Yup, Remember how we used to reminisce? |
One mag that is actually useful is HiFi. They seem to be very objective no matter what they review. |
Sereophile is awful. The idea of 20 class "A" or "best" amps or whatever is ludicrous. Its all about money.
TAS used to be wonderful 15 yrs. ago but HP,s cashing out also. Oh how I wish for the return of the old "Audio Critic".
As for von Schweikert reviews - It may be that the manufacurer won't loan them the gear because they don't want a review.
There used to be several high end guys that didn't want to risk a hatchet job by some tin eared moron because they wouldn't pay their ad rates. Can't blame them. |
It's the times, methinks. Everything in our culture has been subordinated to and measured by money. You can still find movie reviews if you want to but the grosses are listed on the front page. It's a sad fact that even my audio choices are dictated to some extent by resale considerations and depreciation rates. So the rags have sold out and the pool is full of sharks. Nonetheless, most of my audio exchanges range from polite and pleasant to downright reassuring. This here Audiogon thing is somewhat of an oasis. |
VS and lots of others are doing just fine without a plug from stereophile. anyone who has read the last two issues has to realize that the magazine doesnt have the 'juice' to be critical of anything. times are tuff in the publishing world and the world of hi-end. the very fact that its still on the shelves anywhere is more a testimate to the loyalty of its readers (me included), than the usefulness of its editorial. all products are great....nothing is overpriced....maybe its time for a class AA and AAA. a year end list of-who received accomodation from whom-would also be useful. |
Since I never read Stereophile in the "good old days" when presumably they were better than they are today, I take their reviews for what they are - a chance to list the positives of the gear they review and way to spin the negatives. And of course, measure the equipment. I love the measurements, not as a way to review the equipment, but sometimes as a way to know what to look for when I get a chance to audition or listen to the equipment listed in the magazine, or even when I'm reading reviews of the same equipment elsewhere, without the accompanying measurements.
I still think Stereophile does mention things about equipment that I immediately take to be negative, except they probably don't sound totally negative when they're said, more like they're just characterizing the equipment. But if you read carefully they are listing negatives about the equipment, usually immediately followed by platitudes or "lets put this in perspective, I'm only saying this is a shortcoming when compared to equipment 5x more expensive...." That and you will see a tell tale lack of enthusiasm about some equipment they review, which to me is a kiss of death.
The negative comments in the measurements are almost always straightforward, sometimes including remarks like "I'm surprised that the reviewer found this equipment so transparent in the high end, when I see these problems in the measurement."
I do agree however that readers almost need a guide to interpreting Stereophile reviews. In the last 5 years I have read several reviews in stereophile that made me decide against buying equipment, and a few reviews that sparked my interest enough to make me research equipment further.
I think the real fallacy is to think you can make up your mind about any equipment purely by reading reviews about equipment, whether that review is in Stereophile or a forum. |
Sonance,
That's how I feel. My dealer gets these people in there that buy all the recommded components for the year and think they have a great system because Stereophile says so. |
Sonance, Those graphs and measurments are absolutely worthless. The finest measuring gear ever made is on the sides of your head. This is what "The Absolute Sound" used to be about (say in the 1980's). They would plug a piece of gear into their reference system and LISTEN to it for a month. Then they would tell you what they heard. That's all that matters - does it sound like music? They were credible because thay had a reference and replaced one component at a time for extended listening and didn't get bogged down in the specs. The specs don't really matter.
If you try, to the extent you are able, to emulate that methodology, you don't need no stinking graphs and you'll develope a great ear also. |
How many Von Schweikert ads do you see? The guys a genius.
The new line is excellent, indeed exceptional. The problem seems to be that the audiophile community is 20% listeners and 80% sheep. I know audiophiles that repeat verbatim what they read. LISTEN, and form your own opinion! If then you can't appreciate the product, move on. Simple. Don't let those that hide behind the internet influence your decision.
