Most Honest Audio Magazine?

Bruce, I agree with what you wrote. Further, along the same vane, I remember looking forward to the Meitner CD player (SACD player, years ago) review as I was on the fence between that and the Esoteric. I read the review and went with the Esoteric, only because my dealer represented esoteric and not meitner. From the reviews, it was a coin toss and I'd rather toss the coin in my dealers corner. Well, I am VERY happy with Esoteric BUT it wasn't until the next generation Meitner players were reviewed that the reviewer stated how much quieter the new Meiter (spinner) was. It would have been great info to have had in the original review. They don't give similar components to the same reviewer specifically to avoid a direct comparison, and loss of advertiser dollars. They specifically do not tell us very basic traits of the components that you need to unravel in subsequent reviews. Like I said, I give them high marks for nice photos.

I seem to recall that there may be more of a synergistic interactive process going between manufacturers and the "better" audio mag reviewers.

Yes ... I appreciate and do not ignore the comments about the relationship between the mags and the manufacturers who advertise. So yes, there is a real concern that the reviewers may not be 100% objective and independent.

BUT, I seem to recall that if a serious reviewer detects a serious issue with a product, he will contact the manufacturer and vett the issue out. The outcome is that the manufacturer may correct the problem before the product goes full blown retail, or at least shortly thereafter.

I admit that my comments are based on old recollections of stuff I thought I read some time ago. Perhaps a reviewer who is also an A'gon member and who catches my post will chime in.

Bruce

My problem is that the mags don't review. They narrate. In one of the current rags, there is a review of a CD player. The reviewer has an esoteric SA 50 in his rack. Same price point as what was reviewed. Any shot at comparing the two for us? Not a shot. Their "reviews" are written to sell products for their advertisers. You don't know what the problems are until they review they upgraded version. Only then do they say, "yeah, its much quieter...". I buy them for the pictures.

I think the best you have to accept is that a magazine won't review a bad bit of kit. You could argue, what's the point? If it is useless, why waste the paper. I have spoken to reviewers and editors and they say the same. They will call a manufacturer and say "Do you really want a review of this kit?"

If they print bad reviews they won't get any advertising or any kit to review. That is a problem for sites/ mags not taking advertising, like Bound for Sound and the UK magazine HiFicritic. They can find it difficult to get stuff in to review, manufacturers are afraid they have no influence over the outcome, without an advertising budget to withdraw.

You can read between the lines of lukewarm reviews, so the magazines are'nt useless. I use them to become aware of new products to look out for at shows or consider for an audition

For decades I've found the German "Stereoplay" reliable , they use bars and numbers as well so one need not know
German. Website .

Used to be especially absolute sound but in the last decade most just cater to those who advertise or who allow reviewers to keep their gear for extended periods. I do agree with Alan Sircom (hi-fi mag UK) - his observations on equipment I own is spot on.

None- really. They all are paid to review gear, IMO.
I believe, in the beginning, the magazines started out from an honest point of view. Now, not so much. I subscribe to TAS, Stereophile, HiFi+ and HiFi News & Record Review.
Additionally, read all webzines via thedailyaudiophile.com
Happy Listening!

None this week.

UHF has been consistent for years, with no apparent sell-out.
Bound for sound was(is) great too, but I haven't seen it recently.

Consumer Reports has it right. They buy the stuff in the store like a regular consumer.
Hi-end reviewers get free samples, dealer visits to set up the speakers, goes out to dinner with the reviewer, gives reviewer a factory tour, reviewer can buy for an "accommodation price".
Maybe the reviewer is totally objective and honest but it's way to cozy a situation IMHO.

