seems pretty cut and dried to me.
Also, it seems OK to me to be negative. It’s your opinion, and it’s presented as such. You can’t be expected to like everything equally. I think negative reviews can be very useful for everyone involved when the writer gives specific criticisms in a reasonable way.
Oh, and I should add: love your website. I could name of couple of mouthpiece manufacturers who got some business from me after I read (and heard) about their work on your site.
I’m a consumer and I’ve used your site as a resource in the past.
I immediately found the reviews charming, because it did seem like a hobby and labor of love. Always wondered how you could monetize the reviews.
I think at first, before I got to know who you were through your website, because some of your personality does come through, I may have been less enthused about the reviews if I knew you were getting the mouthpieces for free. Just being honest. Knowing who you are through your writing, it does not and would not affect how I view your reviews now.
As much time as you spend on these reviews without material reward, I don’t blame you in the least for accepting or asking for a free piece. Especially since you don’t do any negative reviews. Almost no risk on the maker’s side, except the time and money they spent on making the piece.
My wife who is a lawyer also agrees that you should get familiar with the FTC guidelines. Not her field of expertise, but she remarked that the professional reviewers on Amazon are clearly marked as reviewers and those that bought the product are clearly marked as purchasers. Seems fair. In that respect, since I don’t know these professional reviewers at all, I don’t take their reviews as seriously as those that purchased the product.
Keep up the great work and great playing!
You’ve given it a great deal of thought and as far as I’m concerned you made the right ethical choices already. I would not change a thing and keep doing what you are doing the way you are doing it right now. You ‘re open and transparent about the way these reviews are made and what the deal is and have no hidden agenda or hidden self interest. That is good enough for me.
Your reviews are very helpful and well done. Not only you can ask for a free mouthpiece to review but I think you MUST do it. Your time is relevant and you do not charge to do that.
I think it’s OK to send back the mouthpieces you do not like and you do not review (and that will cost some money).
You are not going to make a living reviewing mouthpieces, you’re not a fashion blogger !!!!
But the reviews are helpful for the reader AND for the maker.
So, keep the good work and if they give you some gear, better
Your reviews are invaluable to mouthpiece makers ………. You are providing a shop window for their goods and I for one have bought multiple pieces based on your reviews! In the same way I am an endorsee of a certain brand of sax I get free stuff to demonstrate their goods! Keep it up mate!
So the guy wants you to pay for his publicity? The guy needs to take intro to economics again. The “no negative reviews” is a good policy, my grandmother (and Thumper’s mother) always said “If you can’t say anything nice don’t say anything at all.” Music gear is subjective and musicians are fickle, it’s better to steer people towards things you think are good than to disparage things that may just not work for you.
Nothing wrong with what you’ve been doing. In my opinion you are doing the makers a big favor by sending back the ones you don’t like. That might be worth just as much to them as a good review.
All your reviews are just your opinion anyway. You have some clips of pieces that you like that I really don’t like the sound of at all, so even your positive reviews don’t mean that everyone is going to love it.
Just keep doing it the way you are, Steve. Your website and reviews have an integrity that is so rare these days. I have learned masses about playing from you, and discovered the best mouthpieces because you gave me a chance to hear them and read about their qualities. I’ve even stopped buying mouthpieces, because I discovered Rafael Navarro via your site, and his pieces really do it for me. I also agree about negative reviews: I’m an academic, and over the years I stopped agreeing to review books I really didn’t like, while still being critical of ones I thought were good. So please just carry on: I suspect most replies will be like this. And thanks for everything.
Muzzel not the ox which treadeth out the grain.
The worker is worthy of his pay.
Pay no heed to the whining of he who wants something for nothing.
Thanks for all of the reviews, Steve. I agree that a policy to not include negative ones may be problematic. Surely there must be a gentle way to include what you didn’t like and why (even if it’s the aural equivalent of “it”s got cilantro in it and I think cilantro tastes like soap), and what your feedback to the supplier was. If you tell them up front that you’ll do it they can decide whether or not to take the risk, and there may well be people whose preferences run entirely counter to yours.
