"Long-Term Equipment Loans: A Win-Win for Everyone" by Robert Harley, The Absolute Sound

[Elliot G.]

You used it to insult and degrade them. Its really disengenous trying to pretend otherwise. Sometimes Joe we make errors, we speak out of of turn, and perhaps we can reconsider our error and admit what we did. Otherwise keep on dancing ....
Im done BTW this no longer interests me

 

[Audire]

You used it to insult and degrade them. Its really disengenous trying to pretend otherwise. Sometimes Joe we make errors, we speak out of of turn, and perhaps we can reconsider our error and admit what we did. Otherwise keep on dancing ....
Im done BTW this no longer interests me

I’m saddened by your reply. I did not purposely insult or degrade anyone by my use of the term “mag rags.” I’m sorry if you or anyone else didn’t understand what I was referring to. I apologize that some may misinterpreted my use of the phrase.

If I had meant it to be derogatory then I wouldn’t have a subscription to Stereophile … What would be the use? I’ll post a picture now, that way you won’t come back later and say I went out and just purchased some …

 

[Elliot G.]

I’m saddened by your reply. I did not purposely insult or degrade anyone by my use of the term “mag rags.” I’m sorry if you or anyone else didn’t understand what I was referring to. I apologize that some may misinterpreted my use of the phrase.

If I had meant it to be derogatory then I wouldn’t have a subscription to Stereophile … What would be the use? I’ll post a picture now, that way you won’t come back later and say I went out and just purchased some …


View attachment 105889

To be frank Joe, I dont care whether you read the magazines or not. I dont care if you subscribe or not. That has nothing to do with your words and acusations. Words especially here have meaning and one should choose them wisely. I will always defend my friends, my industry and my company against the false, the fake, the malicious and the ignorant statements that people make who think they know but don't.
In fact is is very sad to me that there are so many here that can learn so much from some of the amazing people in audio, many of which particiapte on this site. Instead there is so much defensive protective tribal behavior.
The "rags" have a place in this business and they have done many good things. Are they perfect NO, is the system perfect? far from it but that gives no one the right to defame it all.
Thank you for your apology .
Peace

 

[Gregadd]

Elliot ,I only disagree with one thing
The price grants one many rights. Not the least of which is to demand and challenge their integrity. It should be fact based of course

 

[andromedaaudio]

First you gotta qualify for the tournamnt

In this case paying the entrance fee , as we all concluded before already mags cannot live of the wind .
The mags do filter out the hobby companies from the more professional ones i ll give you that

In the last year and a half i decided to vist more dealers / shows again which i had nt really done much for 10 years.
Merely because i was accused of having no experience / never go out to hear new things .

Based on what i heard i m definitively keeping my sub parr non uber audiocomponents and you can keep your uber reference gear like wilson alexx and XVX , Stenheim Vitus D agostino , Dartzeel .

Some nice exceptions though like FM acoustics The Gryphon Wadax CH precision , Rockport Lyra and , Kharma with R koda

 

[Amir]

I will review these reviews soon :

https://www.stereophile.com/content/tad-c600-line-preamplifier
https://www.stereophile.com/content/tad-compact-reference-cr1-loudspeaker
https://www.stereophile.com/cdplayers/326/index.html
https://www.stereophile.com/digitalprocessors/781/index.html
https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/tad-reference-one-loudspeaker-tas-218-1/

 

[Amir]

Robert has stated and writen about his room in TAS before. There is also a video from the review and room pictures. The review was really posted for Amir since he can deconstruct all reviews https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/building-a-listening-room/ this is why one needs to do his homework before blowing up the place !

I did not visit Robert Harley listening room but I have spend many many times to have better sound in similar way and I have used Diffuser/Absorber/Traps and ... in my room.
finally I hated the result, for me the good sound does not come from using lots of sound absorbing/diffusing in the room.
I prefer to have natural sound of my room at moderate RT and I do not fight with it. those CD albums beside left speaker (the first left reflection) are awful for sound in Robert Harley room.

I know experts like David (@ddk), Jim Smith, Roy Gregory (@RoyGregory), Kevin, Bob do not use lots of sound absorber/diffuser in the room.

this is the Roy Gregory listening room :





this is the Kevin Room in UK :

 

[Hi-FiGuy]

Reconsidering Julian Hirsch

They’re still at it. A recent issue of Stereophile featured a sidebar on “13 Products Julian Hirsch Got Right” — implying, of course, that Hirsch got most products wrong. Poke around audio websites and you’ll probably see his name mentioned, often with scorn. But the man retired as technical...

www.soundandvision.com

 

[picears]

Well, this thread has sort of devolved into a pissing contest... but getting back to Ron's original point:

I used to read TAS, Stereophile, etc. back in the 1980's to early 1990's. It was fun, informative, but also something I just never thought of as objective in the sense that say science journals attempt to be.

