2. best-of
  3. 965275669

Most Honest Audio Magazine?

I subscribe to Stereophile and I really enjoy reading it but something happened last year that made me raise an eyebrow as to the authenticity of their intentions. Remember the review of the B&W Nautilus 805's? The original reviewer raved about them and rated them "Class A Restricted Low Frequency". Shortly thereafter they demoted the same speaker down to "Class B Restricted Low Frequency". This really hurt the magazine's credibility in my eyes. My first conclusion was that they didn't want to upset the other manufacturers who produced "Class A" products at far higher prices. Shouldn't a trade journal give credit to the truly remarkable products especially when they are produced for relatively decent prices? It's unfortunate that the advertising dollars of the megabuck manufacturers bullied a stellar product into receiving a less than stellar final rating. I'm wondering if this hasn't happened before. I've since heard from some of my audio buddies that corruption does indeed exist in the audio press; everything from reviewers being related to manufacturers to reviewers being offered products for a song (pun intended). Please share your thoughts and experiences when it comes to audio magazines and let me know which ones you'd rate best and worst. Putting together a great system is hard enough without having to sift through the sometimes suspicious advice of those publications who purport to advance the hobby.
canadianguy
blkadr
739 posts
 
*At least they can spell clever.
waldhorner3fc4
76 posts
 
Basically Blkadr has it right. All subjective evaluations are just that. Subjective. What virtually anyone hears is highly circumstantial and dependant upon the influential conditions of the moment. Numerous tests have demonstrated that even a visual aspect (Brand name) is significant and sometimes even dominant in its influence. Since reviewers are human, they are also subjective and fairly unique in their experieces and preferences. Objective evaluation is more consistent but for most, will be deferred to the simple quality of taste. If you like it, you like it. Relating perceived "good sound" to accurate measurements is a learning process which can require hundreds or even thousands of man- hours of critical listening. So many esteemed reveiwers do have that basis for valid opinion. However, it's obvious that even that can be an unreliable reference for his fellow reviewer...or the consumer seeking validation for an expensive decision. Some can be well-satisfied with even the most basic of music reproduction. Others are never happy. I, at various times, have been in each category. My advice; if you like it, buy it. But listen to a lot of equipment before commiting and buy the least expensive which satisfies you. And most of all. Enjoy!
bookner
76 posts
 
I vote for Bound for Sound.
siddh
345 posts
 
I used to be enamored with Absolute sound. During the late 80s, early 90s Pearson and company ran a great mag. Objective, straightforward, and at times hard hitting. Last month they ran a letter I wrote and to my surprise they revised enough of it to somehow eliminate the essence of my issue. Sentences were moved or completely removed, certain words or phrases relocated. Total crap. I do not know who makes the editing decisions, but I never imagined that letters were under their totalitarian, political- agenda run rein.
joe_coherent
130 posts
 
TAS is enjoyable and accurate. stereophile is full of jargon and seldom as accurate as it purports to be.
More to discover