I’m with Mike and Micah. You have gone to great lengths to review mouthpieces you were interested in by purchasing or borrowing them. You did not solicit makers for free wares to review. When people start coming to you with requests to review their work you should not have to pay for the privilege by either purchasing the mouthpiece or donating your time.
I agree that negative reviews don’t work in this situation.
Your contribution to the saxophone community is awesome. I found your site because of the reviews but have been following it ever since and have purchased several of your books.
Reviewers for other products derive income from them in various ways. They are possibly paid employees for a publication, they have a YouTube channel that earns ad revenue based on the hits they get, or they are an average Joe that gets to keep the product.
Thanks for all your hard work.
Steve, the fact that you can coax such good tone and playability from such a wide variety of mouthpiece designs/quality proves that you are uniquely qualified to be doing these reviews.
Steve,
You have a website that generates traffic and potential sales for the manufacturers of these mouthpieces. Many times if I type in a name of a mouthpiece you’ve reviewed into Google, your website will show in the top 5 listings of that product.
Sending you a free ‘reviewer’s piece’ to potentially sell later is a win-win for both you and the mouthpiece maker. They generate sales and you are compensated for your efforts. And because you have high standards, not just anyone can get reviewed on your site.
I think if you were to take money over and above the free piece, THAT might be unethical. If you want to sleep better, perhaps put a note at the bottom of each review that says that this review is purely my opinion and that a free sample was provided by the manufacturer.
The other guy is a blowhard. Let him scream.
I don’t see a conflict of interest. Your contribution to the sax community is invaluable and there is no question about your ethics.
Keep up your great work!
The best way to inoculate yourself from criticism is to be transparent. In each review tell us whether you bought the mouthpiece or whether one was given to you to review. Somewhere on your web site, place a statement of your mouthpiece review policy. Make sure mouthpiece manufacturers are aware of this policy. Also, post your current horn/mouthpiece configuration.
Yes, by taking mouthpieces to review as “payment” you open yourself to an ethical problem. But your reviews have the moral authority and value to counter most criticism. Transparency will allow you to handle the rest with an easy mind.
Angelo Yodice
1) If a mouthpiece maker ask you as a professional for a review of his product, this is in my opinion is a advertising/marketing commercial for his product by you. If he says by the way you can keep the mouthpiece for your professional time , this I believe is ethical. He should be told up front by you that you will review and post your likes and dislikes. If this is not agreed upon there’s no review, wether he gives you a free mouthpiece or he pays for you time to do the review. 2) Don’t ask for a piece directly have a dialogue about time is money. 3) Does not affect review. 4) No! 5) Need the entire review – or + . Keep it simple!
I have a few comments that may not reply directly to the specific questions you have asked, but I hope they are helpful to you nevertheless. I should first mention that I work as an attorney for a very large organization and regularly deal with issues involving accuracy in advertising and potential conflicts of interests involving employees. I think the issues you raise are important, but I would prefer not to opine about your personal ethics, because I certainly don’t know the details of your arrangements. But I can speak in general terms about the practice of performing reviews in a commercial context.
1. I suggest that you familiarize yourself with Federal Trade Commission (FTC) guidance regarding clear disclosure of the receipt of compensation (money, items of value) in connection with providing testimonials for products or services. Perhaps you are already aware of these requirements; however, people sometimes think, “Oh, I’m just writing reviews on my website, so those kinds of rules don’t apply to me.” That is not the case.
2. Research has shown that even seemingly small amounts of compensation can contribute to unconscious bias in the recommendation of products or services. Even people who think they are highly rational and are making dispassionate decisions are subject to this effect. The only way to eliminate it is to prohibit all compensation related to the delivery of ostensibly objective opinions about products or services.
3. A predetermined policy of screening out negative reviews is itself a source of bias. Ditto for the desire not to cause an adverse impact on a business, though it may be laudable in the abstract.
Is it unethical to take free mouthpieces to review on my site?
No, why should this be unethical?
By reviewing a mouthpiece, you gain visibility and the producer gains visibility, both of you have an “advantage”.