You all got to know by now that there's alot of BS in this industry! Most of it from someone who's whining! |
Don't believe anything you read or hear and only half of what you see. Everyone has an agenda. |
That's right. My Zu Druids were delivered in a black helicopter by three guys in Nixon masks. And they were whining about how I should have bought V.S., whatever that is. |
A manufacturer's perspective.
We advertise monthly, on the 3rd cover, (inside rear page) at obviously no small expense. We get zero reviews, all the while I see 'endless monthly reviews' on Musical Fidelity.
I have no bone to pick with them--yet it seems that MF is in every issue! How does Stereophile justify so much ink for one manufacturer??
In Las Vegas, one person ONE, other than our Sales account rep, came into our suite.
He was terrific, and admittedly Steven Mejias, wrote a nice piece on what happened, (and was REMARKABLY ACCURATE) in his recitation of events. Yet, somehow, I thought that we might have seveal of their staff coming by to at least see what one of their principal advertisers would be doing--see what kind of sound we were offering--if nothing else from curiosities standpoint.
So the next time you think that ad dollars always buy reviews, think of us, with virtually no notice from Stereophile. We're practically invisible in their magazine. Franky it gives me pause to reevaluate our advertising scheme, spread our advertising to many instead of saturating one.
Any comments--what would you guys do?
Also, how credible are they (Stereophile) vesus, the ezines? Soundstage came by, (we've spent not one dime with them), and gave us a "Value Leader" monniker for our price/sound for all of CES. This really makes me wonder.
Thoughts would be appreciated.
Best,
Larry R. Staples
LSA Group
President/Designer |
We do try to have someone get to each and every room. Each morning over breakfast and blogs, the writers ask each other who saw what and who can get where. Nonetheless, it is patently impossible for all of us to get to all rooms and, frankly, I have no idea who advertises and who does not.
Kal
|
Kal, do you not actually read the magazine?
Larry, I can certainly empathize with your position. Over the past several months, I have noticed your ads on the "3rd cover" - a new term for me. I can understand it does take up a considerable investment of yours.
It's a difficult question to address, as I can see the benefits of each side - should the companies who advertise, at considerable expense be given reviews? Or, is it best that the reviews are completely independent of the influx in advertising dollars?
I prefer the reviews to be independent of the advertising into the magazine, but were I an advertiser, would certainly want reviews and folks from the magazine stopping by my room at shows. I'm sure Coincident and Art Audio also feel like you.
To be honest, apart from the overabundance of some manufacturer's products being reviewed, I do not have much of an issue with what gets reviewed. My biggest problems lie with there seeming to be no checks and balances on the reviewers choosing which gear to review (I do hope I am wrong on this account), and the content of the reviews themselves.
Sam Tellig and Michael Fremer are mostly responsible for Musical Fidelity being totally out of proportion with the rest of the manufacturers in terms of how many of their products make it into the reviews. Sam's credibility certainly seems to be questionable when it comes what gets represented in the magazine. A dinner, a phone call, buddying up to him looks to produce ink for your product. Forget about no real information being contained therein - which most of the writers are more than guilty of. That being said, he is an entertaining writer, which the magazine certainly lacks. Would it not be easy to right the Sam Tellig ship? "Uh, Sam, no, I think maybe we should not do another MF preamp review. How about this ASL 1009, though? Oh, and about this CJ power amp review, it's pretty good, but I need a bit more in terms of what it did resolutionwise. Also, I know you glanced over this, but can you flesh out its 'relaxed nature' a bit more? Thanks so much..."
As part of this, the pigeonholing of reviewers to the equipment is something that doesn't appeal to me in the least. I'd like to see Kal review a turntable, Bob Reina do a $20K loudspeaker, Paul Bolin a $500 CD player, and on and on.
Again, my other issue with the reviews is what is contained in them. First, I must complement them on what they do well - physical description of the component, often with background on the company and/or product. From a sonic perspective, I come away with almost no idea of what the product is when all is said and done. Not only that, but so many times, what little conclusion that was reached has been the antithesis of what I hear (not as much of an issue, as we all hear different, but it does raise the issue of my confidence in their ears).