A tale of woe and deception...
Back in 2005/2006 I was in negotiations with Daniel Khessin who was the DK of DK Designs. As I was starting LSA Loudspeakers, I knew that having a 'hook' or 'entry' into dealers and distributors would help lower the 'barriers to entry'. (The economics term for 'gee it's tough to launch a new product, no matter how good it may be.')
In the negotiations, DK pointed out the Positive Feedback glowing review, of his all aluminum loudspeaker, which was to be part of the purchase price of the company.
Admittedly, that was a very small piece of the equation, since I had my own line...nevertheless...
I bought the company, we inherited dealers, distributors worldwide.
Then came the time to get the loudspeakers, which I had renamed LSA10 to put the LSA name on them--I believe Khessin had named them the X-Dreams.
When they arrived in Louisville it became apparent that these speakers had never had a signal through them. You may ask, how can one tell that? Good question...WELL, there were no drivers in place, and none had ever, ever been in place...no pathways for wires, no screw marks (easy to see on aluminum)...they were simply 'shells'...magnificent shells to be sure. No holes for wires for an external crossover, or binding posts on the rear of the speakers...plate aluminum, and cost a fortune to have built in an aerospace facility which had CNC machines capable of cutting such. At the time, I asked Jim Thiel, if I could contract to use THIEL's CNC's and he said, "I'd be happy to Larry, but ours, with our blades couldn't touch that. You need CNC's set up to cut plate aluminum, sorry."
Why this lead in?
The magazine Positive Feedback had written a 'See God' review of these speakers, going in great detail as to how they were the 'Holy Grail' of loudspeakers...several pages, conjuring up 'halucinations of...' and such along the way.
The 'writer' of the story was named, if I recall, Jimmy Olsen'...funny now, cub reporter for the 'Daily Planet' and all, but what the hell, noone expected the whole thing to be an out and out lie.
I contacted the editor/owner, frankly sent several emails asking for information about the review, reviewer, and never got ONE RESPONSE!
Due dilligence, I didn't fly to California and look first, my mistake, and again, that was a very small part of the whole...yet that just makes a great point about reviews, well, reviews by Positive Feedback. Don't believe anything unless you're in the same room as they first listen, then watch them write it...then still don't believe it.
This was a cautionary tale for me--life is that way--we learn as we go, and this was a remarkable deception by a supposedly 'real magazine'.
So...as to 'honest magazines'...NOT POSITIVE FEEDBACK!

Good listening,
Larry

Just as an afterthought, I would hope all of us are wise enough to take whatever ANY audio magazine says with a fairly large grain of salt, for all of the aforesaid reasons. Where they are useful is in bringing new things to your attention. You should be using all the info you glean from all the magazines you can read by synthesizing the bits and bytes and then once youve formed your own opinion , go and listen if possible. I know some of us live in areas where there arent distributorships of certain manufacturers, and there I can see the magazines being more relied upon. I certainly dont think any of the magazines are out there to purposefully deceive us, but Caveat emptor applies to them as well as the equipment.--Mrmitch

I tend to agree that honesty and entertainment dont go hand in hand. That being said, I've had subscriptions to both Absolute Sound and Stereophile since the mid '80's. I think that Stereophile has gone tremendously awry from the course set by J. Gordon Holt, while I still enjoy most of the writing in Absolute Sound. And for those who recall, I used to shake my head in disbelief when a certain S'phile writer would tout how he listened from his Ribbon Chair, or "the soundstage was incredible from my Ribbon Chair", which made me question whether I was reading Stereophile or The Robb Report.-Just sayin'--Mrmitch

Sure Kal, no problem.

THE AUDIO CRITIC. CASE CLOSED. NEXT TOPIC?

First, I suggest that you not make a habit of quoting copyright materials in extenso but keep the link along with pointed excerpts. Some companies are quite protective of their property. (This is not a threat or warning, just a point of information.)

Second, the Imagine T6 was not a full review but was included in my column where space is tight. A typical column that covers 3 topics/products is usually of the same length as a single product review.

Third, you can reasonably assume that the qualitative comments in the column are made with reference to the resident system components, in this case, the Paradigm Studio 60v3 speakers.

Kal

Kal, I do not see that in your review here. Bu on the plus side, at least someone is reading what you write.

PSB Image T6 loudspeaker
For the past few years, PSB Speakers International has been replacing its older lines with new models designed in Canada, and assembled in China from Chinese-made components. Judging from the reception here of PSB's Synchrony One and Imagine T, it's clear that the new models combine advanced performance with true economy. Now, with the new Image line, we see the result of trickling all this down to less expensive products.

As is my wont, I asked for three Image T6 tower speakers to test in my weekend multichannel system, in Connecticut. The T6 is a true three-way design for a very attractive $1199/pair. For this, you get a 1" titanium-dome tweeter, a 5.25" clay/ceramic-filled polypropylene-cone midrange unit in a separate internal enclosure, and two 6.5" woofers; the crossover frequencies are 500Hz and 2.2kHz. The Image T6 measures 40.2" (1031mm) H by 9" (231mm) W by 14.8" (380mm) D and weighs 48.6 lbs (22.1kg). It has dual gold-plated binding posts and jumpers, and adjustable feet with the option of rubber levelers or spikes. Although the T6 lacks the exquisite cathedral-matched wood veneers of its pricier brethren, the black ash finish on my three samples was exemplary.

Out went my resident Paradigm Studio 60 v.3s, and off went the Audyssey room-equalization software, so that I could avail myself of the naked performance of the Image T6 trio. Immediately, they had a better-integrated sound and better-defined bass than I'd expected at their price, though the latter is what I'd hoped for in choosing this largest model of the Image line. Still, the T6s required careful positioning, with very little toe-in, to obtain a fair balance of imaging and smooth bass response. I ended up compromising the latter to optimize the former, figuring that Audyssey would eventually come to my rescue.

