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

[Mike Lavigne]

How does the business model of Consumer Reports work without advertising? There must be some big publisher backing them somehow.

Consumer Reports is wholey supported by subscriptions and contributions. no advertising or corporate sponsorships. they won't even respond to questions.

which does not make them always correct or even qualified to recommend anything.

but they are independant....and not 'soiled'.

personally i have less than zero use for Consumer Reports. but they are what they say they are. they are typically kind to the products i sell, for whatever that is worth. i still have no use for them.

 

[microstrip]

By comparison, somehow automotive magazines manage (at least some of them) to do pretty thorough reviews and tests of performance cars. They may not do completely negative reviews, but they often do comparisons which will be pretty plainspoken, not only about measurable specs, but handling, driving experience, tactile aspects, reviewer preferences, etc. Unless it is simply the size of the ad budget of Porsche compared to Wilson, or the size of the readership, I'm not sure why car magazines can successfully pull this off and audio magazines cannot.

Whart,

I think this is a unfair and misleading comparison. We should not mix cars and audio.

Current audio standards are very incomplete and do not reflect real performance, the main objectives of the stereo audio industry are not clear to consumers (even to WBF readers ), there is not an established agreement on the interpretation of measured data. And in this particular case you refer a car is tested as an unit - pieces of audio equipment are tested in systems. BTW, in all car magazines I have seen, besides the objective comments on performance, the subjective appreciations are strongly biased, variable and non reliable. Not better than in audio, IMHO.

Although both are nice for entertainment, I only buy car magazines when I need to buy a car to get price lists. The only similitude between car and audio magazines is than they always show a picture in the cover of the most expensive item they refer in the issue.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Whart,

I think this is a unfair and misleading comparison. We should not mix cars and audio.

Current audio standards are very incomplete and do not reflect real performance, the main objectives of the stereo audio industry are not clear to consumers (even to WBF readers ), there is not an established agreement on the interpretation of measured data. And in this particular case you refer a car is tested as an unit - pieces of audio equipment are tested in systems. BTW, in all car magazines I have seen, besides the objective comments on performance, the subjective appreciations are strongly biased, variable and non reliable. Not better than in audio, IMHO.

Although both are nice for entertainment, I only buy car magazines when I need to buy a car to get price lists. The only similitude between car and audio magazines is than they always show a picture in the cover of the most expensive item they refer in the issue.

car magazine reviewers/testers make audio reviewers look like saints in terms of independance. lots of consultant work from car companies. obviously plenty of ad dollars too.

but car mags have little influence in the marketplace either. so no harm, no foul.

 

[microstrip]

(...) Harry is a wonderful writer and a great listener who taught many of us a lot but as a business man he failed miserably.
There is plenty of blame to go around for many of the issues that exist today but IMHO there are no innocent parties PERIOD!

IMHO, an excellent summary.

 

[still-one]

Excellent point about the car magazines.

They seem to be able to do a LOT of things audio mags won't do..which is direct comparisons, thorough reviews etc.

I think it comes down to the fact that most car manufacturers are giant corporations, many of them faceless, and even if you are talking about Ferrari or Lambo, their
production runs are sold out way in advance, so getting dinged in Road&Track is like a flea on an elephant.

The fact is, as you noted, the high end is littered with companies who employ less people than Ford employs in their corporate cafeteria.
Way to easy to offend and cause hurt feelings with direct comparisons. And way too much politics.

Hi Fi News does direct comparisons in every issue. Maybe not thorough but direct.

 

[Bruce B]

but car mags have little influence in the marketplace either. so no harm, no foul.

I think Consumer Reports has a large influence on the general public when choosing the right vehicle.

I was a subscriber of Stereophile back when they were in digest form. I read every one of them from cover to cover (more than onece) because I enjoyed the writing and felt the reviews had some teeth.

Now when I get TAS or Stereophile in the mail I may read one review and an article to two, but then it gets tossed in the trash.... not like the old days!

 

[Mike Lavigne]

I think Consumer Reports has a large influence on the general public when choosing the right vehicle.

I was a subscriber of Stereophile back when they were in digest form. I read every one of them from cover to cover (more than onece) because I enjoyed the writing and felt the reviews had some teeth.

