Collective letter s to Stereophile


Why Stereophile magazine reviews (favors) only certain manufacturers? Mostly are already big corporations and established themselves in audio arena. Cary (almost every amp reviewed)Krell even get spotlight for the first speakers they ever made, that's FAIR! Mark Levinson and CJ same Musical Fidelity, B&W every single speaker, so as Revel and Dunlavy and Thiel to a certain degree but still in the spotlight. Ocasionaly one or two obscure companies make debut on the pages (usually scapegoats for the bad reviews). Where are the loudspeaker companies, here in the North America, that already established themselves as competative and superb performers? Meadowlark Audio, Coincident, Talon, AVALON, Tyler, Nova etc..! How about Spendor, Herbeth, Living Voice from UK, JM from France and many many more that do not even get mentioned?

Your take on this? Thanks!
data
I find it amusing that 'Grooves' chooses a path of righteous indignation when customers complain, rather than listening and responding thoughtfully. Way to go, Sport, put another nail in that Stereophile coffin!
Mprime: Cut Mike some slack. He came over here after getting worked up in another thread. As such, i'm sure that he was not "thinking elegantly". It's easy to spew "less than polite" responses when someone stepped on your "tallywhacker" : ) Sean
>
Sean,

Clearly, there are some harmonics I'm missing. While I examined the AA thread, my take was that it was a dogpile on you. Why you'd defend 'Grooves' is lost on me. So instead, I'll state it clearly, from my perspective.

These Sphile guys are confused on who their customer is. They may think it to be JA, but, in fact, it is us: the consumer. Hence, the credibility of their distribution outlet - whether they like it or not - reflects on them as content providers. Plainly said, Sphile has a *serious* credibility gap. In forums such as these, they have a chance to listen to a lead user group and adapt, or not, at their peril. At the end of the day, such online forums represent the future look of their distribution channel. They might want to consider this - especialy when they attack people of proven crediblity (such as yourself) on these forums.

Enough, I preach.

Peace,

Lee
Lee: While it might have ended up being a "dogpile" on me, i'm not crying foul. Let's just say i opened up all the cages and expected something like that to happen : )

As far as why i "stuck up" for Mikey, i think we all know what it's like when people are on your back, you're agitated and even more crap is dumped on you and your co-horts. It's easy to get pissed and respond accordingly.

As to your other comments, i agree 100%. I've tried to pass on ideas to JA directly and i know that others have posted similar thoughts to those that i expressed in public forums, yet it seems to fall on deaf ears. To top it off, we all know that EVERY writer and the editor have seen the hordes of threads / complaints about lack of diversity of products / brand name coverage, especially from specific parties. What do we get ? ST delivers yet another helping of "Triangle Pie". Really makes you wonder if he's doing this for spite just to get our goat or if he doesn't know how to contact anyone else to obtain other brands for review.

Other than that, i thought this issue was quite diverse in brands and types of products covered. Unfortunately, the price bracket on most everything was still pretty well up there ( $2000 for speaker cables and one pair of interconnects ), but at least there was no Musical Fidelity in this issue. Instead, we ended up with Audio Advisor's replacement for MF, which is now Perreaux : ) Sean
>
Sean,

Thank you for the link to AA. I read the discussion involving Michael Fremer and John Marks, among others, and found it interesting. Although, I have to admit that I did not see anything too controversial or enlightening there. I also didn't feel you were being piled on. I've seen much worse in these parts.

One observation I do have is that in these audio forums, the Stereophile personnel do seem to have a chip on their shoulder. I am not sure the reason, one would have to believe that they are as chipper in real life as any of us. But, they tend to come off with a mean spiritidness that I don't fully understand. It could be a defensiveness borne out of so many in the forums taking shots at them in particular, and the magazine in general.

Another trend I see is that often they quote a previous poster's words, and expound on that to an extreme. No one did that more than J10 in that thread here a few months ago. I got more e - mail about that thread than any other I have been involved in, including the controversial "TRELJA in New York" reports on the 2001 and 2002 Stereophile NYC HiFI Shows. The consensus was almost universal that people found Scull to be psychotic and maybe his personality was the reason for him no longer being affiliated with the magazine.

Conversely, I find that most of us here on Audiogon make an honest effort to share their own insight into an issue, rather than focusing on what has been previously stated. Of course, we do have our run - ins and we are also guilty of this on occasion.

What has been developing in me over the course of the past few months is the feeling that there is certainly something special at work here on Audiogon. Perhaps this being a hobby for us and not a job factors into things. In a recent thread, I commented that despite my love of cooking, the ONLY hobby that competes with audio in my life, and the opportunity to pursue it as a career, I have never done so. The reason being I would never want a love tainted by work. Work has the potential to poison love. Money can have the same result.

I am left the feeling that most members honestly enjoy music, equipment, and the interaction with others who share the hobby. There is a genuineness in the discussion that goes on here. Could that be a reason that over the long term, honest friendships are forged?

I realize this post is going too far off on a self - congratulatory tone.

Back to Stereophile, I have never been of the opinion that the writers or reviews of the magazine have been a reflection of advertising. But clearly, in these times, many people do.

Perhaps the way the magazine is run these days factors into this. It may be more of a one man decision making process, whereas before it might have been a several person venture.

Thinking about all of this over this rainy weekend, I dug up an older issue of Stereophile. It was one of the Recommended Components issues of 1994. I wanted to see if I could discern any difference between now and then.

I think that I was most struck by the discourse in rating components. Recommended Components seems to be one of the major sore spots that most people have with Stereophile. The other is the preponderance of reviews of certain companies' products(the distributor of Triangle and others, Cary, Musical Fidelity, Harman International). Both things probably work hand in hand.

In 1994, there seemed to be more opinions involved in rating a component. Actual disagreement took place. My observation of today gives me the impression that far fewer people and discussion are involved the process. I could be wrong...

I also do not think it's a stretch to say that the components are rated higher. Class C was a larger category previously, and represented real world equipment. Today, it seems to be more of a knock. Class B was what most of us who stretched for equipment wanted to achieve. And, Class A was equipment that only the very rich or hard, hard core bought. I doubt a $2000 power amplifier could ever attain a Class A rating then, even if money was cheaper then.

Class A+ has always made me uncomfortable, but that's just me.

As a subscriber, I appreciate the low price of the magazine. No, it could not be done without advertising. But, is there any more advertising now then there used to be? No, in fact, I believe there is less now. And, since I am under the impression that Stereophile has a 1:1 correlation between pages of advertising and pages of print, that would explain why the magazine is so much smaller than it was 10 years ago.

Reading the AA thread, I agree with many of the points you raise, Sean. The person who bench tests the equipment should not be the one who reviews it, more opinions should be polled before a rating is given, etc.

Again, I do feel that Art Dudley has ratcheted up the magazine since his inclusion.

Time will tell how the magazine fares over the next couple of years.