Is it ok to ask that of makers who want a review?
Having reviewed mouthpiece in the past… I would like to say that there are several types of personaly behind the producers.
Nothing’s wrong with a producer who likes to have is product reviews (for car producers is absolutely the same).
I found that there are:
– producers who make pieces for their sake of personal pleasure… so even if you review their products and you give tips (of any kind), they don’t care about them…
– producers who make piece with a definitely original… but they make piece for selling them so every tip you give them is useful if that every single tip can be used to improve the product in order to sell more and to have the customer more satisfied
– producers who believe that they are making the definitive mouthpiece and as soon as you say them something you’re considered like a stupid because if you can play it, you can’t play a saxophone.
Does my accepting of a free mouthpiece affect your view of the review?
No.
I tried/owned hundred of mouthpieces me too. I like to know and to read useful information on a product I don’t know… but I’m able to judging/evaluating myself, a horn or a mouthpiece.
If one review is of a mouthpiece I received for free and one isn’t would you weigh the reviews differently?
No.
Is not doing negative reviews ok? Or is that unethical also?
When I wrote reviews of pieces I get directly from a manufacturer (for free… of course)… I tried to separate the “objective” specs and the “subjective” specs.
I don’t (because I can’t, not able) to play like Chris Potter or Joshua Redman… but I’m pretty sensitive and I can feel almost every detail of a mouthpiece…
So I’m (after a GOOD testing) able to say if the mouthpiece works or not, and if it works for the specific way to play and (I think it’s the most important thing) for which level of technical skills (of the saxophone player) that product will work for.
If it happens that a product lacks (badly lacks) on some “objective” specs a mouthpiece should have… I simply don’t like to give a review.
I’m not responsible for production problem or design errors.
I also know that it’s plenty of people out there who don’t care about anything… so I don’t want to start debating about something too…
This is a tricky issue for all reviewers. Academic reviewers of research papers almost always do so “blind”, without knowing the name of the submitter, though they generally know who is doing research in this particular field and they can often guess the name of the author. For many years, I did reviewers of new sheet music, CDs, books, and accessories for the flute in a column called the “Flute Network Recommends”. After doing this for a while I began to get many, many review copies, but almost always bought the accessories and equipment I tried out. I only wrote up reviews of things I thought were worth recommending and where I was enthusiastic enough to want to get the information out to the flute playing community. After a while, some people thought I was overly generous in my comments since I never published negative reviews, but let me tell you I got LOTS of submissions and just didn’t write about them. I let my personal preferences and professional opinions guide my reviews.
Steve, you are on track with honesty and integrity. Keep up your own path. I have tried many mouthpieces and finally for now I’m using a #8 Otto Link tenor customized by John Reilly out of L.A. I have a baffle in it and it gives me the sound and playability I’ve been searching for., Bottom to altissimo range. But, I tell other players that just because I use this setup, it may not work for you. I would like to find a smaller tip opening that could give me the same response. Sound, power and flexibility. I’m getting older and after a bout with pneumonia, I’ve lost some of my lung capacity. Keep up the great work.
Steve, Keep doing exactly what you’re doing. You are providing a great service and expanding the consciousness and awareness of the sax player community whether we buy any of the reviewed mouthpieces or not. All horns and mouthpieces have their own vibe and personality and it’s refreshing to get/hear your input, both sonically and verbally. We (me and fellow sax brothers) always talk/compare set-ups so Thank you! for further illuminating us with products that would otherwise remain unknown.
Steve saxophonist have come to know, understand and appreciate your efforts in providing a valued service with excellence regarding mouthpiece reviews. Your product review service has helped many saxophonist, by introducing us to new vendors and products. Moreover, you are enlightening and guiding us in making a quality decision, on a product that may possibly work best for our individual needs.
In that vein, a servant is worthy of his hire. Meaning, if the mouthpiece vendors are asking, then they should be providing some form of payment (you decide on what that should be) as consideration of your time and professional efforts. They are essentially getting free marketing, brand recognition and a tremendous sales boost from your review.