But on their own, once I'd found the optimum positions, the T6s offered a deep and beautifully spacious soundstage. Their tonal balance seemed a bit tipped-up in the treble, but the effect did not emphasize or highlight HF details. Bass extension was very generous for a speaker of this size, and deep male voices had wonderful presence. Plain old two-channel stereo was good, with remarkably solid center images that attested to the excellent matching of the two speakers I'd randomly selected to use as the left and right mains. In multichannel, with or without a subwoofer, I heard the same characteristics.

PSB's Paul Barton provided me with a set of measurements he'd taken, in the anechoic chamber of Canada's NRC, of the Image T6 I'd assigned to the left channel. The traces were all impressively flat from about 200Hz up to about 14kHz, on and ±15° to either side of the horizontal axis. Below 200Hz, all traces showed a smooth 2–3dB rise that fell off below 60Hz, but with usable bass below 40Hz. Above 14kHz, a mild dip was followed by a >3dB peak at 17kHz, both on and off axis. Considering the top-octave fall-off in my hearing, it would seem that these treble deficiencies would be inaudible to me. However, I suspect that the trough and peak combined to account for the loss of treble detail I did notice. Moreover, the variations in bass impact I heard suggested that, in my room, the smooth anechoic measurements were not being supported.

I figured that running Audyssey MultEQ would smooth out the T6's bass response and level its upper HF response. Audyssey confirmed the lumpy bass response of all three Image speakers with peaks and dips that varied in near-sinewave fashion from about 150 down to 20Hz. In addition, it clearly showed the 15kHz dip, although, as Audyssey smooths the display graphs, the sharp 17kHz peak was not shown. Unfortunately, while Audyssey's initial "corrected" response looked good, it actually sounded far worse than the T6s did on their own. Male voices were emasculated by a breathy treble and a midbass suckout. Since I had the advantage of using AudysseyPro's curve editor with my Integra DTC-9.8 processor, I fiddled with the response options. What worked was to put in a broad but subtle (<2dB) increase from about 300Hz down, and to use the more severe HF rolloff option. The former seemed to restore some "room gain" in the range where I saw the suckout due to speaker placement, while the latter restored the treble balance to what sounded, subjectively, neutral.

The result was a tonal and spatial presentation that seemed much more sophisticated than I'd expected from speakers of this size and price. I immersed myself in two SACD/CDs from Praga Digital's wonderful series devoted to the chamber music of Martinu: the Piano Quintets and Piano Quartet, with pianist Ivan Klansky and the Kocian Quartet (Praga PRD/DSD 250250); and the Piano Trios, with the Kinsky Trio Prague (Praga PRD/DSD 250256). These discs were recorded in Prague's lovely Martinu Hall, and in both one hears a fairly close-up sound: exquisite detail and instrument placements surrounded by a subtle ambience, all simulating the perspective of a seat at the front of the hall. The soundstage was absolutely seamless, seeming to fill the space without any reference to the three Image T6s sitting in front of me.

Even with much more massive music, such as Christoph Eschenbach and the Philadelphia Orchestra's performance of Mahler's Symphony 6 (SACD/CD, Ondine ODE1084-5D), the T6s offered the same deep, spacious, detailed soundstage as they had with the chamber recordings, but on a larger scale. There was such a feeling of effortlessness that I was encouraged to turn up the volume to a near natural level. It was thrilling, but when I did this I wasn't thinking about the hammer blows in the last movement—when they arrived, I was treated to a visceral impact usually reserved for the live event. Now, this recording is 5.0, and the Image T6s were assisted by a subwoofer below 50Hz, but who cares? I played the disc again, without the sub, and the emotional effect was equal, though the physical effect was reduced. Still, the PSBs didn't cry uncle!

Finally, I fed the Image T6s the DTS Master Audio soundtrack of Roy Orbison's Black and White Night (Blu-ray, Image Entertainment ID4954OBBD), a recording I treasure for its combination of expansive imaging, immersive ambience, inventive mixing of the assisting performers, and, to no small degree, the joy of the performance. The Image T6s were again up to the task of re-creating the excitement and buzz of a live event in which all the performers were solidly placed; I could easily attend to any one of them without losing the sense of the overall event—just as I'd have been able to do had I attended that concert.

If you think I like PSB's Image T6, you're right. In many ways, it suits me and my room better than PSB's Imagine T towers, except for some initial problems with the HF. Still, for $1199/pair, this is an absolutely wonderful full-range speaker, and is now my quasi-$1000/pair standard for an entry-level high-end loudspeaker.

