For those A'goners wishing to read Jules' article here is the link:
http://www.ultraaudio.com/opinion/20031001.htm
Jules: well written & does convey our collective concerns of the audio industry today. Indeed we are plagued by much skepticism that is hardening into cynicism & butt of much of our cynicism is directed at those 2 magazines we can find at our local bookstore. I also agree that fully disclosing the reviewer's/magazine's ties with the manuf. will go a long way in removing some of our skepticism.
However, what I don't understand is how will a subscription-only magazine solve this problem?
S'phile is a subscription based magazine. It's cheap but still subscription based.
TAS is also a subscription based magazine.
Richard Hardestry's Audio Perfectionist is also an (expensive) subscription e-magazine.
J. Peter Moncrief's IAR is also a subscription e-magazine of sorts - it's free on the web but costs you if you want his archives.
The last 2 magazines do *not* accept any advertising whatsoever & so their views should be neutral/call-a-spade-a-spade.
Do the Audiogon members here put any more faith in the reviews printed therein??
Have all or many Audiogon members of both types - those that have slammed S'phile & TAS & those who haven't - gone running with their money & subscribed to Audio Perf. & IAR??
If not, why would they subscribe to one published by Plato?
On a related note: I personally find more even-handed reviews on soundstage.com esp. when one component is reviewed by 4 reviewers. I also find that Soundstage reviews more price-wise diverse equipment. However, I do find some co-relation between their advertisers & that manuf's equip. getting a good review but it *appears* to be less blatant. Maybe this website is the better of the worse?
A friend & myself were discussing this issue some time back & we likened the evolution of the audio industry to maturation of an economy. When a country is poor & trying to bring itself out of the dumps (think Germany & South Korea) all the workers are earnest & put in their best. Goods from such countries are hailed to be excellent unanimously. As that economy matures, these same goods now become commodities. Manuf. is mechanized & millions are belted out en-masse. What started out as being built for the cause is now built for commercialization & revenues dictate the strategy more than anything else.
Audio too started out this way in the 1950s & 1960s. There was virtually no hype & even tho' the equipment wasn't that good, it was built be craftsmen & designers who were true to the cause of audio: accurate reproduction of music in the home environment. As this industry has matured, has it become a commodity item where marketing hype over-rules (by a long margin) the true reason of building audio gear? is this a natural cycle for this industry as it is for many other industries? If so, we are those unfortunate souls who will witness the "corruption" of this industry & the audio industry will never return to its former glory. Those among us for older vintage will remember those hay-days with much fondness & with good reason.
Seems like a fatalistic attitude on my part. Not so! I'm merely posing some questions for this forum at large. And, asking whether we are seeing a natural progression of an industry to which we seem to be the unfortunate witnesses.
http://www.ultraaudio.com/opinion/20031001.htm
Jules: well written & does convey our collective concerns of the audio industry today. Indeed we are plagued by much skepticism that is hardening into cynicism & butt of much of our cynicism is directed at those 2 magazines we can find at our local bookstore. I also agree that fully disclosing the reviewer's/magazine's ties with the manuf. will go a long way in removing some of our skepticism.
However, what I don't understand is how will a subscription-only magazine solve this problem?
S'phile is a subscription based magazine. It's cheap but still subscription based.
TAS is also a subscription based magazine.
Richard Hardestry's Audio Perfectionist is also an (expensive) subscription e-magazine.
J. Peter Moncrief's IAR is also a subscription e-magazine of sorts - it's free on the web but costs you if you want his archives.
The last 2 magazines do *not* accept any advertising whatsoever & so their views should be neutral/call-a-spade-a-spade.
Do the Audiogon members here put any more faith in the reviews printed therein??
Have all or many Audiogon members of both types - those that have slammed S'phile & TAS & those who haven't - gone running with their money & subscribed to Audio Perf. & IAR??
If not, why would they subscribe to one published by Plato?
On a related note: I personally find more even-handed reviews on soundstage.com esp. when one component is reviewed by 4 reviewers. I also find that Soundstage reviews more price-wise diverse equipment. However, I do find some co-relation between their advertisers & that manuf's equip. getting a good review but it *appears* to be less blatant. Maybe this website is the better of the worse?
A friend & myself were discussing this issue some time back & we likened the evolution of the audio industry to maturation of an economy. When a country is poor & trying to bring itself out of the dumps (think Germany & South Korea) all the workers are earnest & put in their best. Goods from such countries are hailed to be excellent unanimously. As that economy matures, these same goods now become commodities. Manuf. is mechanized & millions are belted out en-masse. What started out as being built for the cause is now built for commercialization & revenues dictate the strategy more than anything else.
Audio too started out this way in the 1950s & 1960s. There was virtually no hype & even tho' the equipment wasn't that good, it was built be craftsmen & designers who were true to the cause of audio: accurate reproduction of music in the home environment. As this industry has matured, has it become a commodity item where marketing hype over-rules (by a long margin) the true reason of building audio gear? is this a natural cycle for this industry as it is for many other industries? If so, we are those unfortunate souls who will witness the "corruption" of this industry & the audio industry will never return to its former glory. Those among us for older vintage will remember those hay-days with much fondness & with good reason.
Seems like a fatalistic attitude on my part. Not so! I'm merely posing some questions for this forum at large. And, asking whether we are seeing a natural progression of an industry to which we seem to be the unfortunate witnesses.