Praise in public, criticize in private. If the mouthpiece does not meet your standards or expectations let the vendor know. But don’t post it. We all make mistakes that need to be rectified or adjusted.
As noted from comments by others who have replied, you are providing a valuable (value), professional high quality service (professional service), with a defined time commitment (your time). So I leave it to you as to how you work this out.
Steve, you are doing a terrific service for the sax community and you come across as a person with integrity, but I have sometimes wondered why there were no negative reviews. This article helps clear that up.
I agree with everything Myrick Crampton said. His outline for transparency is the answer.
Another thing to consider is Google’s guideline for url links when it comes to product reviews. You may want to take a look at this: https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/66356?hl=en&rd=1. The TL;DR version is that you should add a rel=”nofollow” attribute to the tag if you’re getting a free product sample.
As for the matter at hand, I have no problem with you keeping some of the gear you review, especially if someone reaches out to you for a review: you’re more than entitled to demand something in return. What else would anyone expect when they’re asking to use your website’s popularity, your reputation, your time for what amounts to free advertising? It’s even better than advertising in a way: it is a review from the perspective of a skilled saxophonist, with a ton of experience trying mouthpieces.
Plus, shipping things back is a PITA as far as I’m concerned. I try to avoid having to deal with any shipping carrier as much as possible.
I think some folks may not realize how much is involved in writing reviews, and how much time they consume: correspondence regarding to the product, evaluating it, taking photos, recording sound samples, writing, formatting and editing the review and following up on comments and PMs are all very time consuming.
Regarding negative reviews, I’d probably take a similar approach to yours: I personally try to be as honest and objective as possible when writing reviews (and I don’t shy away from mentioning things that I think could be improved or don’t quite work for me) but if I had more bad things to say than good ones, and what I was evaluating absolutely didn’t work for me, it would only mean that I’m not the right guy for the job. You’ve done a great job explaining why you won’t write negative reviews and your reasons make sense to me.
Steve,
You have the premiere site for mouthpiece reviews and clips. We, as saxophonists, greatly appreciate your taking time to do this for us. I always listen first to the clips and after multiple listens, I then read your review. I always wondered why your words were mostly positive. Now I understand why. It makes perfect sense for such a subjective area. As far as receiving a free mouthpiece? This is the minimum for such a service. Your approach in reviewing and your entire website, for that matter, are refreshing and fun to visit. The clips, in my opinion, are the most important feature. How we sound, our search for the Holy Grail, so to speak, is what drives us. It really never ends but the journey is just as important.
That you ask for input to these ethical questions speaks volumes to your good character. When I sent you some of my transcripts you willingly displayed them. When you noticed some errors or found a better display option you took time to make the changes (which should have been made) and thanked me. That was greatly appreciated and I learned by your example how to better transcribe.
Please keep doing what you do so well. I know I speak for most saxophonists when I say how much we appreciate your dedication and long hours of hard work. Your lessons and technique books are quite valuable. Thank you!
Hey Steve,
I think the way you are doing things is perfect. I’m no where near the level of exposure that you are, but I’ve had mouthpiece makers send me a piece and ask me to record a clip, or do a youtube video on the piece. Just like you, I’ve only agreed with the stipulation “If I like it, sure thing”. I don’t think it does anyone any favors if I put up a clip of a mouthpiece that I sound like garbage on.
I really like that you don’t do reviews on mouthpieces that don’t work for you. Mouthpieces are so subjective that it’s great to hear the character of a piece that you sound good on, but I wouldn’t be as interested in a piece that doesn’t work for you, because it likely just doesn’t fit your concept/physiology. Leave those reviews for players who connect with that piece.
And yes…you should get a free piece if you spend that much time on it. As you say, there are entire youtube tech channels that live on that stuff. It’s common practice, and as long as you disclose it, it shouldn’t be a problem. If you were getting paid to give good reviews to certain pieces, that’s a different story, but I think you’ve proven yourself over the years to be impartial, and your sound clips are often more important (or at least serve as a concrete backup) to illustrate how a piece works for you.
TLDR, it’s all good.
I support your policy and think you’ve given a great value to the community.
I love your site.
