HP- Why I Quit the Absolute Sound or: Path to Personal Revelation

[mauidan]

http://www.hpsoundings.com/2013/04/why-i-quit-the-absolute-sound/

 

[dallasjustice]

I really don't like it when a business attempts to promote their business by discrediting another business. This happens in all industries. I have never purchased audio gear from a dealer that touts his product by insulting another manufacturer's product. In the case of HP, it's not surprising that his magazine changed after he sold it. My only surprise is that he claims he couldn't see it coming.

 

[Andre Marc]

I really don't like it when a business attempts to promote their business by discrediting another business. This happens in all industries. I have never purchased audio gear from a dealer that touts his product by insulting another manufacturer's product. In the case of HP, I think it's not surprising that his magazine changed after he sold it. My only surprise is that he claims he couldn't see it coming.

I generally agree with you. But many have long thought there was a distinct connection between advertising and reviews in TAS, which he explicitly states here.

John Atkinson has released public data that indicates that fully 50% of the reviews in Stereophile are from companies with no
ad space in the magazine.

 

[dallasjustice]

Why does that matter? Isn't the point of a business to make money? There's no need to nanny the so called "consumer"; the market will take care of that. People are smarter than you might think. If TAS sells out too much, then they will lose readers and others will take the TAS' place. There's no need to badmouth the competition. Why doesn't HP just focus on making his new website the best it can be and try to steal business away from TAS that way?

I generally agree with you. But many have long thought there was a distinct connection between advertising and reviews in TAS, which he explicitly states here.

John Atkinson has released public data that indicates that fully 50% of the reviews in Stereophile are from companies with no
ad space in the magazine.

 

[Priaptor]

I really don't like it when a business attempts to promote their business by discrediting another business. This happens in all industries. I have never purchased audio gear from a dealer that touts his product by insulting another manufacturer's product. In the case of HP, it's not surprising that his magazine changed after he sold it. My only surprise is that he claims he couldn't see it coming.

Funny as I read HP's missive, I had advertisements of equipment popping up to my right, all of which have earned stellar recommendations on his site.

In the old days, HP would write a real review and pull no punches. Over the last 10 years, his reviews have been little more than stream of consciousness with a promise of a followup which never come. I think HP may have had something to do with the descent of TAS

 

[Andre Marc]

Why does that matter? Isn't the point of a business to make money? There's no need to nanny the so called "consumer", the market will take care of that. People are smarter than you might think. If TAS sells out too much, then they will lose readers and others will take the TAS' place. There's no need to badmouth the competition. Why doesn't HP just focus on making his new website the best it can be and try to steal business away from TAS that way?

Again, agree.

Maybe the market has spoken. Stereophile does three times the circ numbers that TAS does.

I happen to think TAS has some great writers..Neal Gader, our own PB, Steven Stone. etc.

 

[dallasjustice]

Btw, I subscribe to TAS, Stereophile and Hifi Critic. TAS is my least trusted source of information about gear but I still read it anyway and take what they say with a grain of salt.

 

[Andre Marc]

Btw, I subscribe to TAS, Stereophile and Hifi Critic. TAS is my least trusted source of information about gear but I still read it anyway and take what they say with a grain of salt.

Explain why you think TAS is your "least trusted" source.....

 

[dallasjustice]

Explain why you think TAS is your "least trusted" source.....

Their little research experiments with bit perfect playback software claiming all manner of sound quality differences; Even claiming sound quality differences between flac and wav. This kind of nonsense knocked them down several notches in my eyes.

Then I got a look at some of the reviewers' rooms. Of course, this is a problem with most reviewers. For whatever reason, most reviewers don't have an acceptable listening room in which to make meaningful judgments. I have some opinions about why this is the case, but it doesn't really matter. The bottom line is that dealers and customers generally have a much greater incentive to correctly set their room up to optimize sound quality. Therefore, I thinks it's foolish to rely on any reviewer's impression about gear unless you know what that reviewer's room sounds like. The best place to make decisions on gear is in one's own home or at the dealer's place.

 

[Elliot G.]

Funny as I read HP's missive, I had advertisements of equipment popping up to my right, all of which have earned stellar recommendations on his site.

