|
Over time, I got an impression that not many pay attention to what Stereophile writes anyway.
I used to be a subscriber for a long time. I realized I would read a few issues a year at most. After subscription lapsed, I did not feel I was missing anything.
How many visitors to this thread actually subscribe to Stereophile? Most? A few?
|
Huh? What’s a Sterophile subscription cost, about $1? Give me. A break. Admit it - you’re just another audiophile hater. Something’s missing alright.
“How many visitors to this thread actually subscribe to Stereophile? Most? A few?“
>>>>>>Huh? Who cares? |
>>>>>>Huh? Who cares? Those who are curious about why Stereophile reviewing something may be a big deal. |
"How many visitors to this thread actually subscribe to Stereophile? Most? A few?"
I subscribed since the time when Stereophile was nothing but a stapled booklet. It was run by J. Gordon Holt. It was also when Stereophile was at its best. Holt pulled no punches and called a spade a spade, and junk, junk.
Now, it just caters to manufacturers, especially the ones who place expensive ads in the magazine.
Has anyone noticed that Stereophile magazine keeps getting thinner by the issue, while TAS flourishes? There's a reason for that.
As for me, I dropped my subscription to Stereophile three years ago. Why? Because I got tired of their snarky little political snipes, and the downright arrogance of one main reviewer in particular, who I will not name, other than to call him an offensive little jerk-off.
In addition, check out the music they use to review equipment. It is mostly electronically enhanced recordings that are dripping in artificial reverb. Using "music" like that, how in the world can they honestly review equipment?
Save your money and buy records.
Frank
|