* As has been mentioned, you should review the FTC rules about reviews online. Transparency is the way to go (disclosing whether you received the mouthpiece for free, bought at a discount, or paid full price, or whether you were paid by the mouthpiece maker to do a review.)
* I think skipping negative reviews is the way to go (for the reasons you mentioned.)
* I would keep all the unsolicited mouthpieces you receive whether you review the piece or not. Returning them is an undue burden on you. You could put a notice on your website stating that all mouthpieces submitted shall become your property and that submission of mouthpiece is no guarantee of a review.
Is it unethical to take free mouthpieces to review on my site?
I don’t think so. I suppose you could put a disclaimer stating that you are being compensated for doing the review, so it is in fact a paid advertisement. These mouthpieces aren’t cheap so the compensation is significant.
Is it ok to ask that of makers who want a review?
Sure because they can always say no.
Does my accepting of a free mouthpiece affect your view of the review?
Of course, because you’re being compensated for your time writing the article. I don’t mean any negative connotation by that. I’m just aware that it’s an advertisement of sorts.
If one review is of a mouthpiece I received for free and one isn’t would you weigh the reviews differently?
Yes, but that’s not to say one is garbage and the other gospel. They’re just different.
Is not doing negative reviews ok? Or is that unethical also?
It’s ok by me. The saxophone is an ever expanding yet somehow still small world and we need friends! Again maybe add a disclaimer, but it’s actually pretty easy to figure out after reading a few.
I take them as very well-intentioned promo articles.
I’ve checked out a few of your reviews and honestly you sound basically the same on all the different mouthpieces because you’re already an accomplished player and your sound is in your head not the equipment but I digress…that’s a whole other thread!
I thoroughly enjoy your reviews, Steve, and frankly, this whole incident would make a wonderful, yet cautionary, read for followers of your site.
I don’t mean dime the guy out, yet I’m sure there are some readers of your site that aspire to do gear reviews, or even do them already, and your experience would be an invaluable tool to prevent others from having to go through the same PITA that you are with this guy.
Best of luck with this one and I look forward to many more of your thoughtful insights on new gear.
Steve,
Sounds like everyone is in agreement with you and the way you conduct your reviews.
I will add that to build a website and get it to rank on the first page of an organic google search when searching for a specific product is very valuable. Since you have established yourself as a mouthpiece expert and trusted source, the time alone to review a mouthpiece should be compensated with, at a minimum, the mouthpiece itself. If the pieces don’t warrant a positive review, sell them.
I don’t know the person you are referring to, but it reflects well on you that you don’t mention them by name. From what you wrote, it seems to me that you are going out of your way to uphold an ethical standard. Don’t forget to get paid a bit along the way, you’ve earned it right?
Steve, this is solely my personal opinion and don’t know if others (or you, for that matter) have ever felt this way, but I have a couple of hobbies that I partake in and I look for various places that offer reviews of products, etc. For me, when I consistently see EVERY product reviewed on a certain website and it gets the proverbial “thumbs up” and I know from my own personal experience with “product x” that it’s far from “thumbs up” land, by BS flag goes to full staff.
However, I fully realize that with some of those products and especially with something like saxophone mouthpieces, the personal opinion and variables are HUGE. But I still think that people/places that give positive reviews of everything they run across are simply being disingenuous. I would hope that manufacturers would also appreciate and recognize this, but I’m sure they don’t always do that. It’s a slippery slope, but I never base a purchase on a single review. It’s like reviewing food. I won’t even get into that! haha!
Bottom line, I think you’re doing an excellent job with how you do things right now. Not that you are, but I don’t think you should be afraid to be honest and call something a dog if that’s what it is!
John
Although it’s good to be generous and help others it seems to me that because we’re musicians the hard work and time practising that we’ve put in is forgotten and we are expected to give our services for free (this seems to be unique to our profession).
When I look on the web for information about a mouthpiece that I want to buy, most of the time your name is in there and your information is both professional and accurate. Yes. I agree that you should only review quality products as bad feedback on bad mouthpieces can get personal. I’ve bought loads of mouthpieces because of your reviews and it should no longer be a free service because you’re established in this subject.