And I will say I have a beef with Stereophile not doing comparison reviews. In contrast, Rob Reina's reviews do include at least a little something and is very helpful. If for no other reason than I haven't listened to EVERY speaker out there. So if he compares PSB to Monitor Audio (which I HAVE heard) then I have something to go on with the PSB's.

Put another way, I can pull out an ad for Hartley speakers from the 60's and they use the SAME adjectives as today. So just reading the review and not comparing it to anything else, I would think they are as good as what it made now.

I consider the 2 main Audio magazines,like... "Military Intelligence","accidentally on purpose","jumbo shrimp"

The Audio Critic, used to be the only credible source of the lot, IMHO that is.

Both Stereophile, and The Absolute Sound, are guilty of contradicting themselves too many times to count.

I have to agree with.."03-31-11: Lulimet
There aren't any honest magazines.They're all driven by advertising.
There are more lies in audio magazines than any other type of publications or books that I have read."

My 2 cents...

I Love My Music!

Never comparing the two?

Despite this, I listen to stereo most of the time for reasons of repertoire, but even with my abiding expectations regarding stereo, some speakers can throw a bigger soundstage than did the PSBs. An example would be my resident Paradigm Studio/60 v3s, which fall far short of the Imagine Ts in terms of midrange clarity and neutrality, and treble delicacy. With big stuff, the bigger Studios simply sounded...bigger. But with a jazz quintet, solo voices, and most music on a small scale, the PSBs sounded more honest and real.

Entertainment and honesty don't necessarily go hand in hand.

There isnt one HELLO!

There aren't any honest magazines.They're all driven by advertising.
There are more lies in audio magazines than any other type of publications or books that I have read.

I question things like Kal at Stereophile taking out his Paradigms and replacing them with a similar PSB speaker.....and never comparing the two.
I question JA measuring the Harbeth P3ESR and mentioning how the tweetr and woofer don't integrate.....and not showing the graph in the magazine when he does for all other speakers.

Yet another very big hi fi+ vote. I honestly can't wait for their issues to appear at Barnes & Noble or Tower. (I choose not to take a subscription so as to compel me to visit the book and music stores more often.) The down side is that the distributor never seems to hit their U.S. shelf date. I gave up reading TAS first, so offended with their editorial slide to the more, bigger, fine wine, fast car approach to all things. Stereophile followed, although I do hit their website. Brianhutch is dead-on with regards to hi fi+ and their record reviews, broad ranging and terribly international selection of equipment and, rightly pointed out, their paper and printing quality (if you are going to spend $10 on a magazine it ought to feel like $10). But what I like most about the publication is the frequent use of the word “whilst”. When will these Brits learn to “talk real good” like us?!

sensible sound

I also like UHF for the reasons listed above.

Another hi fi+ vote. They will tell you the faults without any reservation. And you don't have to listen to foofy liberal elitism before getting to the review (actually I do enjoy that part of the review just for the bombastic fun of it).

I like hi fi+ magazine.They use a much better quality paper than most of their competitors.Photography is of a high standard, most of the contributers seem articulate.The last issue I read reviewed equipment from the States,Canada,UK,Germany France,Japan and China.Eastern european equipment is often featured and they do a good job of mixing articles covering all price ranges.The record reviews [at least for the kind of music I look for]seem spot on.They also introduce lots of little known fi and I will for sure audition the Elac 4pi super tweeters instead of just buying the Townshends but 4 pairs of euro audio team 300b,s for my vac at 528 UK pounds a pair not within my budget even with the rave review.

This is like asking who is the most honest politician. There's a certain amount of truth within all but not enough to trust any.

UHF is my favorite. I like the panel discussions by all three reviewers and they use the same two reference systems always, so they are all hearing the same equipment.

UHF (Ultra High Fidelity) is one of my favorite magazines. They use a panel of three to four people to review any piece of audio equipment; each reviewer is allowed at the end of the review to add their personal comments on the piece. I've read several comments in this thread about magazines that contain a glowing review on particular piece of audio equipment followed by a full page ad by the manufacturer. I believe this is a normal business process; a magazine is in the business of generating ad dollars as well as a means of survival. I would only be expected that a manufacturer should be given the choice to advertise in a magazine that paints their product in a positive light. With that said, UHF magazine has conducted reviews on several Copland products; they rave about the Copland 305 preamp, but absolutely hated one of the Copland amplifier models. In my mind, UHF tells it like it is. By the way, Copland still advertises in their publication....

Calgarian5355

At one point I thought that Stereophile, and especially their "recommended products" was written in stone, for once and for all. When I'd shop for gear I'd always check to see where it was in the lists. If it wasn't there I didn't even consider it. I've learned something in the past year. The people here, in these forums are light years ahead of ANY of the rags. