59 responses Add your response
I gave up on Stereo Review many years ago when it became too obvious they never met or tried an advertiser's product they didn't like and/or recommend. Stereophile magazine seems to have gradually moved out of any possible meaningful range for me as I'm much more likely to drop $60K on a new Mercedes as I am on a pair of amps, and a 4 box CD player at $130K is something I just can't relate too, especially after hearing one in a hyper expensive system with unacceptable imaging. |
J. Gordon Holt was inspired to start Stereophile in the early 1960's ('62?) when, while employed at High Fidelity magazine as Technical Editor, he had a negative review of a product by an advertiser vetoed by the rag's publisher. Can't go bitin' the hand that's feedin' ya! Gordon was the single lone voice in "subjective" reviewing for over a decade, until The Absolute Sound appeared. After that, every Tom, Dick, & (heh) Harry thought his ears were golden enough to make him qualified to be a hi-fi critic. |
For the record, Stereo Review morphed into Sound and Vision. Like many of us, I began reading Stereo Review at a young age when I wasn't quite sure what this hobby was all about. It did, if not always 100% accurate, always provide material that fed my appetite for this hobby and, quite frankly, I don't remember any other magazines that focused on consumer electronic even being in existence. For whatever it's worth, I have a collection of probably 15 or 20 years of back issues I kept for the hell of it. I can still remember reading articles and going to local stereo type stores to check out the equipment and to learn more about this hobby. Jullian Hirsch was the man back in those times just as others are highly respected today. It was a part of the overall interest in this hobby and I am glad I was able to read and follow it at the time. |
Stereo Review was a fraud. Back in the late 70's SR commissioned Dr. Larry Greenhill and the Audiophile Society (of which I participated) of NY to test & compare A/B testing of speaker wire. There were 10 testers which most of us could determine which wire was being played. Some of us were 10 for 10 identifying what wire wad being played. The Stereo Review article said we as a group could not identify the difference in the wire, which we clearly did. |
I think i remember that article in SR about speaker wire--would be distressing to know they lied. As to few negative reviews, i remember Hirsch and Holt both responding to that accusation by saying that the vast majority of equipment they review is pre-screened in order to decide what to review and they only wanted to review good products--so if you never saw a review for an item it might not have made the cut. Kind of makes sense as they obviously couldn't review everything. SR's philosophy seemed to be to review only products that were "affordable" which is why i enjoyed it back when i had no money--it always seemed to me that they were trying to tell you what the best affordable equipment was. S&V seems to have the same philosophy but i checked out of that rag when it became more V than S-or so it seemed. And then i discovered the crack that is Stereophile and TAS and my wallet got pounded pretty hard... |
I enjoyed Stereo Review and High Fidelity. I also enjoy Stereophile and Absolute Sound but I don't believe much they say.Here's a free magazine from Germany I like: https://stereo-magazine.com/ |
SR and Hi-Fidelity were my mainstay mags in the mid/late-70s. Bought my first system (JVC 100/Kenwood KD-1003 turntable/Ohm Model E speakers) based on the equipment reviews at the time. Added in a Teac top-load tape deck to complete the ensemble. Eventually SR underwent an owership/staff change in the mid-80s as I recall and the overall quality slid down the trash chute. By that time I was reading Audio and the little mag called TAS |