The Absurdity of Some Recent Audio Reviews in Stereophile.

[brianherlihy]

First a confession, i am really horrible at putting multiple quotes into a post (I run a communications company but seem to be ICT challenged - Amir, maybe i can get a tutorial one of these days). Second - this has been a wonderful thread and i will come back to the most important post, which Steve put up and has been completely overlooked.

magazines in the UK that 'tell it like it is' fare no better than magazines that pre-select the best products before reviewing.

-

Alan - If you are to look at all industries (not just audio) I would have to disagree. Top Gear from the UK has turned reviewing upside down. Granted the audience is ten million times larger than high end audio, but they told it how it is and now the industry is forced to let them review all their cars because their impact on the audience is just too important (don't let them review and they tell everyone - this company is afraid their product is not good enough for us to review) I think they proved that the audience will pay for honesty.

Marty, b/c of my inability to put multiple quotes into a section, I must just say I tend to agree with you a lot and look forward to meeting you some day.

With the beginning of this thread, I think there are two realities we are dealing with - 1) the major reviewers are now all sitting with $250k+ systems 'on loan' and i think the Cary CD review is polite but will never elicit the excitement deserved (or not deserved) because it is overshadowed by what is sitting in Fremer's listening room and 2) I am finding that you have to read between the lines with these guys. They all have their unique way of saying - I wouldn't buy this product if i were you, but advertising policy insists that my Conclusion states Recommend.

Now, back to the important part of this thread. We all agree on the power of online forums in general: whether buying cars, appliances, restaurant reviews, or whatever, it is the input of the masses that gives us a perspective we can follow. Steve and Amir founded this forum on these principles and about three or four pages ago, Steve stated that there will be a section of this forum for personal reviews. I think this is absolutely fabulous. I actually believe that as a collective group we can gather more empirical data than any other site online. Between our own means and those of our forum members, we probably have the ability (or can have a friend come by in close proximity) to measure our systems (i for one am a novice at taking measurements but I live close to Myles and will certainly invite him over to listen when my renovations are done). Second, we are all biased towards our own systems, I think as a forum we can all do what TAS will never do and have members listen to our systems, make comments, give input on rooms, etc. i know this is tough as no one wants to criticize a friend's system, but I am sure we can devise some objective inputs to better understand a greater spectrum of equipment. Steve and Amir, i am sure there are some sensitivities in doing this but I also think it could achieve a real step forward for high end audio.

FYI - I just received the Magico Q5 - i had to bring them in with the appliances via a crane - i have a video which i will post when i get home from Africa.

 

[FrantzM]

Well, one could argue that simply mentioning that 600 ohm resistor is a conclusion in and of itself. I mean, if you were in the market for an $80k loudspeaker, I'm pretty sure JA's aside about inserting that resistor would have an influence on your shortlist selection process.

And One would have lost that argument ... That is beyond a tweak.. That is a modification of a component and that should not be part of the review process ... That is similar to modifying some paragraphs in a novel to make it better ... not the role of the reviewer ...
Admitting that review wasn't good would be a first step ..

Now about your inference on 220m apt ... Are these markets really similar ... Granted , there might a certain cachet , even prestige in owning expensive equipment .. that cachet doesn't hold long when a less expensive model or systems, trash your expensive gears or that you can't hear , honestly and reliably the differences between your $30 K cable and a $100 one reliably ... Whereas one with a 220m apt still leaves where common mortals can't ... with amenities the common mortal doesn't have ..etc, etc.. status , indeed ...benefits.. almost certain ...
Do you really think that what goes on in Audio could have passed in video? Where progress is almost constant? Where every year (almost) brings substantially better products? At lower costs?

 

[mep]

I need to say something here. I have repeatedly read in this thread the assertion that no one buys something they don't listen to first. That is simply not true for those of us who don't live somewhere that has a few high-end audio stores to visit. And if I am in that boat, I'm sure others are too. And even if you could go to a high-end store and listen to something you were interested in buying, that is no guarantee that it will sound the same in your house and your system. The only way to know if you are going to like a component over the long haul is to listen to it in your system.

