I recently emailed John Atkinson of Stereophile


I was concerned lately by the lack of Class "D" preamps in latest Stereophile Recommended Components listings and e-mailed John Atkinson the editor, who implied that because many newer preamps exceed the Class D limitations and newer preamps simply outperform their older bretheren, this class was currently empty. Which got me thinking: one can purchase a used Conrad Johnson PV10a or a Conrad Johnson PF-2 on this site for around six hundred dollars. Does this mean that Newer preamps in the same basic price range, like the new Parasound Halo which goes for $799 at Audio Advisor "sound better" than vintage gear? Any thoughts?
triumph

Showing 3 responses by nrchy

Rooky, there are lots of people who read the reviews in TAS and Stereophile to scout for the next product that will trinkle down to their price level so they can buy it used next time the company offer the latest "flagship."

It's just plain stupid to criticize them for reviewing expensive audio gear. No company put their latest technology into the middle of the line products. When they build to a price point there are tons of compromises made. Are you content to live with all of those compromises or do you want something better. It's the top-of-the-line stuff that pushes the envelope so people like you will continue to have mid-fi gear to buy rather than buying the good stuff.

I began reading Stereophile about 17 years ago when I could bearly afford a used receiver. I learned enough reading it to know what I wanted when I could afford to move up to seperates. I quit subscribing a few years ago because they kept reviewing mid-fi crap that wasn't any better than what I already had. Who wants to read that???

Stereophile should have a solid section of class d gear, but I don't want to read about it, I want to see the cutting edge stuff. Show me things I can't afford and I'll be happy!!!!
onhwy61 you could not be more right. I am a small business owner in a non-audio enterprise. The company that does not advertise is the company that is going out of business.

If the selfrighteous people who think advertising buys reviews would stop and get a grasp of what it's like to try to run a real business and pay 40 or 50 employees who depend on them for a living these dialogs would be much more helpful.

Any successful businessman know advertising is critical to maintaining and growing a business. If Bose (for instance) advertises and their competition doesn't, who is going to sell more product? Not everyone lives in NY or LA where virtually every product made can be auditioned and seen. Lots or people live in Yuma or Springfield where the closest they will come to most gear is by way of advertising and review.

Since many of the respondants to this and other posts have determined that advertising corrupts and reviewers from magazines like Stereophile and TAS (which does suck!) have been bought and paid for many times over, where does that leave the poor audiophile from Yuma, Springfield, and other parts unknown?

Are they to be left completely in the dark since they have not suffered the indignity of having been forced to live in the big city? Where should they go for information? Any suggestions?
I have been subscribing to Stereophile on and off since the eighties. JGH was the editor and chief crumudgeon then and I can say with volumes of proof that there was plenty of advertising in the magazine then. I will admit that there is more now. That may be due to the fact that it has become more of a pamphlet than a magazine though.

Manufacturers are not stupid. When they see a magazine that caters to their customer and does it at an increasing level of volume and quality they will want to advertise on those pages.

If magazines sell-out to advertisers how does this happen? It's like the: "What came first the chicken or the egg?" question. The answer in both cases is obvious. The chicken came first and so did the successful magazine. No one advertises in a magazine that has no circulation. When Stereophile and TAS got started they were an unknown quantity. There was no other rag that did the same thing they were doing. It would be pure speculation on the part of any advertiser to establish a relationship with such a publication.

The tiff between 'Tiffany' and TAS comes to mind. When TAS refused to bend over for them just because they advertised Tiffany threatened to pull their advertising. TAS response was to tell Tiffany that they would never accept advertising from them again. Tiffany went out of business shortly thereafter.

I find it quite noble that so many companies that did not advertise have gone out of business. WOW! Hurray for them. What a great bit of business saavy they displayed to all of us!!!

Companies that do not advertise and still succeed are the exception, not the rule.

Corona what do you do for a living? I doubt that you are a business owner. You seem to have no grasp of what it takes to compete in the marketplace.

Is there glory in a noble death?