++++StereoPhile Class A components+++++

Here's my problem with the ratings: "Editor's Note: Class A Loudspeakers are sufficiently idiosyncratic and differ enough from one another that prospective customers should read Stereophile's original reviews in their entirety for descriptions of the sounds."

What does this tell you? The reviewers don't know what speakers are supposed to do. As one reviewer who does know what he's talking about said: "There is something on the recording. Reproducing it correctly can produce only one result. This "different perspective" is a way for audiophile reviewers to conceal the obvious fact(just compare Stereophile's measurements to the reviewers
comments) that audiophile reviewers mostly have no clue as to what things ought to sound like."

To my mind, first class speakers shouldnt make sounds of their own. I'm fairly easy with respect to speakers, I think. There are a few that I think sound ok at their price points, some I think sound very good. But there have been some Class A rated speakers that are unlistenable.

Ultimately, the rating system is worthless, except in generating demand for the products.

Read Audiogon not Stereophile!

Stereophile's rating system is helpful in shortening your list of equipment to audition. I have noticed (along with everyone else) some class rating "expansion". A few (okay, maybe it is several) of the Class A rated items would have been Class B a few years ago. When you are spending the big bucks, hopefully most people will have a tendency to listen to the equipment and decide for themselves.

Paulwp: That's a great observation you've made. While i never really paid attention to that in Stereophile, i have used a similar line of thought on various salespeople at Best Buy regarding Blose products. For instance, i'll ask them if they think that Blose products are built to sound "as accurate as possible" or if they have "a family sound that the designers think is musical". While they usually look at me as if i'm from Mars, they can finally understand what i mean after further explanation. Once we've reached that point, i then get them to listen to each of the different Blose products side by side, one after another. Their displays allow one to do this at the push of a button. In case you've never done this, each model sounds markedly different from one another.

Once they have been "shown the light" and see what i'm talking about first hand, they can then FULLY understand what i was getting at. One model is no more "accurate" than the other, nor do they have a familiar sound from one model to the next. They all sound like junk in different ways and are selling based on hype and reputation only. Once the salespeople realize these facts, they may have a harder time peddling this type of "low-fi" garbage. That is, if they have a conscience....

It's just part of the war on "audio junk" that i wage while working undercover as a plain-clothed civilian. At the same time, it is a small step towards helping to educate someone that is in a position to educate someone else. I'm hoping for the trickle-down effect : ) Sean
>

Mmowry: How could the R.C. list help anyone in "...shortening your list of equipment to audition"?

>Fact: Stereophile 'recommends' virtually every piece of gear they review.

>Fact: Stereophile can only review a fraction of the gear made.

>Fact: Among what they do review, they can only do extremely little head-to-head comparing.

>Fact: Even if a piece you're interested in does get reviewed - be it positively or negatively (and as we all know, it's almost never the latter) - the review cannot possibly tell you anything about what *you* will think of its sound in *your* system.

The only way I can see that a magazine review could rule out auditioning a piece of gear is simply by providing some of the same sort of general information about a component's operation and configuration that is usually available on the manufacturer's website, or maybe if you dislike the results of certain lab measurements (though this can be debatable without gathering correlative sonic evidence, i.e. auditioning). But as far as sound goes, at best a review can only be looked at as being one piece of information that you can add to whatever else you're able to glean about a component's reputation before auditioning it. Maybe reviews can be helpful in identifying pieces of gear you'd be interested in auditioning, but I don't honestly think that mag reviews should be used to rule out auditioning anything (and the R.C. list and letter-grade ranking tell you even less than the review proper). For every time I've agreed with a reviewer's assessment, I've had differing opinions on enough gear over the years to know better. This is intrinsic to the pusuit of personal truth and taste, and is not an indictment of reviewing per se, but just a fact of life and a perfectly understandable one. IMO, we should take the mags for what they're worth and don't let anything they proclaim define our horizons without any corraborating evidence, preferrably from our own ears.