Further, the writing, for the most part, is flat out boring, Sam and Art Dudley excepted. Say what you will about Art, and I happen to think he is currently the best thing at Stereophile by far, but his writing engenders some sort of reaction from the reader - for or against him. While I have heard the argument, ad infinitum I might add, that reviews should contain "just the facts, ma'am", no editorializing on politics, personal things, the weather, etc., but I feel those who miss out on magazines being entertainment miss out on the big picture.
Just me, but Stereophile would do well to find more writers like Art Dudley, maybe throw the constipated right wingers whose faces grow red every time they read him a bone by hiring one whose leanings are more toward their bent. Do things that provoke some sort of emotion out of the reader beyond, "Oh, a JMlab/Triangle/CJ/Mac/MF review by Sam this month? Haven't seent that since last month..." And, push the writers to really focus on providing a picture for what the component actually sounds like.
Never thought I'd say this, but I kind of miss Jonathan Scull. While I have had my run ins with the prima donna, and have given him faint praise, he was informative, well written, entertaining, emotional about what he was doing, and most of all, he seemed to be able to describe a component very well sonically.
For what it's worth, my subscription is good until November, 2008. After which, presuming the magazine is still here, I'll re - up for another three years. |
Yeah, I'd like to do a turntable review. :-)
Kal |
Trejla,
As usual, intelligent, thoughtful,insightful, well prepared thoughts.
I would have to believe, based on years of following them that everyone at Stereophile has 'honor' as a mantra.
My issue with Stereophile as it relates to 'ranking them' centers around simple business etiquette. From LSA's perspective it seems that the owners/editor of Stereophile should at least pay a courtesy visit to those who advertise with them, while at the preeminent show of the year--even if they don't write about us. I would think that they would have a passing interest in the people and products that they highlight in their advertising sections each month.
Moreover, what other time are we all this close in terms of simple geography?
We were virtually ignored by (what is currently) our only advertising outlet. Insofar as I am concerned this is unacceptable in any business relationship.
They can claim that they were busy if they like but I can trump them there--sending six pairs of speakers, four amplifiers and nine people from three states to Vegas--then entertaining hundreds of dealers, distributors and other attendees for four days.
I am really discouraged and disappointed by their snub.
Larry R. Staples
LSA Group
President/Designer
|
Say what you will about Art, and I happen to think he is currently the best thing at Stereophile by far Amen. His contributions to Stereophile are the one thing I can look forward to, and can count on being consistantly the most enjoyable and thought provoking every month. Humanistic, wholistic, written with intelligence and wit and always thoroughly enjoyable: Makes it worth the cost of a subscription in my book. Marco |
Lrsky, you paid your money and they ran your ads. Unless they lied about their circulation you got exactly what you paid for. It would seem to me that anything beyond running the ads as promised would be unethical. I don't understand why you're upset. |
I agree with Onhwy61,And besides, every minute spent in your room left less time for drinking scotch or hanging out with Antony Michalson... |
One could argue that the "take no quarter, give no quarter" business philosophy is THE best to adhere by, and I certainly understand the viewpoint.
However, we live in the real world. And, as we all know, it's far from perfect.
Further, there is a "right" way to conduct yourself, and I admit THAT is a most subjective thing. One of the first rules of business is to not alienate your customer (unless, of course, it actually improves business - like talk radio). It would be a "nice" thing to do for someone like JA to stop by, and at least meet someone who is taking out that ad space in your magazine. That's how I would run my business, I'd make it a point to visit my advertisers AND all of the other room. I realize reality gets in the way, and there are time limitations, but something could always be worked out.
I hope no one begrudges Larry trying to make a profit in this business. We need more folks like him in the audio world. Just look at his more than generous upgrade offer in that 3rd cover of Stereophile.
