Chazro,
Agreed, it was much better when it was the smaller size. |
I understand and agree with the ops that for the price, it's a no-brainer.
On the other hand, for those of us that were into the magazine (and all the others) 25-30 yrs ago, it's hard to reconcile today's version with what was, at the time, an extraordinary publication. It's NEVER, I repeat, NEVER, going to go back to the way it was so enjoy it for what it is today, audiophile porn! |
French Fries has it right. If you like audio get an audio magazine, something to look at and read when bored. I never understood why people think it is OK to trash magazines and their writers, who cares it is just a magazine. Most product magazines are the same be it an auto mag or boat mag or whatever it is, reviews are positive and informative. If you want negativity go go internet websites and forums... |
My feeling is that TAS is a form of entertainment (with maybe a touch of knowledge thrown in occasionally), not philosophy, that's all.
Is it worth the price of admission @ $14.95? In my opinion it is. Pretty simple. |
Lighten up its only a mag. |
I have no problem with philosophical discussions but this poor guy asked our opinions on TAS. Aww Rja, come on, both Mrtennis and I expressed views about TAS. Mrtennis is skeptical of the Mags value, while I, for the sort of reasons described in detail by Sgr, think many, if not most, hobbyists would get 30 bucks a year of value from subscribing to both TAS and Sp. So my advice, tempered by paper-consumption-guilt, is to try both. Actually, the philosophical discussion helps contextualize Mrtennis' skeptical remarks on the Mags. He doesn't think the Mags are a source of knowledge, but as he's said, he doesn't think you have knowledge of what amp you own, what country you reside in, and how many children reside in your house, either. Good to know where people are coming from! ;) John |
I've subscribed to the AS and Stereophile for several years. I've read both publications since the early 80s. Both publications have changed radically over the years. Both have groups of writers/audiophiles that write fun, interesting, informative, and opinionated articles. I still miss the AS when HP held sway over his kingdom. I didn't always agree, but the writing was always witty, entertaining,and informative. Some of the best years to read all the mags was when HP was lambasting the editors of IAR or Stereophile or vice versa. Despite his critics, IMHO, HP did provide audiophiles with a vocabulary to describe what he was hearing and many of his descriptive terms have been adopted today. I also believe that many of his reviews on equipment and subsequent essays on equipment sonics both positevely and negatively influenced the industry. I'm sure at the time, many an audiophile was seduced by HP's decriptions of the mighty Infinity IRS or Tympanis or Magnepan/Infinity QRS speaker systems and even though many folks couldn't stomach HP's wit or hubris, many still wished they could own the equipment he was describing.
Today as ever, I sometimes find myself skipping the reviews on certain components on the first read, only to find myself interested at a latter date in a component still costing thousands on the used market. The afore mentioned publicatioins do/did a fine job describing the equipment and its sonic signature. Thank heavens, many of the reviews can be found on line today, otherwise I'd have a whole corner of my basement filled to the brim.
Sometimes I wonder about subscribing being a waste of money, but my friend JDoris pointed out that for $15.00 they provide cheap entertainment and exposure to equipment costing thousands of dollars that one will never view/audition in St. Louiis. The mags still provide clues (though you have to read carefully) on how to get the best sound from a particlar component or how to setup the latest trends in both digital and analog technology. I also read many of the online publications and find them helpful as well.
So I say, subscribe away! I still look forward to a good read/fantasy about equipment I'll never be able to view, purchase, or audition. I just wouldn't base my purchases on the publications opinions!
Best of luck to all.
Sgr |
Mrtennis,
I have no problem with philosophical discussions but this poor guy asked our opinions on TAS. |
for example, as silly as it sounds, you can say , i know i own a levenson amp, but you can't prove it using mathematics or logic, since it requires you to see the amp. Do the mathematics on my credit card bill count? |
i apologize for the discussion of what may be an arcane and irrelevant topic and perhaps boring some of the readers. my bad. |
OK you two, go to your rooms until you can get along with others! |
if you "know" something to be true you must be certain else, there is a probability of it being false.
regarding your example of the parked car, you don't know it is located at a particular spot, you have a recollection of where it is located.
secondly i believe that when you use your senses , no knowledge can be derived from it.
all knowledge is abstract.
for example, as silly as it sounds, you can say , i know i own a levenson amp, but you can't prove it using mathematics or logic, since it requires you to see the amp.
yes this approach is radical skepticism, but it is my concept. |
truth without certainty seems contradictory Mrtennis: I might have lots of true beliefs, without being certain of them; e.g., I might make an educated guess about what floor of the garage I parked my car on, and be right. Indeed, there might be any number of true statements nobody has considered, so nobody is certain of them. The general thought is that certainty is somehow psychological, and truth is not. It's plausible that knowledge entails certainty (knowledge may be a partly psychological notion). I don't think it does, because I don't think justification requires certainty. John |
hi jdoris:
truth without certainty seems contradictory. |
Timrhu's right, Mrtennis. Never too late to pursue study of philosophy, or anything else. Change happens!
