Hello Nick

It's debatable but contrasting opinions may be equally valid but I don't see how they can help readers to make their own minds up, isn't it more likely to lead to the opposite?

If two reviewers have such widely different opinions about the same recording how is the reader supposed to choose which one to buy? As a reader of record reviews it can be interesting to encounter contrasting opinions but ultimately I expect to encounter a consensus, to a greater or lesser extent, among knowledgeable and experienced reviewers whose opinions I trust more than my own as to which recordings are the best in a market that has multiple versions on offer. That for me is the very crux of record reviewing. To be a trustworthy guide, i.e. buy this, don't buy this and to explain why. If one reviewer says 'black' and another says 'white' about the same recording of core repertoire, isn't there a real risk of readers throwing their hands up and saying if the reviewers can't agree what chance have I got?. What's the point in reading reviews, if the experts can't agree?

This is connected to a point I raised last year about the Recording of the Year. I would expect a recording of the year to be seen as such by at least the majority of reviewers and not just one among a long list of reviewers favourites.

Helpful, worthwhile record reviewing, like a school curriculum has to be based on more than mere subjective opinion. There have to be criteria upon which those who have invested the time and effort into music and its recorded history can agree on to some degree. If not it's just a free-for-all, where anything goes, which I dont think helps anyone to make up their mind.