In my own selfish way, I want Larry AND Stereophile to do well, as the hobby in general benefits most of us by being a healthy industry. In my own admittedly utopian view, Larry advertises in Stereophile, sells product, continues to advertise, Stereophile can grow, other companies are able to advertise as more and more people are buying audio, they sell, they continue to advertise, and on and on. And, somewhere in that mix, the magazine pays a visit to the CES rooms.
Again, I'm leaving myself open here, and certainly welcome differing and divergent opinions, with the hope that someone also appreciates mine, warts and all.
And, here's hoping Kal gets to review a VPI or that new Marantz TT in 2006, though I probably need to write to Stereophile for that... |
Onhwy61, I would agree with you that Larry "got exactly what he paid for" if all of the other manufacturers (read Musical Fidelity) got only what they paid for also. But that doesn't appear to be the case in my opinion. |
I stopped reading Stereophile years ago...always the same equipment and stratospheric priced rigs being touted...you'd do better to advertize in Audio Asylum or Audiogon IMHO
Larry |
They review the same manufacturers over and over. VS speakers have been reviewed by many other rags, and they have had stellar reviews. Don't you think that would get Stereophile's attention? There is clearly a hidden motive why they would ignore them all these years. It makes me wonder how many other brands they ignore that are better than their "good old boys" manufacturersÂ’ equipment.
Maybe they feel that VS would give their favorite manufacturers some serious competition at a much lower price?!?
Credibility goes out the window, and so does Stereophile.
They are good at herding sheep, talking politics, and turning their nose up but thatÂ’s about it.
Disclaimer: ThatÂ’s my opinion based on the facts that IÂ’ve seen. I could be wrong and often am.
|
I agree. The only way to knock a smug, sanctimonious magazine off its high horse is to cut off its revenue stream. Just watch how quickly they get humble once their advertisers wise up and stop feeding the beast.
Just look at who reads this stuff. Of the population that reads Stereophile, the best demographic, us, is reachable without paying their preposterous price by simply reaching out to the Audiogoners. |
Of the population that reads Stereophile, the best demographic, us, is reachable without paying their preposterous price by simply reaching out to the Audiogoners. As successfull as Audiogon is (it's also a partner with Stereophile now, by the way), I think "we" are only a very small part of the demographic that Larry may wish to reach. There's a whole other world out there who use and appreciate this kind of gear and do not visit Audiogon and do not read Stereophile. Best strategy is to pepper all the venues, as the previous owner was doing very effectively, and keep that buzz going (though I do think the original owner went a bit far in his efforts as all the deleted threads may have attested to). Regardless, I think his campaign was very effective. Larry, I truly mean no offense by this, but the current full-page ad you've been running with the Photoshop-obscured view of one of your amps....well, from both a consumers point of view, and from someone been in the advertising business for over twenty years, that really needs some reconsideration. I have no idea what you are trying to do there, but it almost looks like someone accidently ran the comp for the ad. Those full pages have to cost you a goodly amount of coin...I'd invest in some better photography and graphic design to make that investment work for you more effectively. Just one man's unsolicited opinion mind you. The previous owner was running some very slick ads, well designed, with excellent photography, that made the product appear to be worth much more than he was charging for it. The current ads I'm seeing do not draw me in to read more about the product, and do not speak at all visually of the product itself. If your ad doesn't make the reader stop and read about the product, it's a wasted investment. Anyone else finding that with the current run of Larry's ads? Maybe it's just me as I am a very visual person and put a strong emphasis on the visual, especially in this 5-second attention span culture we live in. Marco |
isn't that the TV evangelist guy, who got busted for having an affair in a motel room ? Jimmy Schweikert ?? |
Marco, you really helped me out here.