So here is my take on your questions;
Is it unethical to take free mouthpieces to review on my site?
No, It’s time consuming and you’re a professional.
Is it ok to ask that of makers who want a review?
Yes, you’re essentially advertising their product.
Does my accepting of a free mouthpiece affect your view of the review?
No, as long as you make it clear that you only review mouthpieces that are well made and high quality.
If one review is of a mouthpiece I received for free and one isn’t would you weigh the reviews differently?
No because you don’t have to say which ones that you’ve received to keep.
Is not doing negative reviews ok? Or is that unethical also?
Pros and cons are essential. I like comments like “This mouthpiece is easy to play from top to bottom and has a rich dark sound but I wouldn’t be able to use it in a loud situation”. It’s not negative if you give both sides in the review.
Phil, your points are well taken. Regarding the value of musician’s services. Here is an old joke that hits home:
Overheard by band members, “You guys are really good!…..but be sure to use the back door”.
Steve, over the years I have valued your reviews and made a purchases based on your reviews. I have the highest degree of respect for the education you provide. In all those years which I’ve followed you as a student/consumer of your books, videos, fan of your reviews and website you’ve always come across as knowledgeable, honest and sincere in how you offer your services in your business.
Your policy with the mouthpiece manufacturers is fair and reasonable. You do not do these reviews solely as a public service to the saxophone community but as a part of your business which provides education and value to that saxophone community.
Just posting your moral question on your site, speaks volumes for your character. Keep on doing what you are doing.
I look forward to your next review.
For me, full discloser is key. I would consider a brief outline stating the perimeters you outline in the article somewhere easy to find with the reviews. I found the article really interesting and helpful in understanding your reviews (I always wondered why I never read a bad review). You could also consider stating in the review how you got the piece. (I think you usually do that, but you could be clear as to whether you bought it or received it from a manufacturer). With that information a reader can conclude what they want. If there is a nonnegative (neutral?) way to let people know what pieces you have chosen not to review, there would be value in that, but I can understand your reluctance. Having read and listened to many of your reviews, I haven’t detected any differences related to how you acquired the piece, and I would continue to use them identically no matter what. Thank you so much for the reviews; they are consistent and useful.
Hello Steve, Sam’s here.
As everyone says, you’re doing a great job, which will help a bunch of people out there (and i mean anywhere in the world, because the market changes dramatically from country to country) having at least a point of view on something maybe hard to reach or find or try by the time you’re reviewing it.
Like you said, this can’t be an objective p.o.v. (e.g. Electronics) since Music has a different flavor to any of us and the readers (even the occasional one) should understand from what Musical taste your impressions are coming from.
About the “negative” review being present or not, i can tell you this:
having been also a classical player (Clarinet and Sax) i was asked about mpcs and reeds many times around. Luckily for me, playing diverse kind of Music and having to do with many different embouchures, reeds requirements, ligatures and of course mpcs, gave me the tools to understand when and where something can and can’t be used. So, instead of givin’ off something negative, i was pointing out the environment in which a given reed, mpc, ligature, could be used to it’s higher potential. In the very end, most of the people tend to play everything with 1 mouthpiece and 1 reed brand and number, which is fine if you can manage it, but it takes more work than you think if you play both as soloist/alone or in a wind section (classical/chamber or jazz/combo/big band).
The point (at least to me) was to help people understand what could be done with a particular reed, mpc, ligature, so they could take a step further and go for a personal try.
As a personal note, given that those are yours by the time you receive it, i wouldn’t sell the Mpcs you discarded as good for you… I repeat, it’s a personal point of view, maybe a little naive, but something got as a gift (i know, i know… It’s a commercial thing anyway), should be given as a gift too, to possibly someone worth it. It’s the kind of kindness (no pun intended, really!) i like more, to share.
Big hug, Sam.