When I want to upgrade a component, I do read as many reviews of the contender replacement as possible. I read to see if there are common threads/thoughts on the performance that will either put it in contention or take it out of the running. Most importantly, I need to know if I have return privileges or if I can buy it "right" so that if I don't like it, I can sell it and make my money back. A recent example: I was looking to replace my beloved Counterpoint SA-5.1/SA-2 combo. I wanted a preamp that would not give up any of the good qualities I had while at the same time giving me some other qualities/features that I didn't have. And so I bought a Mcintosh C-2300 preamp. HP gave it a rave review in TAS. It is a tube preamp that uses six 12AX7 tubes. It has XLR inputs (though it is not a truly balanced preamp) and RCA inputs. It has a MC and MM phono section with adjustable loading from the remote control. It looks kind of cool in a garish sort of way with at least 3 different colors of back lighting that don't mesh too well. Anyway, I bought the preamp with return rights minus shipping. The salesman was actually Frank Gow, son of Gordon Gow, one of the founders of Mcintosh. Frank is a great guy to work with. I wanted to love this preamp and boot the Counterpoints down the road. The C-2300 didn't work out in my system. It sounded like a SS preamp in that it was thin and sterile-no meat on the bones. And I don't want to start a SS vs. tube rant here. The phono section sound robbed the life out of LPs. The only way I could make it sound half decent was to use my SA-2 and plug it into the MM side of the C-2300. Yes, the signal to noise ratio was better than my Counterpoints, but the music was killed somewhere in between. I sent it back and was only out my shipping costs. Frank Gow told me that he wasn't surprised that I didn't like it better than my SA-5.1 and he thought it would take a more expensive preamp to beat it and that would mean stepping up to one of McIntosh’s truly balanced preamps.

So, here I am again still looking for a replacement for my Counterpoints. I have purchased a brand new Atma-Sphere MP-3 directly from Ralph Karsten sight unseen and sound un-heard. Ralph has just made some changes to the MP-3 and I will have one of the first units. It has a new volume control ($750) and better voltage regulation. It should be here next week. I hope it trounces my Counterpoints. The reviews of this preamp have all been very good-at least the ones that I have seen. Ralph doesn't build audio jewelry. Atma-Sphere products look like old military gear-specially their power amps with the big jewel lamps and the front label plate that looks like the nomenclature plate that is installed on all military hardware. The preamp is truly balanced, it has a MC phono section reputed to be very good, and it is all tubes with the exception of the power supply. It has no remote control and it retails for more money than the C-2300. The other contender I was looking at was the Janus preamp. Like the Mcintosh, the Janus has all of the bells and whistles and then some. Line stage, phono stage, truly balanced, remote control that will do everything except fetch you a beer. It was available from Sound by Singer at a going out of business price of $3995-very tempting. MF in SP had mentioned before that he liked the line stage that was part of the Janus as a standalone unit and he like the phono stage that was part of the Janus as a standalone unit; he just didn't like them when used together. The story goes that the Janus was conceived due to a request from Musical Surroundings. The bottom line is that I passed on the unit because I was afraid it was going to be another Swiss army knife like the C-2300.

In summary, some of us are forced to buy components without hearing them first because we really have no other choice. And as I pointed out earlier, if you can't hear a component in your system before you buy it, you really don't know if you are going to like it or not anyway. Because of this, reviews of gear that you are contemplating buying can be somewhat helpful. However, I did send an email to HP to let him know that I didn't like the C-2300. It might have sounded great in Sea Cliff, but I would have preferred to throw it off a cliff. Again, I hope I love the Atma-Sphere. We will see.

Mark

 

[kach22i]

I need to say something here. I have repeatedly read in this thread the assertion that no one buys something they don't listen to first. That is simply not true .........

You are right, and I have no idea how one would audition something like a phono cartridge.

The surface noise my Grado Sonata picked up lead me to all sorts of turntable modifications which I do not regret. Hidden in the review which sold me on it was the line which said something like; however there are other cartridges which pick up less surface noise. That line was hidden in three pages of praise, along with the line; takes a couple of LP's to really warm up. In my experience I often only get to play one or two LP's at a time, so by the time it's sounding sweet the session is over. It's a great cartridge, few regrets but next time I need to buy one I will be reading between the lines more carefully.

 

[Alan Sircom]

And One would have lost that argument ... That is beyond a tweak.. That is a modification of a component and that should not be part of the review process ... That is similar to modifying some paragraphs in a novel to make it better ... not the role of the reviewer ...
Admitting that review wasn't good would be a first step ..