But for most people, it is probably unwise to pursue college teaching as a vocation, esp. later in life. The current economic malaise seems to have increased the (already depressing) rate at which desirable, secure, jobs in the academy are drying up. There might be some uptick with a "recovery," but I suspect things will continue to be a bit grim.
John
PS: FWIW, the standard account of knowledge as "justified true belief" does not seem to imply certainty. |
Mrtennis, it's never too late. |
i will admit that this discussion is out of proportion to the importance of the topic, however, i wish to comment upon my position of the inadmissibility of scientific knowledge..
any "theories" based upon observation cannot be proven mathematically.
such theories or as one would call them "empirically-based knowledge", are based upon inductive reasoning, which cannot be proven with certainty.
knowledge implies truth, implies certainty.
newton's theory of gravity is a stochastic phenomenon. there is some very small probability that some event in the future may contradict it, although, to date it has not happened.
this subject requires a semester of philosophy, so i will say no more.
i think i should have majored in philosophy and gone for a phd and then decided to teach. |
Rxman:
"Tasac"........PRN OU. |
|
Just think of Stereophile and TAS as audio porn. :) Who cares about the articles? |
Blkadr: Note that I'm not the one who used "tautological." ;) I think a little epistemology makes a nice counterpart to "the best speaker", and of course, toothpaste.
Mrtennis: Glad to see you biting the bullet on the impossibility of scientific knowledge. Hard to do nowadays (harder than it was for Plato), given the remarkable success of scientific inquiry.
As others have noted, the music reviews and writing in both TAS and Sp probably justify the cost (though I feel guilty about the paper). I've been put on to a good bit of nice music I'd not have come across otherwise.
J |
Prozac........................ |
I need a "prescription" after reading some of these threads ! |
I'm not embarrassed to say I looked up "tautological". I would advise you guys take a chill-pill, but it is evident you both enjoy the exchange.
Lets just say, if you get the subscription, be aware that the reviews may be bias and many think TAS is rubbish. That is not reason for you to not draw your own conclusions as to the validity of content and entertainment value. Order the damn thing, its cheap.
You opine here in six months. |
hi frogman:
i reread your post in which you commented on statements you believe are held by some cynical audiophiles. while i agree your statements are opinions. to suggest that that knowledge is relevant is something with which i don't agree.
accusing someone of not knowing what he/she is talking about is an ad hominem remark,in my opinion.
my comemnts did not insult you personally.
i would be willing to debate the principles of philosophy , knowledge and mathematics if you wish.
the appropriate context would be e mails or by phone.
the ball is in your court. |
empirical observations and so called empirical knowledge is based upon induction. so called empirical knowledge is usually synthetetic posteriori.
that is a collection of corroborating facts leads to knowledge of an evnt.
for example. the sun has risen evry day for a long time. i suupose you might say that one knows that the sun will shine the next day. such knowledge is based upon induction.
the problem with induction is that the exception disproves the rule, and it will take an infinite number of occurrences to rpove with certain (, i.e., to know) that something is true.
that which is considered knowledge must be true and provable.
mathematics or logic based upon the analytic a priori principle is necessary to establish knowledge.
therefore, empirical knowledge is an oxymoron. if a conclusion is based upon empirical observation it does not constitute knowledge.
knowledge is tautological.
that is given axioms, and definitions proofs are possible.
euclidian geometry is a fertile field from which analytical proofs are possible. |
Seems kind of ridiculous to get this serious about what is basically IMO entertainment. Yes, for me, there are entertaining moments in the magazine that are worth the reasonable cost of admission.
Not earth shattering by any means, not meant to be. Maybe we should all lighten up a bit.
And of course if the magazine is not to ones liking, no one is forcing anyone to read it.
Personally, I've never bought audio equipment based on a review although reviews have tweaked my curiosity enough to investigate. But I frequently buy music based on reviews. |
The cost of reading these advertisement controlled magazines is NOT the price of the subscription, but the cost of purchasing one of there world's best components and finding out it isn't. That is costly.They are paid for by the advertisers and will not give a negative review for fear they would pull the advertising.