All humans have biases. We cannot escape them. That is why double-blind protocols were invented, why science papers get refereed blind, etc.

Is someone who buys a piece of gear less biased than one who is long-term loaned a piece of gear? I doubt it.

And of course the questions Ron raises leads to the bigger question: why bother with these old school outlets anymore? Neither TAS nor Stereophile nor any others are serious academic journals. They are, and always were, entertainment. (Someone mentioned Nelson Pass looking on this industry as such, yes?)

And of course the new school is video. People have already brought up Youtube. I'd rather watch a person's response to a piece of gear, and have them describe their experience, than read a story.

Of course there are problems with Youtube reviewers - just like with old-school reviewers. Someone here brought up Jay from Jay's Audio Lab. His channel is a channel for conspicuous consumption, a very American thing. I do not take his opinion highly, and his obsession with outrageously priced power cables ought to be a warning to anyone.

But there are other Youtubers out there who clearly know more. Guttenberg is clear that he gets loaner gear (and people raise that as an issue in comment to his videos.) Yet I still find his discussions often interesting. Audiophile Junkie brings videos of very high end products but he does not pretend to be a reviewer.

And we have plenty of online forums such as this one. Our fellow humans who go to the effort to post their own experiences are valuable. Their owner-biases are no doubt there, but don't we all expect that?

 

[Gregadd]

I imagine the high end is a tough economic environment. Make no mistake somebody is making money. Narrow margin is no excuse for incompetence or corruption.
You have an obligation for deliver a fair and competent product to your customers. If you can''t do that get out of the busobess. Yes it is that simple.

 

[andromedaaudio]

I seriously doubt high end manufacturers are in it for the money.
I think its more a artisan / artist market .
Or its a busines besides a larger busines they already own .

 

[Rt66indierock]

A few random thoughts that folks here should consider:

1. Some manufacturers insist on long -term loans only. This is because they have had problems with shady reviewers in the past and desire a right to ask for the equipment back.

2. Some manufacturers will lend equipment and then use that as a weapon of sorts to try to sway opinion of said gear. As far as I can tell, TAS doesn't work with manufacturers who do that.

3. The magazines are far more ethical than some here might imagine. Harley has dismissed two reviewers the past few years for ethical lapses at the magazine. Robert is one of the more thoughtful and ethical people I have met in the business.

4. Accommodation pricing is completely fair for writers. Most writers in high end audio only get $200-$500 an article and being able to buy gear at wholesale is a fair bit of bonus compensation.

5. Accommodation has a few other benefits as well. 1. It solves a problem the manufacturer has because he cannot sell the reviewed gear at full MSRP. 2. The pricing allows the reviewer to experience more and/or better gear which builds that reviewer's experience base so that makes them a more insightful writer.

I think some here need to put away the conspiracy theories. I have worked for four audiophile publications and, with few exceptions, most writers are genuinely trying to help the reader gain insights that help them get better sound.

Lee,

As far as ethics go, I’m good with as long as your reviewers aren’t on roof tops shooting at people.

If your reviewers are paid what you said they are then you are exploiting them. I am fine with that too.

 

[gleeds]

The recent video by Michael Fremer and TAS (linked below) is in my estimation a model of disclosure, professionalism and integrity from a reviewer. For those who do not have the inclination to watch it, MF indicates how he came to own or have in his possession each piece in his reference system. He openly discusses how he makes his money from audio (outside of reviewing), his room and its limitations, as well as clearly expresses why and what he likes about each component in his system. I have always admired Michael for his passion, sense of humor and writing style. Now I believe stands at the very top of his field and has proven that reviewers from all parts of our industry (including highly experienced hobbyists) can make a positive contribution if their biases and experience with components they are commenting on is made clear.

 

[Gregadd]

I know at least one manufacturer who complained about being rich.

 

[Lee]

The recent video by Michael Fremer and TAS (linked below) is in my estimation a model of disclosure, professionalism and integrity from a reviewer. For those who do not have the inclination to watch it, MF indicates how he came to own or have in his possession each piece in his reference system. He openly discusses how he makes his money from audio (outside of reviewing), his room and its limitations, as well as clearly expresses why and what he likes about each component in his system. I have always admired Michael for his passion, sense of humor and writing style. Now I believe stands at the very top of his field and has proven that reviewers from all parts of our industry (including highly experienced hobbyists) can make a positive contribution if their biases and experience with components they are commenting on is made clear.