I am on shaky ground given I haven't either seen the product or the review, but here goes anyway:

How is this different from saying "this is an excellent, if flawed product... and here's how you cure the flaw?" The price of the product is a factor in this - that at $80k you shouldn't have a product with a 'flaw' - at nearly $600k, you shouldn't have a supercar with an engine management system that cannot cope with city traffic without flooding the engine, but my trader friend has just that. And yes, that fact was conveniently skipped over in the rave review from Top Gear.

Here's the thing. The Top Gear review focused on how amazing the car looks (agreed), how fast it is when whizzing round a disused airport (agreed... probably) and how great one of the presenters thinks he looks when he parks it outside of an expensive coffee shop (er...). And the car is all these things and more. But it's deeply and fundamentally flawed; in the city, it can hardly cross 'sleeping policemen' speed calming measures, it stalls and the engine floods when nose-to-tail driving round town and it is so low you get a nice view of cyclist's knees. All of which makes it a deeply flawed and impractical car for round town driving. And yet, he loves it.

The point of this is this, if on balance the product deserved recommending, then on balance it deserved recommending. I have seen motoring reviews (Top Gear once again) where the car has been criticized for being unreliable, poorly constructed, with panels that don't fit and shut-lines that don't shut, how other cars are faster, more economical, more comfortable and just better in every way... and yet still win the day. Perhaps this is the case here, it gets recommendation in spite of the tweeter issue. Perhaps if you or I had heard this product, we might be able to hear just why it does or does not deserve that recommendation. Without it, it's all so much empty rhetoric and guess-work. Maybe, after all this loudspeaker is the Lamborghini Countach of the loudspeaker world; wrong, but beautifully wrong.


And most novels are edited by a third party. That's what an editor does. The clue is in the job title.

Now about your inference on 220m apt ... Are these markets really similar ... Granted , there might a certain cachet , even prestige in owning expensive equipment .. that cachet doesn't hold long when a less expensive model or systems, trash your expensive gears or that you can't hear , honestly and reliably the differences between your $30 K cable and a $100 one reliably ... Whereas one with a 220m apt still leaves where common mortals can't ... with amenities the common mortal doesn't have ..etc, etc.. status , indeed ...benefits.. almost certain ...
Do you really think that what goes on in Audio could have passed in video? Where progress is almost constant? Where every year (almost) brings substantially better products? At lower costs?

I think the market for ultra-high-end products is more or less the same whatever kind of ultra-high-end product you supply. Yes, the product has to perform its given task well, but the exclusivity that very high prices bring is a very significant factor in the selection of products. Given that something like a $50k Vertu cellphone lacks much of the functionality of any good modern smartphone, or that a $650k Jules Audemars Grand Complication keeps slightly worse time than a $10 Timex, performance in absolute terms is secondary to other considerations.

Set in this light, super-high-end audio does extremely well, because much of it delivers excellent performance as well. Forget cables for the moment (they can be considered contextual, as it seems unlikely that someone would spank down $30k on cables without $300k's worth of system to go with it in many cases), but there is an continuum. A c-j GAT sounds better than a c-j ET2, which sounds better than a c-j Classic. Similarly, the DarTZeel NHB-458 monos sound better than the NHB-108 stereo, a dCS Scarlatti stack sounds better than a Paganini stack and that's better than a Puccini two-boxer. The same applies in many product lines. Of these, DarTZeel makes the case for me. The difficulty a company like DarTZeel faces is what do you do to make the NHB-108 better? Making a mono version improves matters, but not enough to justify the two boxes and the two box price. So you design a product that raises the performance beyond that already achieved by your own product. Suddenly, you have a product that offers genuinely better sound, but at an astronomic price tag. In the past, such products would have stayed on the test bench, but now there seems to be a small market for these extravaganza products.

Mere mortals can hear the difference such a product can deliver. Unfortunately, mere mortals - including this mortal - can't do that every day because the product is desperately expensive. But the differences are there. And in some of these cases the law of diminishing returns simply does not apply - those DarTZeel monos, for example, are not slightly better than the '108; the change is as significant and substantial as you would expect in paying something like five times as much. The improvement in performance a c-j GAT has over an ET2 is far larger than the jump between an ET2 and a Classic.

Could I justify the increase in price between a NHB-458 and an NHB-108? Absolutely not, and that's why I think the 'owners make the best reviewers' concept has a few plot holes worth exploring. If I earned perhaps $750k per year or more, I would have no qualms in saying the jump in performance between the two products is justified. I like the 108 and I like the 458 a whole lot more. But my cash book doesn't go that deep. So, the justification question alters whether you are asking me or my bank account. Compare this response to the one I would give if we were talking about the difference between the Electrocompaniet Nemo and the smaller AW400. Once again I don't think the price differential between the Nemo and AW400 is justified, but this time that applies irrespective of bank account health - I think the smaller mono amp is the better of the two.

You should read a review for the voracity (edit: veracity... that's one hell of a Freudian slip) of the findings of that reviewer, not on the size of his wallet.

As to video, the single most expensive system I have ever, ever encountered was a video installation. Exactly the same thing goes on in video as it does in audio. There's good low end stuff and then there's dictator-grade equipment, with not a lot in between. Just as in audio, there is a vast jump in performance between the two and just as in audio, the hole in the middle means those who used to be into the idea of getting better equipment over time are less well served than they used to be.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I need to say something here. I have repeatedly read in this thread the assertion that no one buys something they don't listen to first. That is simply not true for those of us who don't live somewhere that has a few high-end audio stores to visit. And if I am in that boat, I'm sure others are too.

I suspect many people are in that same boat. Let's face the reality here: The 2-channel market is shrinking. Lots of "high-end" stores disappeared before the economy hit the wall. Many more are disappearing now. And many more are morphing into audio/video/home automation/installation stores with ever-shrinking audio offerings. If you're in a major metro with a couple of dozen traditional or more "high-end" audio stores, and you're looking for a new DAC, you may be able to spend a months worth of weekends driving around the city and its suburbs and hear 25% of what is regularly discussed on just a handful of internet boards. Here? I could drive all over the state and probably not hear 10%.

Auditioning "high-end" audio in person is simply no longer practical for most people. That's just a reality.

The only alternative is to read reviews, read customer feedback on the internet, and, most important IMO -- familiarize ourselves with companies, their products and their design/product development/marketing approaches. Analog or digital focus, a bang-for-the-buck vs. no compromise (and specifically what they mean by that), upgrade paths, and, yes, measurements...these things will tell you much about a company's approach, the kind of equipment they design and whether or not it is a good fit to your needs and beliefs. I have never heard a Bryston amp, for example, but from everything I know about their design approach and company philosophy, I'll bet I'd like them. If I needed an amp for a passive system, I'd be pretty comfortable buying one used (so I could recover most of my $ if it didn't work out) or through an internet outlet that offers a trial period and return for the cost of return shipping. On the other side, I know from what they promote, propose and produce, that the folks at Naim and I just don't believe in the same things or have the same audio goals. I would never order anything from them sound unheard.

The approach works for me. YMMV.

P

 

[Alan Sircom]

Alan - If you are to look at all industries (not just audio) I would have to disagree. Top Gear from the UK has turned reviewing upside down. Granted the audience is ten million times larger than high end audio, but they told it how it is and now the industry is forced to let them review all their cars because their impact on the audience is just too important (don't let them review and they tell everyone - this company is afraid their product is not good enough for us to review) I think they proved that the audience will pay for honesty.

My feelings on Top Gear do not match yours. The audience pay for entertainment, not information. They wouldn't spend so long trying to drown 20 year old Toyota pick-up trucks and setting fire to caravans if they did. As to the reviews, surely the recent 'group test' of the Aston Martin Rapide, Porsche Panamera and Maserati Quattroporte shows the limits of that. OK, the whole 'wedding chauffeur' part was entertaining, but which one came bottom of all the tests - the one they picked as the best of the lot.

It's a great programme, excellent entertainment and makes other motoring programmes seem hopelessly out of date. But it does that because it tweaks the review process to limit the amount of actual review and max out on the fun factor and the expensive photos.

-

In other news, hope you like the Q5s. They more than live up to the hype. I don't think there's a better speaker on the planet at this time, IMO.

 

[Alan Sircom]

I have never heard a Bryston amp, for example, but from everything I know about their design approach and company philosophy, I'll bet I'd like them. If I needed an amp for a passive system, I'd be pretty comfortable buying one used (so I could recover most of my $ if it didn't work out) or through an internet outlet that offers a trial period and return for the cost of return shipping. On the other side, I know from what they promote, propose and produce, that the folks at Naim and I just don't believe in the same things or have the same audio goals. I would never order anything from them sound unheard.

The approach works for me. YMMV.

P

How do you know this works for you? Or is this really just a "I've never tried oysters because I don't like oysters because I've never tried oysters" viciously circular argument that I'm not supposed to expose to sunlight?

 

[Gregadd]

In other news, hope you like the Q5s. They more than live up to the hype. I don't think there's a better speaker on the planet at this time, IMO.

Now that is worth the price of a subscription. BTW YG Acoustics makes a credible claim to that position. We should know their is a difference between a reviewer and a consultant.

I don't think anyone suggests we should buy a magazine knowing we should ignore the advice. If that's the case, why not ignore the whole magazine

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Yes, I knew that when I wrote it, no-one (esp the level of gear under discussion here) would buy without an audition.

Actually, what I said was that I would not buy without an audition. No one should buy without an audition but that is not always possible as others have pointed out. So, as much description/analysis (and, if possible, measurements) as you can get is desirable.

What I meant was, the reviews themsleves provide no differentiation if they are 'all class A.' So, we cannot even use the reviews to narrow down the files of twenty items, as they are all equally good.

Assigning quantitative grades to products which often differ less in quality than in sonic style/flavor is difficult and thorny.

 

[FrantzM]

Alan

That people buy something , does not constitute a proof of the quality or lack of such… There will always be highly priced products whose sole performance claim is the difficulty to acquire them.. One can point toward the relatively rise of "celebrities" whose only claim to that coveted fate is ..nothing... They are celebrities.. simply for being so .. Very weird… The list is long and people buy products with their name-tags happily ... People do what they want and its their money if a $600K car has a deficient engine management control it is not good on that term … period .. That people buys it change NOTHING... It remains bad ...
To get to your car example aside from the simple status symbol .. In cars the field has leveled considerably and it could be argued that a Maseratti remains a nice car to have but most likely would have its behind thoroughly whooped by some modest-pedestrian named cars in all aspects of sports cars performance .. An example is the Nissan GT-R whose performance are squarely in the upper echelon while costing less than $100 K .., … So yes one buys a Maseratti and it has the nice exhaust sound tuned to attract women, etc but when it come to put the pedal to the metal …. one better be careful with one of these lowly Subary WRX STI ..

Back to Audio .. I haven’t heard the Dar Tzeel monos , I have heard their little brothers and these are excellent amps … Whether the monos are audibly superior is left to audition, notice I did not mention blind audition … It still doesn’t mean that it would sound better than a 5 K amp .. The DCs top of the line is not a priori better than a Weiss Minerva or a Playback Design DAC by the simple virtue of being more expensive … On watch .. The Luxury factor is the sole claim … The overriding claim … Is that the same for High End Audio ? If it is so … Then let’s simply find the most expensive component and anoint it the best … In line would be the Wavac amplifiers at $350 K and the Cat MBX at 1.4 millions … Do you really think they would sound better than several less than 50 K components? … Actually I would have the tendency to think that their sound may be surpassed by numerous 50 K combinations.. but there, I am going on a priori and have no way to back this up but … it ., well , could be , I doubt there is a $50 K car that can beat the Bugatti Veyron but I digress … So let’s not go on the Audio does extremely well here ..

Video? Have you been following video? Video performance is not too far from what we are seeing with PCs... It becomes obsolete as soon as you install it … I have seen my Sony Ruby trounced by the less expensive JVC RS-2... People with SIM HT-5000 will quickly tell you that the Lumis is its superior and there again the Lumis is less dear...
That a person whose annual income is higher than most countries GDP decides he/she wants to buy the most expensive video system and have his/her (rarely to never) used “Home” theater designed by Theo Kalamaris (not my cup of tea), complete with gold leaf inserts, cashmere curtains and Oriental hand-woven alpaca wool carpet is ok .. The projection system is likely to be obsolete one year after installation... even if its performances were good to start with... not a given …

Back to reviews … I now live in the USA. When I was in my country, I had to rely on reviews and I have bought a few products sight unseen ( Graham Arm, Lyra, Koetsu cartridges, Basis TT, Nordost cables, Sony Ruby, JVC RS-2, Stewart Screen, etc).. In many instances I was pleased... I recently moved away from the cable audiophile view … to be polite the differences are very, very, very subtle... so subtle that …reliability of observations becomes a factor …