I just presumed the ad was a flashback from my drug phase. I was getting paranoid and everything... |
I don't get it. One of the most common comments about Stereophile is that advertisers get great reviews and other perks. We now have an advertiser saying he didn't get any perks from Stereophile at the RMAF and people use that as a point to further criticize Stereophile. You can't have it both ways. Either the reviews are independent opinions written by journalist, or the entire mag is one big paid for ad. For hardcore audiophiles Stereophile is somewhat irrelevant since it really caters to a mass audience, but at its subscription price it's hard to pass on. Regarding Musical Fidelity, it could just be that their room was more "fun" to hang out in. Free alcohol to entice journalist, what an original idea! |
When magazines never say "this product sucks" - or the socially acceptable equivalent, they can't be taken seriously. In real life, isn't it more likely that we don't like items we review? Cars? Computers or software? Aren't critics of most things critical instead of supportive? Not so with Stereophile.
They can't take themselves seriously... but yet they do when it comes to turntables. So they get all bent out of shape over products that maybe 10% of their readers and 1% of all electronics customers may purchase. This misses the mark, in my mind.
So, they have content for 10% of their readers and are bound to like almost everything they review... better hire witty, edgy and controversial writers (like that one liberal idiot) to take the focus away from the formulaic reviews each product gets.
My subscription lapsed and I don't miss it at all.
Let YOUR ears do the review.
Don't forget to enjoy the music. |
The 3 best audio magazines I know of is
1.Hi-Fi + (usefull,well written,lot of reviews,outstanding pictures.
2.Absolute Sound (Well written if you read between the lines,H.P. is amusing,takes a stand on ocassion.
3.Stereophile(Good bathroom reading,everything according to them is great,refuses to offend anyone,just once I would love to hear them say something sucks. |
My dealer said that Stereophile has a VR4jr they are reviewing!! and he's not nuts - could this be true?
If it's true I guess the pressure is finally getting to them. And the fact that the absolute sound gave the jr's stunning review might make readers wonder where Stereophiles priorities are. Maybe the jig is up!?!? |
Hey Larry, I can't believe I just noticed this thread. Let me first say - LSA-1's are awesome! Seriously, they are particularly musical, I don't know how you do it. They are one of the few elements of my systems that I never consider "rotating" out to something else that I pick up on Audiogon.
As for credibility of magazine reviews, as was mentioned earlier Sam Tellig in particular seems to just like certain brands. As a hobbiest I need to learn to calibrate my taste against each reviewer, and I can tell you that when I've tried gear that Sam gushes over, I usually like it but not remotely as much as Sam does. It does leave me puzzled, but that's my calibration FWIW.
The Absolute Sound has historically had a bit more credibility over all than Stereophile, but, I have no idea about demographics, volume of readers, etc.
Some online 'zines have high credibility: Soundstage, EnjoyTheMusic come to mind. Positive Feedback. 6Moons has useful reviews but frankly I have such a hard time navigating that site that I'm not sure of the value to an advertiser. 6Moons is the only place on the entire web where when I try to find what I'm looking for, I usually fail (and all I'm trying to find are the latest equipment reviews!).
IMHO, deciding how to allocate advertising dollars is no easy matter.
As for how the magazines decide what to review, there are certain objective criteria that they usually establish, like, how many dealers carry the goods. There is a subjective component I'm sure. I would guess that you need to have one or more people at a magazine that "champion" your cause.
Thank you for your great work. I hope you totally succeed because I think you've created an outstanding "family sound" for your speaker line.
Art |
As someone who's subscribed to Stereophile for several years and thought they were relativly fair, I did a little test.
Take the recomended components guide, there's a couple different versions of this that come out yearly.
There's an 'advertisers index' in same issue. Compare recomended list to advertiser index, uncanny coorespondance. This made it clear to me, no advertisie, no recomendie. |
Art,
The link to 6moons reviews is always low down the page on the right side. Cheers,
Spencer |
Spencer, I find that link easily but then I find myself wading through a list of advertisements and "coming reviews" and after screen after screen of that stuff I just give up. Have you any rules of thumb for actually finding the reviews instead of the advertisements or "coming attractions"?