Have Stereophile or TAS ever given a less then glowing review to a product whose company is running a full page colour advertisement?
Not recently.
This may be of interest to some
http://www.high-endaudio.com/magaz.html
Regards, |
Mrtennis, I am sorry I upset your sensibilities; sensibilities seemingly rooted in political correctness. Beyond that, I offer no apology for what I wrote. Moreover, I believe you could not be more mistaken in your characterization of what I wrote, or the issue at hand; certainly, as concerns the issue of logic, or it's absence. And yes, even mathematics, or it's absence; issues that you raise in your own disagreeable comment about what I wrote. Why don't we start by practicing what we preach?
On the issue of disagreeability: Kindly explain to me how making an arguably disagreeable comment in response to someone else's, likewise, disagreeable comment about a publication's worth is more deserving of your scrutiny and lecturing than the original offense. Particularly when the publication in question is one which has been, faults aside, unquestionably influential in a positive way. (And yes, IMO anyone who refuses to acknowledge this is a curmudgeon with his head in the sand). Notice that I said IMO; just as I did when I made my original comments. Comments that you found so troublesome.
So, the basis of your argument is that the views which I "attacked" are opinions, and thus not provable. I made it clear that my comments are my opinion. So, what exactly is the problem? Additionally, my comments were an attempt to encourage someone with no knowledge about this publication to explore what it has to offer; a positive endeavor, I think. More positive than the unfounded, knee-jerk negativity expressed by many. That, to me, is logic of the highest order.
Now, on to the subject of mathematics: $14.95?
Peace. |
knowledge can only be established using mathematics and/or logic, both absent in your statement(s). Mrtennis: is your contention that there is no observational/empirical knowledge? Might make it difficult to explain scientific discovery. Yours in epistemology, J |
hi frogman:
knowledge has nothing to do with attitude.
the idea expressed that "absolute sound is a worthless rag" can not be proven. it is a matter of opinion.
for you to say that such a person doesn't know what he is talking about is technically correct, as such a statement is an opinion. however, your implication is a disparaging remark which is completely uncalled for.
this forum should not be a place for ad hominem attacks, although i assume that your comment was not intended that way.
it is unfortunate that words like "knowlege" have been used improperly according to the strict definition of the term.
there is very little knowledge expressed in posts on these forums. knowledge can only be established using mathematics and/or logic, both absent in your statement(s).
rather they are opinions and perceptions based upon (one hopes) personal experience.
surely we can disagree without being disagreeable. |
Go to your local Barnes & Noble and read it and see if you like what you see. |
I have always been a bit perplexed by the level of cynicism expressed by some audiophiles about audio mags; particularly TAS and Stereophile. I have come to the conclusion that many of us are closet reviewers; magazine writer wannabes. IMO, this level of cynicism is usually not warranted.
Sure, TAS is not what it used to be. But to declare that it is a worthless rag is absurd, and simply not true. IMO, anyone who insists that it is, simply doesn't know what he is talking about. Particularly for young audioplies, it can be an invaluable source of information. If anything, about the history of high-end audio. TAS has done more to promote the high-end in a way that is rooted in something resembling integrity than any other magazine. It has contributed more to the development of a meaningful audiophile lexicon than any other force in the high-end; certainly more than any other magazine. And most importantly, it (along with the early Stereophile) set a standard, and reference, for the judgment of components' sound: the sound of live music. Imagine that, that audio systems should sound like real music! Sorry, now I am showing my cynicism.
Mceljo, you wrote: "Before the mailing arrived I'd never heard of The Absolute Sound". IMO, the answer to your original question is a resounding YES! Usually good to excellent music recording reviews, interesting retrospectives about the history of the high-end, and audio reviewing. And audio reviews that while not at the level that they once were written, still sometimes demonstrate glimpses of the quality that was once routine (wether we agreed with the conclusions, or not). In general, exposure to writing that will expand your audio lexicon in a way that is rooted in some sort of standard. All for $14.95? Are you kidding me? |
Both The Absolute Sound & Stereophile are a complete waste of money. Not to mention if your do decide to waste your money on either of them - they'll JUNK MAIL you to death every 3 months soliciting "re-uping" your subscription.