At the end the questions remains of what should be the purpose of a magazine review? In itself a review by a person versed in the area of review is a good thing... A lack of committal conclusion is not

 

[Alan Sircom]

Despite it all, people buy status products for the perceived status they bestow upon the person who bought them. And in some parts of the planet, hi-fi remains a high-status purchase. But I disagree the motoring field has leveled. Those who buy cars for their status still buy the same top brands that the last generation bought, hot Scoobies and Mitsi Evos notwithstanding. The luxury car selling points are the exclusivity, the implied wealth, etc, etc.

This applies to some of the buyers of the upper echelon of audio products. It does not necessarily apply to the products they buy.

I think one of the problems with ultra-high-end audio is the products are often developed in isolation. If a designer tries to improve substantially on the performance of his existing product, an 'if you build it, they will come' mentality can quickly rationalize a product that costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. Up to a point, this isn't a problem, because if you build it, they do come, albeit in small numbers. Sometimes though, just how good that product ultimately is might not be determined until it is out on sale. In a few cases, this has led to a designer producing their masterwork in their own workshop, only to find it's effectively unsalable. This is rare, and the more canny manufacturers know the works of their rivals.

Having performed many auditions with people - sighted and blind - the one thing I can say with surety is people have different tastes. And were you to demonstrate what you consider to be the best and the worst amps you can think of under similar conditions, some people will consistently and repeatedly choose the best amp as the one they could live with, and some will choose the worst. I remember hearing early into my reviewing career what I still maintain is one of the best audio systems I have ever heard (a very tweaked Maplenoll deck and air-bearing arm, Highphonc MC-A3 cartridge, Klyne phono stage and pre, Croft OTL amps into stacked Quad 57s), listening to music with tears streaming down my face from the sheer beauty of the sound emanating from this set up, only to hear the reviewer sitting next to me say, "I've heard better sounds from my f*%^ing clock radio!" before walking out.

So yes, I dare say I could find someone who - on listening to a couple of hundred thousand dollars worth of DarTZeel amps and comparing them to something costing 1/40th the cost - would prefer the cheaper system. Does that undermine their performance and sound quality - not one bit. This doesn't mean the person who prefers the cheaper amp is a philistine - no, it means their tastes lie in different directions.

We don't all speak with one voice and we don't all like the same things. To draw on an earlier posting, there are plenty of people happily listening to Bryston electronics and there are others perfectly happy listening to Naim electronics. Chances are, there will be some people who use the same loudspeakers on both systems and may very well get a completely different sound in the process. And yet, swap the Naim system for the Bryston system with those people, and all you will get is two unhappy campers.

The problem faced by a reviewer is they have to be an everyman. They have to listen to the Bryston system and the Naim system and find what both people see in them. One day, you have to think like someone with $1,000 to spend on a whole system. The next, you need to be contemplating what it's like to blow $10,000 on a power cord. One day, you might be looking at a system that wouldn't have been out of place in the mid-1950s, the next you are looking at something so high-tech, you go looking for the warp drive button. Can you really envisage a scenario where you can make definitive committal statements and still be able to do all this?

Occasionally, when the product is so outstanding that you need to make a statement that steps outside the day-to-day reviewing, you are duty bound to make a definitive statement. This year, I've made those statements about the Ayre QB-9 and the Magico Q5, because I think both set a benchmark that all high-end products in those categories should be measured against at this time. I reserve the right to make a few more. The last product that got a definitive statement in the other direction was several years ago. The reaction to negative reviews - from the readers - is so strong, many magazines have concluded it's better to return products the reviewers don't like than review them*. Manufacturers have long since learned how to cope with a bad review - pretend it didn't happen, hope it goes away, point to methodology problems, demand a rematch - but readers who happen to own the product you took a dislike to see it as an affront to their listening skills and an act of sabotage against the resale value of their shiny new product. Your turntable brand was a notable pariah in the UK 20+ years ago, after one LP12-loving reviewer suggested it wasn't even as good as a Dual 505; imagine how you would feel if that conclusion was drawn by SP in the next issue.

