Rank Stereophile, & why no Von Schweikert reviews

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?