Thanks,
Art |
10 years ago when a friend would buy a computer I would help them and it was really important that they get this one rather than that one for this that and the other reason. Today, I myself, am content to go to Costco and get a computer if I need a new one. The point being that things have improved tremendously.
I am finding Hi Fi to be the same. 10 years ago there was lots of complete crap being sold at many many various prices. These days, as long as you go with a trusted manufacturer, stuff is pretty good. I mean, it depends on what you are trying to do - I have a 10k+ or so system, with 3 components hand built by small manufacturers that I picked after years of reading. But for most people who plunk down 4k total or 2k total - which is the bulk of the market - I am seeing less and less major errors. System matching can be more important than getting this or that piece. They all sound 'reasonable'. Now if you want a special system that outperforms its pricepoint by a large margin, you have to be really careful.
I say all that to say that in this kind of environment, where most stuff is 'good' - and you want to find 'great' stuff, or match what you buy to what you want, i.e., all 2k speakers are compromised somewhere, so what do you want to give up, bass, extended highs, looks vs performance, etc. - In this kind of environment, magazines have a different angle. Maybe all the stuff Stereophile is reviewing is actually 'good'. I'm not trying to excuse the extreme praise that can go too far - but I am trying to explian the lack of negatives.
What do you guys think? Can someone find a piece of equipment that they think is really 'bad' that stereophile said was 'good'?
So, if my hypothesis is correct that most equipment by the main manufacturers is 'good' then the magazines have to help people who care pick 'great' equipment and/or do system matching, explain room matching, teach us what balance different pieces provide. It is a different endeavor than distinguishing between good and bad.
Almost a different topic, but related:
I think what is really interesting - and TAS used to do this a lot, not sure if they still do - put out their pick for 2k, 5k, 10k, 30k systems. And focus on the 2k, 5k, 10k ones more than 30k. That is practical, useful, involves system matching, is actionable by the community, etc.
For example, and I've set this up for 4 friends to great effect,
$350 NAD C315BEE Integrated Amp
$350 NAD C525BEE CD Player
$550 Mangepan MMG
$124 Kimber Kable - 4TC Speaker Cable short run
$77 Kimber Kable - PBJ Interconnect
_____
$1451
And it kicks butt! People spend 1500 on all in one systems from CC and BB that sound 1/100th as good - shouldn't really even be compared. That is the kind of insight I want from the magazines - what to do at pricepoints.
Its amazing to me when some people talk about this versus that speaker or something and people are saying A is better than B, and then it comes out that A is 1500 more than B and someone will say, 'but that doesn't matter'. For most people I know the questions isn't what speaker is better, the question is that there is a 3 or 5 or 7k budget and they want a system in that budget.
Now for some of us, this isn't a factor, we buy things maybe once per year, not a whole system at once, and for 1500 more if we get a different speaker because it is so much better that is fine, but we are the upper crust of this stuff, and most people work with budgets. |
System balance and goals are crucial, as lightminer suggests. Heck I've got a $20 clock radio that sounds really nice - it just does not attempt to reproduce any sound out of it's natural narrow band in the midrange.
As far as reviews being never negative... well they ARE if you read them properly.
Have you ever been to a restaurant where you ask the waiter their opinion of a dish, and they kind of wince a little bit and say "well, it's good". What they are telling you is (1) it's BAD and (2) they can't be so up front about that for political reasons.
Negative reviews end in some variation of faint praise.
"I enjoyed my time with these speakers"
as opposed to
"I bought the review pair!"
"Anyone shopping for speakers in this price range should check these out'
as opposed to
"New benchmark in it's price range!".
Qualification by taste is a good one too:
"Anyone seeking a pair of speakers to match with a slightly lean sounding amp should check these out."
ETC.
I used to be annoyed by all this but now I find it amusing. The review journals need to be able to communicate to the reader, accurately, without directly insulting the potential advertiser.
And they do. You just need to learn the "code".
Art |
It's interesting to read all the different POV's listed here about what gets review space etc versus what doesn't. I travel a lot and have been into the vast majority of US HE B&M dealer showrooms. I also look in on AudioGon and AA from time to time to see what's in the news etc.