*the one magazine that still publishes strongly negative reviews also gets more than its fair share of anger pitched at it for having an opinion. A recent two-star review of a £99 interconnect cable in What Hi-Fi led to a 35-page, 344-post long tirade in a UK forum.

 

[FrantzM]

Alan

It is a pleasure debating/discussing with you ..

In car performance the field is very leveled .. Of that there is no doubt.. it used to be that some cars were the highest performers: Back in the days and Alfa Romeo and a Ferrari would automatically beat any Toyota .. Alfa Romeo in particular with their double overhead cam and multiple valve per cylinder. Today you might find the same in a Kia ... The Subaru WRX -STi is an incredible performer in that can easily put to shame several exotics ... The Nissan GTR might outrun most exotic you care to name ... About amenities .. maybe but when one looks at level of refinement a lowly Hyunday can come up with. Do have a look at their top of the line for example , the name escapes me right now ...

I have to come back to a project that is getting, so far the best of me ... so the rest .. later some points need to be debated more ...

I should look at your reviews .. Hope they conclude at least ..

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

How do you know this works for you? Or is this really just a "I've never tried oysters because I don't like oysters because I've never tried oysters" viciously circular argument that I'm not supposed to expose to sunlight?

What works for me, Alan, is the approach, the methodology. Here's the entire paragraph, not just the part you took out of context:

The only alternative is to read reviews, read customer feedback on the internet, and, most important IMO -- familiarize ourselves with companies, their products and their design/product development/marketing approaches. Analog or digital focus, a bang-for-the-buck vs. no compromise (and specifically what they mean by that), upgrade paths, and, yes, measurements...these things will tell you much about a company's approach, the kind of equipment they design and whether or not it is a good fit to your needs and beliefs. I have never heard a Bryston amp, for example, but from everything I know about their design approach and company philosophy, I'll bet I'd like them. If I needed an amp for a passive system, I'd be pretty comfortable buying one used (so I could recover most of my $ if it didn't work out) or through an internet outlet that offers a trial period and return for the cost of return shipping. On the other side, I know from what they promote, propose and produce, that the folks at Naim and I just don't believe in the same things or have the same audio goals. I would never order anything from them sound unheard.

The approach works for me. YMMV.

I know it works because I have a pretty good track record of researching companies this way, ordering their products via the internet, and ending up with gear that fits with my idea of what sounds good. It hasn't been foolproof. The stuff that was wrong I sent back or re-sold. But for the most part, the approach works for me.

P

 

[vinylphilemag]

But the bottom line is how will you pay your staff (including editors/graphic artists) w/o advertising. If you don't, they will eventually leave for greener pastures where they are paid. Reviewers like to (and are due) be paid for their time. When you figure it takes about three or so months of listening to a component before writing it up, it comes out to 0.000001 cents/hour. It really comes down to a labor of love for the reviewer.

And it takes a long time for a reviewer to build credibility and if your staff is constantly turning over, then your magazine never achieve much credibility. Readers take time to link/identify with a given reviewer who "hears" the same way they do.

Once again, I find myself in agreement with Myles. Trying to build up my vinyl centric mag is--and has been--very challenging, and I think the point about credibility should not be underestimated. Yes, I need ad revenue in order to survive, but my integrity cannot be bought. Easy to say, I know; only time will tell...

There are lots of other interesting points in this thread, much of which I agree with. Although I think it would be ungentlemanly of me to critcise my competition (although I think David and Goliath is an apt visualisation of that battle!), I will say that I read Stereophile a few times a year and I've been a subscriber to TAS for about 20 years. I too miss the journal size!

 

[Alan Sircom]

What works for me, Alan, is the approach, the methodology. Here's the entire paragraph, not just the part you took out of context:



I know it works because I have a pretty good track record of researching companies this way, ordering their products via the internet, and ending up with gear that fits with my idea of what sounds good. It hasn't been foolproof. The stuff that was wrong I sent back or re-sold. But for the most part, the approach works for me.

P

This still sounds deeply one-sided to me. You appear to be suggesting ordering products unheard based on a reaction to that company's published ethos. You also appear to suggest rejecting other products - also unheard - for the same reason. As the company ethos represents one side of the package (the other side being 'what it sounds like'), perhaps you can see why I consider this a one-sided viewpoint.