Now when I get TAS or Stereophile in the mail I may read one review and an article to two, but then it gets tossed in the trash.... not like the old days!

i do not consider Consumer Reports to be a 'Car Mag' in any way. it's a thing unto it's own. i agree it has influence with a certain segment of buyers.

when i say 'Car Mag' i'm referring to enthusiast magazines; Car & Driver, Road & Track, Autoweek, Motor Trend, etc.

 

[amirm]

I was reading the blog and I thought for sure he was going to say to take a break from sitting and listening to music all the time and exercise as to not have a heart attack. Oh well.

 

[Elliot G.]

ElliotG:

I have always enjoyed your "battles" with Mr. Valin!

thanks me too

 

[audioguy]

Consumer Reports is wholey supported by subscriptions and contributions. no advertising or corporate sponsorships. they won't even respond to questions.

which does not make them always correct or even qualified to recommend anything.

but they are independant....and not 'soiled'.

personally i have less than zero use for Consumer Reports. but they are what they say they are. they are typically kind to the products i sell, for whatever that is worth. i still have no use for them.

I do use them to look at reliability and operational issues for things like vacuum cleaners, washers and dryers, etc. Don't need them often but they do provide me value when necessary.

 

[mep]

you missed my point. which was that HP is wrong to be pointing fingers at others. he borrows gear long term and is then obligated to deliver value for value. no different than advertising......only that instead of ad dollars it's the value of the long term loaned gear which has influence.

if he wants 'cover' from influence and the right to cast negative comments then he needs to own his own long term reference gear. it is important for a reviewer to have references, but if someone loaned it then it comes with 'pre-conditions' and that affects the reviews. i'm not suggesting 'pre-conditions' are formal, or even spoken about. but they exist non-the-less.

i'm not saying i personally have a problem with advertising, or long term loans, or any of it.......simply because i don't place undo value on what is being written. it's entertainment with information......not any ultimate truth.

but HP is simply writing sour grapes.....and it's sad....is all.

maybe you think because he's HP he has a right to long-term loan of gear and we should ignore the effect of it. i guess we disagree about that then.

btw; do i agree with HP about certain speaker companies and Absolute Sound?.....of course i do. but really....who cares. i don't. but reviewers should stay out of the dialog on that subject.....IMHO.

I don't think any reviewer has a "right" to long-term loans of gear, but I do think it's nice when they have a reference system that stays consistent for some length of time. In a perfect world, all reviewers would own all of their gear. I know that Myles has clearly stated that he owns (and paid for) all of his gear. I wish that was the norm and not the exception. I don't think that many of us buy into the theory that every month the SOTA advances greatly and the new kid on the monthly audio block is now the greatest piece of audio gear in history.

 

[Elliot G.]

I don't think any reviewer has a "right" to long-term loans of gear, but I do think it's nice when they have a reference system that stays consistent for some length of time. In a perfect world, all reviewers would own all of their gear. I know that Myles has clearly stated that he owns (and paid for) all of his gear. I wish that was the norm and not the exception. I don't think that many of us buy into the theory that every month the SOTA advances greatly and the new kid on the monthly audio block is now the greatest piece of audio gear in history.

they need the newest and latest to generate new revenue streams. Its hard to take any reviewer seriously that has not listened to the companies by which the standards have been developed. I mean by that when the reviewers have not heard the current gear from ARC, Wilson, Magico, CJ, dCS, MSB, Krell, Transparent, Nordost etc, then its hard to believe the review on new gear that has no history.
I am so sick of the RH type reviews of this is the "best" front cover, factory tour blah blah blah. Its just to obvious to me whats going on

 

[Bill Hart]

Whart,

I think this is a unfair and misleading comparison. We should not mix cars and audio.

Current audio standards are very incomplete and do not reflect real performance, the main objectives of the stereo audio industry are not clear to consumers (even to WBF readers ), there is not an established agreement on the interpretation of measured data. And in this particular case you refer a car is tested as an unit - pieces of audio equipment are tested in systems. BTW, in all car magazines I have seen, besides the objective comments on performance, the subjective appreciations are strongly biased, variable and non reliable. Not better than in audio, IMHO.

Although both are nice for entertainment, I only buy car magazines when I need to buy a car to get price lists. The only similitude between car and audio magazines is than they always show a picture in the cover of the most expensive item they refer in the issue.