Tom Martin and I talked early on about sharing the listening room layout of our reviewers on video. I felt it would build more trust to see some of the detailed approaches our reviewers took to get a reference sound. Robert Harley‘s and Jacob Heilbrunn’s rooms are really impressive. By the way, a lot has changed since the photo of Harley’s room above.

 

[Lee]

Well, this thread has sort of devolved into a pissing contest... but getting back to Ron's original point:

I used to read TAS, Stereophile, etc. back in the 1980's to early 1990's. It was fun, informative, but also something I just never thought of as objective in the sense that say science journals attempt to be.

All humans have biases. We cannot escape them. That is why double-blind protocols were invented, why science papers get refereed blind, etc.

Is someone who buys a piece of gear less biased than one who is long-term loaned a piece of gear? I doubt it.

And of course the questions Ron raises leads to the bigger question: why bother with these old school outlets anymore? Neither TAS nor Stereophile nor any others are serious academic journals. They are, and always were, entertainment. (Someone mentioned Nelson Pass looking on this industry as such, yes?)

And of course the new school is video. People have already brought up Youtube. I'd rather watch a person's response to a piece of gear, and have them describe their experience, than read a story.

Of course there are problems with Youtube reviewers - just like with old-school reviewers. Someone here brought up Jay from Jay's Audio Lab. His channel is a channel for conspicuous consumption, a very American thing. I do not take his opinion highly, and his obsession with outrageously priced power cables ought to be a warning to anyone.

But there are other Youtubers out there who clearly know more. Guttenberg is clear that he gets loaner gear (and people raise that as an issue in comment to his videos.) Yet I still find his discussions often interesting. Audiophile Junkie brings videos of very high end products but he does not pretend to be a reviewer.

And we have plenty of online forums such as this one. Our fellow humans who go to the effort to post their own experiences are valuable. Their owner-biases are no doubt there, but don't we all expect that?

My personal view is that there is a customer buying cycle. Videos are good for building curiosity but print reviews are a longer term, deeper consideration analysis imho. I think ideally you need both. But then use the reviews to create a short list of gear to audition. I think TAS wins if we have the best of both worlds, print and digital.

 

[microstrip]

My personal view is that there is a customer buying cycle. Videos are good for building curiosity but print reviews are a longer term, deeper consideration analysis imho. I think ideally you need both. But then use the reviews to create a short list of gear to audition. I think TAS wins if we have the best of both worlds, print and digital.

Videos are mostly entertainment and a poor way of learning about gear or system building. A good printed article or review contains much more reliable and solid, easily accessible information than a video.

As far as I have seen, no one takes notes when seeing videos or sees them several times ...

 

[andromedaaudio]

I know at least one manufacturer who complained about being rich.

Lol its never good
I suppose its better to complain being rich then to complain being poor .
Usually rich people have made smart decisions along the way , id rather deal with a smart manufacturer then a dumb one

 

[andromedaaudio]

A smart reviewer would have a large enough home to store all those long term loans , plus do as much reviews as possible at 200 / 500 $ per review .

This creates an incentive off course to declare all new products as better / slightly better , because not doing so would put you out of review samples / business quit quickly i reckon

 

[the sound of Tao]

As far as I have seen, no one takes notes when seeing videos or sees them several times ...

Not everyone needs to Francisco… when it comes to recall some people are better at read and recall while others are better at listening and recalling. So some of us are better (and so enjoy) reading more and others are better at listening and so instruction from video can be preferred by some. When it comes to visual perception (graphics, symbols, diagrams etc) some people like to watch… but that is a story for a different day lol.

My read/write modality simply isn’t as strong as my listening and visual perception skills… even my kinaesthetic learning is generally less challenged than my read/write function. I’ve spent my whole life trying to get better at read/write but it’s an uphill battle.

None of these modes are necessarily an inherently better way of perception but they are just different modes of perceiving and most of us have a different mix of perceptual strengths and weaknesses. So a publisher who uses both written and video communication is making their content more successfully accessible to a greater number of people.

Reading the way some people write very complex sentences can feel for me more like (assumption) giving birth to a watermelon… without the anaesthetic .

Give me a good orator over a good writer any day. But better still it’s great to have access to both.