I think the biggest thing that ANY mouthpiece manufacturer should realize when sending you a mouthpiece to review is that you’re a PROFESSIONAL player and also in my opinion, you have a high level of knowledge regarding different mediums (hard rubber, metal, various platings, etc) and your reviews are FAR from a simple, “garden variety” type of thing. You often (if not always) play different reed brands and strengths with the mouthpiece you’re reviewing. You give an in depth analysis of not only the appearance, but the workmanship and many of the variables that personally I’ve never seen any other mouthpiece reviewer do.
You should do this for free? I think not. There’s NO doubt that manufacturers gain sales from your reviews. You put the time and effort in to not only the photos (which are great, by the way) but the multiple audio files and the very detailed description of not only the mouthpiece itself, but the playing characteristics and very detailed observations that only a professional who has played and reviewed hundreds of mouthpieces in the last 25+ years.
There is absolutely NOTHING wrong about your requesting to be compensated for this work, whether it’s the mouthpiece, or a predetermined fee.
I wonder how many professional photographers would shoot a wedding for free? I mean c’mon……they’re getting all of that recognition for holding a camera and taking pictures! They could also hand out business cards to the guests, right? Those cameras don’t cost that much money to justify them charging money for doing something they love, right?
Pffft…
John Greiner
As most folks know, MP review is such a subjective activity that your personal comments and impressions may not often be representative of other players impressions. Providing audio clips is a bit more objective but still not definitive as to how another player may sound with the same MP. You have clearly emphasized these points in the past and it is obvious that you are just trying to offer your own impressions and results for what they are worth. This is greatly appreciated but not worth taking crap from some cheapskate who wants your free support. Ignore this character and keep up the good work. Stick with your original instincts. They are right on target.
Hi Steve, As soon as a musician starts to play the bulls**t stops and I know that you’ve paid your dues and your opinions are therefore respected. You are always truthful and factual in your descriptions and I for one have learned more from your books and reviews in the last few years than the previous fifty! Just keep doing what you do! I’m hoping to get the 10mfan Boss tenor ‘piece soon, will let you know if I may. Best Wishes from Spain, Mike.
I think the quality of the comments here speaks volumes about the service you provide. I look forward to your reviews and have bought numerous products based on your reviews. I have had a Skype lesson, purchased numerous lessons, and books. Based on all of these interactions, I can verify your integrity and I think that the vast majority of your subscribers would agree that you provide a very valuable service. It is like getting insight from a friend and for that reason I think the way you have been doing your reviews makes perfect sense. You are a trusted source.
Unfortunately, any time compensation gets involved it can be a slippery slope and if someone chooses to imply dishonesty, it can raise doubt in people’s minds. And people seem more willing to believe the negative. That being said, I think transparency is the best course (cover yourself legally) and I hope you continue to do reviews.
You’re good, dude.
Some random thoughts:
As stated above, you will get biased from getting free stuff. It will put you in a good mood and a good mood will make you tone down the negatives.
However, you are doing this in your spare time because you like it. The time you spend doing these reviews is time you could (should?) spend practising, teaching, writing publications too sell or being with your family. Why not benefit from it?
You have no need for yet another mouthpiece (am I right?). I have not followed your reviews lately, but I guess that you still play your Link, so in that case you are not endorsing anybody. Not even Otto Link/Babbitt since it is a model long out of production.
On the third hand, with every mouthpiece you review you _are_ building brand, your authority on sax playing and will thus, hopefully, increase your income. So I’m contradicting myself a little here about dong it in your spare time. It _is_ an investment in your brand.
Do I want to get more gigs? Yes. Do I want to play for free or pay to play? Only if I can get something else out from it. Only then can I justify the time spent doing it.
As the not-payed artistic leader of a non-profit jazz club I get lots of albums and promos. I don’t return them (I simply can’t/don’t want to spend neither money nor time doing it) but very few find their way into my collection or into my cd player after the first review. However I get to see a lot of great acts for free, and sometimes people contact me if they want music for some event.
We had a debate in Sweden about the lack of bad reviews regarding jazz albums and concerts. It basically boils down to that writers work for free, or very little pay, so they write what they want to write about. Who wants to spend time writing about a bad concert/album? Given that you for some reason don’t have a bone to pick with the artist… 🙂