I am making an assumption of fair play on your part here. I am assuming that you have not heard either company's products you mention, because if you have heard one and not the other, the comparison you are making is unfair to both parties. Given that, "I know from what they promote, propose and produce..." must be limited to at best partial experience of the 'produce' part.

There is every possibility that listening tests correspond to the findings of such research. There is also the possibility they do not. However, without anything other than on-paper experience of the two products, there is no way to determine that. Potentially, this could lead to a listener putting up with mediocre sound purely on ideological grounds.

This is the problem with track records. There's a danger of being the fastest person on the track because you are the only person on the track. Without testing your track times against others, you never can tell.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

You appear to be suggesting ordering products unheard based on a reaction to that company's published ethos. You also appear to suggest rejecting other products - also unheard - for the same reason. As the company ethos represents one side of the package (the other side being 'what it sounds like'), perhaps you can see why I consider this a one-sided viewpoint.

Well, if you add reviews and customer feedback online to "company ethos," Alan, that's about right. And that's where the "what they produce" part comes in -- knowledge of the kinds of products they produce - valves or ss, known for neutrality or house sound, upgrades/tweaks etc. It certainly doesn't give me the pre-trial experience of walking into a showroom and hearing the products, but it is what's available to me, and listening is part of the process -- listening in my home, on my system, with my own references. Can I compare a half dozen DACs this way? Not without a substantial investment in return shipping, but I can't compare a half dozen "high-end" DACs within a day's drive of home either. There are no good alternatives.

There is every possibility that listening tests correspond to the findings of such research. There is also the possibility they do not. However, without anything other than on-paper experience of the two products, there is no way to determine that. Potentially, this could lead to a listener putting up with mediocre sound purely on ideological grounds.

There is no ideology involved here. If Naim has a long-standing reputation as a company that engineers a "house sound" and my goal with electronics is always to buy the most neutral electronics I can afford, it's a pretty safe assumption that I'm not going to be happy with most of their gear. That's not ideological, it's just logical. Could it cause me to miss that rare piece of Naim gear without the extra PRaT (the silliest of audiophile-invented words!)? Yes. But it will not cause me to listen to mediocre sound. If what I order doesn't sound good it will be returned. In fact, in most cases, if it "sounds" much at all it will be returned. YMMV.

This is the problem with track records. There's a danger of being the fastest person on the track because you are the only person on the track. Without testing your track times against others, you never can tell.

I'm not even sure what this means. That I need to test every potential piece of kit against all its competitors? That would be nice if it were possible. It's not, so I've listened to much more limited choices, judged each pieces' impact in my system and made a call. I am content with my systems and haven't changed so much as a cable in a few years. I declare victory.

P

 

[Alan Sircom]

Your quest for a neutral sound - if not itself evaluated - remains an ideological one. An arbitrary one too, unless you establish some kind of benchmark to determine what neutrality means to you and what its limits are. I can point to several different products with a similarly valid - but very different - claim to neutrality. None of them make a claim for a 'house sound' but none of them go after the same neutrality goals. Far better to test these things to see if you actually agree with yourself.

Of course you don't need to compare a product against all its peers. But you should at least include a listening test. It's taken you this long to admit that you have performed such tests. Why? Do you consider them a confirmatory exercise, or a key part of the evaluation process?

Surely, half the point of being involved in a hobby is never being content with it. My system, and my record collection, is in a constant state of work in progress because that's the fun part. As such, I'm not content with being content. I'm content with Airfix model aircraft, given that I haven't built one since I was 13, but I don't feel the need to go onto model aircraft forums and profess this contentedness, because I am not that engaged with the model aircraft hobby anymore. Given that your next post will be your 250th and your joining date was last month, you can hardly claim cool detachment from audio. So, what's the story?

 

[terryj]

Surely, half the point of being involved in a hobby is never being content with it.

Now there's an interesting topic for a thread.

Funny eh, one persons heaven can be another persons hell.

I can't imagine being stuck on an endless roundabout of upgrades.

So, let's have a poll.

The endless journey, or the contented destination?

How much of your job contributes to that (more able than most to make changes) or how much of that led you to the job?

 

[Alan Sircom]

How much of your job contributes to that (more able than most to make changes) or how much of that led you to the job?

I think my magpie-like nature with regard to things in which I am generally interested put me in line for the job. Fortunately, my obsessions are consistent, otherwise I'd be one hell of a dilettante.