Were you an audiophile in the 1980s and 1990s?

Interesting indeed to compare the writing styles of JGH and HP.

I mostly agree with bdp24’ s comments about the two writers (and their associated reviewers) on “technical” grounds (credentials?). However, I strongly disagree with the implied relative relevance and importance of their actual writing.

For me, what made HP (and TAS in general) stand out above most other audio reviewers at the time and since was, wordiness and all, his ability to write about the way that equipment was reproducing music in a way that clearly showed a level of understanding of aspects of the sound of a musical performance that most reviewers simply don’t have a very good grasp of; or choose to not write about it. A passing comment in a review about the bass of component A being tighter or a few hertz deeper than that of component B only scratches the surface of all that can be heard on a recording.

Now, HP’s thing was Classical music. He reviewed some Pop and non-Classical recordings, but to me it was obvious that Classical music was the genre that he understood best. He held subscriptions to Carnegie Hall Classical music series’ and it showed in his writing. When was the last time we have read a review that talks about the unique sound of the reverberation off the back wall of the stage when the French horns play, for instance? Or, the unique way that the sound of triangle floats above the rest of the percussion section of an orchestra. Writing about these things may seem flowery, but are real aspects of the sound of live and what can be on a recording.

I liked JGH’s writing very much, but IMO he did not write about the relationships between the performance and the sound on the same level as HP. A reader may not be interested in such things, but those are the details that give credence to the idea of “the absolute sound” and “the sound of unamplified instruments in a real space as the standard which TAS adhered to. IMO, the recent departure from this notion in the audiophile press and audio forums is unfortunate. As editor, HP shaped the “mission” of TAS in a direction that, to me, demonstrated a deeper appreciation of the more nuanced and ephemeral aspects of the sound of a musical performance as it relates to assembling an audio system than any other audio publication.

Then there were the great concert halls of the world surveys, surveys of the great pipe organs of the world, HP Suoer LP lists and much more. All this made it much easier for me to forgive HP’s tendency to be a bit of a blowhard.

Consider me a fan. I look forward to reading your book, MK.

i agree @frogman

as much as we appreciated what hp brought to the party, in the later years i feel the success and respect gained led him to become harder and harder to take (your word 'blowhard' is well chosen imo), i remember reading his later reviews and writings, remember many eye-roll moments

jgh, otoh, stayed solid with both feet planted on the ground and brought in the next gen of writers and reviewer which i grew to like and respect - i remember the early corey greenberg writings on nht and audio alchemy... ground breaking real hifi for us at the time starting out with small budgets, but loving music and hifi

@jjss49 I really enjoyed reading Corey Greenberg.  I wish he had stayed writing longer.

Tony Cordesman (AHC) was another one of my favorites.

Excellent comments, all.

Pearson did indeed go much further than Holt in describing the purely "sound effects" contained in recordings (including the infamous sound of subway trains running under the streets in recordings made in NYC, for instance). But Holt, being a recording engineer, knew far better than Pearson that the sound contained in a recording is not necessarily what the music sounded like when performed live. And for studio recordings, Pearson’s "rule" is completely and utterly inappropriate. Capturing the natural sound of acoustic instruments in real space is not at all what the vast majority of studio engineers are attempting to achieve.

The reason I value Art Dudley’s reviews above all others is that he was listening for how the piece of gear under review affected not just the sound of the music, but the music itself (plus, he had great musical taste, including a love of Bluegrass, which he also performed). Yes, PRAT and all the other musical concerns. Gordon Holt was definitely from the original generation of audiophiles (WWII generation), which considered the freedom from "vowel coloration" (a term coined by Holt) in the reproduction of instrumental and vocal timbres the first priority of a hi-fi system. I, having a very low tolerance for such coloration, shared with him that point of view. Loudspeakers in the 1950’s and ’60’s were plagued by it (easily heard in the sound of vocals, with which we are all very familiar), which is why I was knocked out when I heard music reproduced by an electrostatic loudspeaker. Far more transparent than non-ESL’s, but more importantly far less colored. Horns? Way, way, WAY too colored for me.

Rode an elevator with Holt once at a Show in LA in the mid 80's.  I didn't say anything mainly because a person on the car asked question after question and Gordon was getting slightly irritated.  Me, I thought the guy was gonna bend over and kiss his hand. When we reach our floor and the doors open he looked my way and smiled and raised in eyebrows.