Micro- your point about cars being a complete commercial 'unit' vs hi-fi gear as components is a fair distinction when it comes to the magazines reviewing these products. But, I can no more tell how a car 'drives' and 'feels' by reading the technical description than i can determine how a piece of gear sounds by looking at the specs, so I think the reviewer's description of the driving experience, subjective and biased as it may be, is valuable. Some reviews captured the experience very well, e.g. the old Car magazine reviews and comparisons of the Lambo Countach vs. the Berlinetta Boxer. But, my main point was that the magazines weren't afraid to be critical in comparing the merits of high performance cars.

 

[audioguy]

Most reviewers post their reference system along with each review. What would be as or more helpful would be a diagram of their listening space, with dimensions as well as some photos to show the kinds of furnishing, room treatments (if any) etc that are part of the listening experience.

I recall a review (I think in Stereophile) many, many years ago by the guy that was the director of the National Symphony Orchestra (Lipnick??). He was reviewing these ginormous B&W speakers (the 800 series with something that looked like pointy things on the top of the cabinets pointing inward). He kept talking about the wonderful bass and then there was a picture of this tiny, tiny room with 7 foot ceilings (just above the speakers) and it was immediately clear that he could have NO idea of what the real bass abilities of that speaker was in his closet sized listening space. All further reviews by him I totally ignored.

 

[mep]

I do believe that TAS was the first mag that had each reviewer detail by drawings their room dimensions and list their reference gear and list their personal biases so that everyone could understand where they were coming from. Too bad none of this is done today. We now have too many fluff reviews written by reviewers.

 

[MylesBAstor]

I do believe that TAS was the first mag that had each reviewer detail by drawings their room dimensions and list their reference gear and list their personal biases so that everyone could understand where they were coming from. Too bad none of this is done today. We now have too many fluff reviews written by reviewers.

That's actually not quite true. If you go to http://positive-feedback.com/staff.htm, you'll see we have a page listing every reviewers system and what in the system is actually owned and what is on loan.

I think Stereophile also lists reviewers gear in a separate box in the review. Might be mistaken there.

 

[audioguy]

I'm still waiting to read a review of some piece of audio gear in TAS or Stereophile that contains the equivalent of: "compared to other and similar products at this price point, this product isn't worth the sheet metal it's fabricated from. Save your money and look elsewhere".

Their grading scale seems to be a bell curve shifted almost completely to the right. Sort of like a class with 30 students where 28 of them get A's or B's, 2 get C's and no one EVER fails. Life is not like that and neither is audio equipment but you'd never know it from reading the main street mags.

And the response the magazines provide when queried about the above is always: "we don't review products that we believe to be inferior [or that don't provide advertising revenue to us]" P U L E E E Z E !!!

Just sayin'

If one reads the magazines for entertainment exclusively and pays no real attention to the reviewer's opinion (with, in my case, a couple of exceptions), then I find them worth the investment. I still love to look through the magazines but ignore the reviews. HiFi PLUS with easily the best photographers is almost worth full time residence on the coffee table.

 

[garylkoh]

If you need a reference system and cannot afford to keep one in your home, then go ye to the symphony more often. That way there is no possible way to be considered as "in the pocket" of your current favorite manufacturer, at least IMHO.

+1

I don't see why any reviewer needs to have a "reference system". If he/she does, then their reviews will be benchmarked against that reference system - good, bad or ugly.

Go to the symphony, the local jazz club, listen to kids practice in school. In Bellevue, the Crossroads mall has free live music at least 3 times a week! With my 11 yr old daughter learning the cello, I've begun to have an even greater appreciation of the textures and timbre of sound in the upper bass region.

 

[garylkoh]

One of my favourite magazines is Cooks Illustrated - no ads, good paper, and very good objective writing. They've managed to survive purely on subscriptions. The iPad on-line subscription is also worth having. I think that their reviews are second to none, and I have no problem buying a product just on their say-so.

http://www.cooksillustrated.com/

 

[Bill Hart]

One of my favourite magazines is Cooks Illustrated - no ads, good paper, and very good objective writing. They've managed to survive purely on subscriptions. The iPad on-line subscription is also worth having. I think that their reviews are second to none, and I have no problem buying a product just on their say-so.

http://www.cooksillustrated.com/

You are right. We subscribed for a good while- I'm not much of a cook, my wife is, but i enjoyed reading that publication.