Over the last few years there has been an obvious and widening gulf between the different products that generate this or that temporary buzz on the chat forums and are often fleetingly popular, versus what holds its place and sells in the marketplace outside the net.
The posts above mentioning VSA, EMM, Green Mountain, Reimyo, Tyler and Caravelles are all _perfect_ examples of products you see generate conversation on the internet, but are not widely distributed in the US and are not found in many traditional B&M dealers. Some companies like EMM and VSA went through significant internal changes in distribution/personnel over the past few years. I think EMM had some history years ago with SP that may be a reason no new reviews came when they launched new products.
Largely, the products covered in Stereophile these days, and to some extent TAS and SoundStage reflect products that are more widely available in traditional B&M stores. Product lines that have stable US distribution outlets and have stood the test of time in the market place are far more likely to earn review space--at least to some degree. As everyone likely knows, successful HE B&M dealers are becoming harder to find. This acts almost like a natural filter for brands-- Manufacturer's must not only make products that perform well, but have exceptional production and delivery time, excellent dealer support staff, customer support and some manner of solid company infrastructure (bookkeeping/International etc).
The competition for market share among speaker lines especially, is incredibly intense, making it hard for new or unique products no matter how great, to find any footing at traditional dealers. Again, what you see reviewed in the magazines largely reflects what is available and successful at US traditional B&M dealers. This months Magico review/interview in SP and previously in TAS is an exception, but it also points out that that may well be a great products to check out.
You may see a preponderance of reviews for certain electronics/speaker lines mostly because those are very strong companies with exceptional service, a broad staff, solid distribution and time tested success at a majority of B&M dealers. In a way, there is some good in that. People that buy products that have long term success at established dealers may be more likely to have a better overall buying experience and receive better support, warranty service and re-sale value. There are many small companies that deserve better recognition and support as well. I am merely pointing to one of the reasons I think reviews at the majors fall the way they do.
Grant |
I like Enjoythemusic.com, TAS and Stereophile ... and about everything else I visit or find (beyond ETM). In large part I just like to keep up with what's being made, the associated data, and what reviewers have to say. Most of the letter posters are self-indulgent and intentionally insulting, so I tend to ignore their diatribes. I also enjoy zipping through all of the info found on AGon. The only audio mag I simply couldn't digest was one called "Listener," dating back to 1999 or so. |
I think we take any mag reviews far too seriously in general. Personally I subsricbe to both for a variety of reasons and have issues with both. On TAS, a) no measurements: while I am not a measurements guy mostly due to my own ignorance, I see why some would want it and to rule it out I think is a mistake on TAS. But perhaps more importantly, I hate the whole pontification on what constitutes what is the absolute sound itself or conceptual flights they frequently go on about. To me at least, its a bunch of intellectual masturbation that is driven by self narcissism. Amateur philosophy is not what I am looking for. Now not all reviewers like that at TAS and even those who are do not always write in such manner. But as mag, they do have that tendency...and Hifi Plus I find tends to go into that direction too frequently as well.
Stereophile does not go in that direction and the writing style is more to my taste. But I agree with what is being implied here in that its choice of equipment to be reviewed could be much more varied and falls behind TAS. And all reviewers should really avoid hyerbole and point the relative weaknesses with more clarity IMO.
At the end of day, what I personally I look for in these mags and any others is simple a) technological trends b) a basic idea of how the equipment works (functionality etc) and an idea how it sounds, what are the strengths and weaknesses to consider.
One thing. I do love Stereophile's special articles in a particular artist or musical genre. Through it I gotten to know and find out more...and ultimately led to further investigation/enjoyment of the Italian jazz scene as well as current New Orleans music post Katrina. Surprisingly these reports I find are better written and researched with greater variety than most mags dedicated to just music. I wish they did more. Perhaps it because in these reports, there are no commercial interests involved? |