Save your money. Buy more vinyl. |
Be a sport get Absolute Sound live a little!! |
Mceljo, Yes, do it. It's a good deal, really. I'm sure you will like TAS. While you are at it you should take Audiofeil's advice and subscribe to Stereophile too. You can decide which one you like the best and tell us all about it. |
Maybe TAS only publishes reviews of equipment they mostly like, and if a specific manuf's equipment has not been reviewed, ever, in any issue you can assume a. they haven't had a chance to listen to it or b. they listened and didn't like. In other words all equipment reviewed is recommended equip, I don't see anything wrong with that.
Regardless, I find the sales and marketing facets of this industry fascinating and a hard copy magazine is a good way to experience the marketplace, from the letters to the editor, to the record reviews, to the ads. |
'tis super short money to subscribe; out of pocket expense not worthy of note. the only question is whether there is substance that interests you. at this point, i find the music blogs in stereophile (baird and kaplan), very much worth reading, the the other columns pretentious and otherwise not appealingly quirky (the same estimation follows tas. i am so very tired and bored to tears having to face/and read - or not - the latest and 'greatest', 'game changing' hyperbolic reviews from reviewers.
whatever, don't sweat over the decision, it's hardly worth a blink of the eye. |
I like their music reviews. |
I like the absolute sound, especially at $ 15.00. While I might agree that the reviews may not hold that much weigh, they can come in handy if your interested in a piece.
Sometimes they can point out specific features and issues.
The more information you have the better, especially when some audio gear cost more than a used car. |
Today I received a final notice for a bargain renewal price. The deal was $63 for 3 years, $48 for 2 years, or $32 for one year. It's in the trash. |
simple answer:
it doesn't matter, one way or the other.
maybe they are entertaining, but they take up space.
of course, you can read it and then give it away.
point is , you can be a happy as a music listener and owner of stereo equipment, without reading magazines. just like you can buy a good car, without reading car magazines. |
It might be worth reading for a year. Just don't take it as seriously as they take themselves. It used to be better, and may be "total crap", but you do get a glimpse of whats new, and what they want to create buzz about. I for one miss the adolescent feud TAS had with Stereophile. Pompous blowhards slinging feces at each other about stuff nobody cares about is funny.
I like the look of hifi+, and even remember a negative review here and there. I like the Brit rags, but dont really read anything that's not online any more. Still take every review with a grain of salt, or Pepto-Bismol. |
I used to read it 20+ years ago. Since the hobby is purely subjective, what's the point; HP's opinion is as relevant as my local butcher's (though since the butcher is 40+ years younger, he technically has better hearing). There are numerous online resources which give you nice glossy pictures of recently released audio products, and there are certainly better e-zines and blogs regarding music of all types.
Talk, listen, form your own opinions as to what you value in audio equipment (or anything in life). Everything else is merely pissing in the wind... |
For $12.97 you can subscribe to Stereophile.
Save $2 for the same BS and arrogance.
The free market concept is alive and well. |
I find looking at my Back-Issues for Used Equipment purchases helpful [ usually 3-10 year old stuff ] .
Reviews that I paid little attention to when the Mags [ AS & Stereophile ] first arrived are relevant .
Also Software Reviews can be helpful . |
Imo, both tas and stereophile claim this current product they are reviewing is the best they ever heard, in their own room and setup, even if their setup isn't the same when they reviewed the 1st product. Laughable sometimes. Better reads are hifi+, tone, and absolute audiophile. I am converting all my subscriptions to the ipad version which is much cheaper and more convienient. |
Seems appropriate to ask opinions on an audio mag here.
I prefer Stereophile, for the measurements and the detailed set-up information, both of which AS lacks. I think these omissions contribute to the slightly lightweight vibe of AS, since the (almost invariably positive) "verdict" often seems to me less useful than other info in a review.
That said, Mceljo, I think most hobbyists would get a CDs worth of pleasure from a year of either mag.
John |
Mceljo, If you are interested in music also, and not just gear, you might check out HiFi+, which offers not only better pictures than TAS but also better music reviews by far, and finally a flavor for what the Brits are up to. The subscription costs of TAS and Stereophile are so cheap, the decision really becomes do you enjoy reading about new equipment and, if so, just order them. If you have philosophical differences with the reviewers and/or advertisements then don't buy them and read Soundstage!, Dagogo, Positive Feedback Online, Enjoy the Music, etc. etc. etc. on line for free.
Tvad, no such thing as one dollar meal. Sort of like audio magazines. You buy one and you want another...pretty soon every day....then finally you are hooked and you can forget that 100 miles a week on your bike. Just say no :?) |
For the small price of the subscription, it is a cheap fix to my addiction to audio. I may not be able to afford all the good stuff, I can at least look and read about it. |
