New Stereophile format

Johnd, I think your point is excellent. After you brought it up, I realized that I also was getting lost in the too many columns.

Again, I like it overall. I think it feels more modern and slick. But, I would prefer a reduction in the number of columns and making it easier to follow are you pointed out.

Nrchy, I also agree with you. Stereophile has basically become the Dunkin' Donuts of audio. Dunkin' Donuts are actually mini doughnuts that a guy in the back pumps up with a bicycle pump to regulation size. After you've eaten one, you don't feel like you've eaten anything at all.

The writing is quite bland. Their coverage of their own show was less inspired than what was put forth by the Audiogon and Audio Asylum posters. Although, I read a good amount there, there was not much there there to quote Mr. Tellig. In my own lightweight show review, I felt we got to a much deeper level of discussion of sonics. And, as I pointed out, I purposely kept it very light.

Fremer is overdone these days. Sam is old and tired, probably just hanging on for the easy money, even if it isn't a lot, and all the gear being thrown his way to try. Art Dudley is the breath of fresh air, but the number of people who hate him and the niche gear he reviews should probably have a balance in an HP type who is commanding, demonstrative, and listens at 120 dB. I miss Chip Stern, as I felt he was the best "meat and potatoes" writer at Stereophile. Robert J. Reina's budget speaker reviews were fun for a while, but I am oh so tired of them now - they all read the same to me. Kal isn't as boring as he used to be, but I would predict he still hasn't gone on the motivational speaking tour and he doesn't review much gear these days. John Marks I appreciate. John Atkinson's reviews actually say something, but are too dry to keep me interested. This is too long a rant for one paragraph...

The verticle bar is a slight distraction. The thick horizontal bars in the middle of the page are down right stupid. It makes you think that its time to move back to the top of the page. Makes you slow down and figure out which way to go to continue with the article. I guess the guy/gal who came up with the new layout doesn't read much.

As for the content; too much high priced gear. How many $350K amps do the sell anyway? How about reviewing stuff in the $1k-$5k range that people can afford in todays economy. That we keep out the low budget mid-fi crap. It seems like the go from one extreme to the next. Like reviewing a $350k amp righ after reviewing a pair of $269 speakers. Now, if you hook up the cheap speakers to the solid gold mega-amp will you have a Class A Stereophile system?

I thought it was very interestin that Art's not-so-hot review of the Audioquest cables caused a 1+ page manufacturer's response in which they politely slam Art and his ability to understand and properly review their product. It must have caught them by off guard as they are so used to getting glowing reviews even when minute improvements cost big bucks.

Prpixel - Nobody reads much nowadays and I think that's what Stereophile is going for. The new format is "short attention span friendly" and thus the center page lines, mid page lines, etc. It is supposed to make the reader think there is less text so it's more attractive.

And I hate to say this, but I am probably typical of Stereophile readers (age wise) and I find the font too small. My eyes ain't what they used to be. It kinda works like this: they can't spend much money on paper so they have to use small print size. But the majority of their readership is middle aged (and getting older) so the eyes aren't what they used to be. However, younger readers also don't like small fonts - looks like too many words! I'm generalizing, of course, because there are guys my age who see really well without glasses and young people who don't mind actually reading something - but in general...

I found the new format somewhat distracting. I actually miss the 1980s version. While the review of the $350K amp generated a lot of criticism, you can bet that most readers nearly ripped the magazine in half in their hurry to find the story! It was a wonderful example of why subjective reviewing needs to be backed up by objective testing. Stereophile is the only magazine I've seen that offers high-end hobbyists that kind of credibility. I guess that makes format changes a bit inconsequential to me.