In the old days, HP would write a real review and pull no punches. Over the last 10 years, his reviews have been little more than stream of consciousness with a promise of a followup which never come. I think HP may have had something to do with the descent of TAS

The days of magazines being funded by paying readers ( a foolish notion to begin with) has long long since died. The problem with a poorly run business is that it ruins every thing and every principal is was founded with. I am not a fan of the review process for the last 25 years because of the use of it as a marketing tool rather than reporting. When so many companies are fighting for the pat on the back it and are seriously under-capitalized it leads to the state we now find ourselves in.
The situation now is one that is difficult to follow and trust. The motives are in question and the alliances as well. Who's zooming who?
A question to ponder Grasshopper

 

[Priaptor]

The way I see it, HP is really no different than any other reviewer who engages a company to place 100s of thousands of dollars worth of equipment into their homes for multiple months if not years. He has had the very same expensive equipment in his listening room for years really no different than those he criticizes in TAS. His current site has advertisements no different than TAS or any other, just less because his site is less mature. Truth is I am not sure what his point is in his essay.

I have no issue with a reviewer, particularly if they are part of a large organization picking a "reference system" against which all other gear can be compared, assuming, they or the company they work for pay for it. When they have these "extended" loaners, by definition, there is bias inserted into the equation. Alternatively, they should have this equipment for a limited time but then they lose the capability of a "reference system" against which all else can be compared.

 

[NorthStar]

The days of magazines being funded by paying readers ( a foolish notion to begin with) has long long since died. The problem with a poorly run business is that it ruins every thing and every principal is was founded with. I am not a fan of the review process for the last 25 years because of the use of it as a marketing tool rather than reporting. When so many companies are fighting for the pat on the back it and are seriously under-capitalized it leads to the state we now find ourselves in.
The situation now is one that is difficult to follow and trust. The motives are in question and the alliances as well. Who's zooming who?
A question to ponder Grasshopper

I pretty much agree with most part of your post (96.99%).

Today the world is different; the underground secrets of yesterday are finally revealed to the general masses.
...Simple technological evolution, and much quicker.

* I did not read the article yet, but I will.

EDIT: I just read his note (hospital and 'wind' of conscience). I'm not surprised; I've been reading Harry for as long as he's been writing. What I took the most from him, in all over those years, is 'The Music'.

"To lose something is to believe in an illusion, and to gain something we don't realize it till someone else find it." - Bob (me)

 

[Elliot G.]

I pretty much agree with most part of your post (96.99%).

Today the world is different; the underground secrets of yesterday are finally revealed to the general masses.
...Simple technological evolution, and much quicker.

* I did not read the article yet, but I will.

if you only disagree with 3.1 percent I can deal with that

 

[Andre Marc]

Their little research experiments with bit perfect playback software claiming all manner of sound quality differences; Even claiming sound quality differences between flac and wav. This kind of nonsense knocked them down several notches in my eyes.

Then I got a look at some of the reviewers' rooms. Of course, this is a problem with most reviewers. For whatever reason, most reviewers don't have an acceptable listening room in which to make meaningful judgments. I have some opinions about why this is the case, but it doesn't really matter. The bottom line is that dealers and customers generally have a much greater incentive to correctly set their room up to optimize sound quality. Therefore, I thinks it's foolish to rely on any reviewer's impression about gear unless you know what that reviewer's room sounds like. The best place to make decisions on gear is in one's own home or at the dealer's place.

Yes, I thought those computer audio articles were preposterous too.

I agree that to rely on one reviewers impression is not the way to go. I think the best thing audio magazines and websites do is to
help create product awareness. But hearing is believing.

 

[edorr]

Yes, I thought those computer audio articles were preposterous too.

Those articles were a complete joke .....

 

[Elliot G.]

I think that too many want a permission slip to enjoy the gear they like to look at or too ratify the buying decision they made or are making. Like many things in life a tour guide in a strange place is of great benefit. In this Industry it seems it is mostly ignored. My advise find some other interested parties and listen if you really want to educate yourself. If you cant set up great sound yourself then find someone who can. In most cases I have encountered the owners are searching for mysteries without any clues. I believe that is why they seek permission to like what they have in a reviewer they agree with.
Magico owners love Valin, Wilson owners Harley etc. This is not the facts or the truth just an opinion and you know what they say about them.

 

[NorthStar]

if you only disagree with 3.1 percent I can deal with that

That was just a 'figure', of speech and also of measurement. ...Just so that agreeing 100% with someone's else opinion seems just too perfect, and perfect is the last thing we all are, and different is certainly our uniqueness. :b

 

[Elliot G.]

Speak for yourself LOL

 

[still-one]

Yes, I thought those computer audio articles were preposterous too.

I agree that to rely on one reviewers impression is not the way to go. I think the best thing audio magazines and websites do is to
help create product awareness. But hearing is believing.

I agree with you regarding reviews and product awareness. Rather than use a review to determine whether a product sounds good or bad to someone else, I read them to understand the design, build and capabilities of a product.

Also, the days of reading a poor or scathing review in a print magazine are long gone in the litigious society.

 

[NorthStar]

Speak for yourself LOL

I was. ...Are you an audio dealer?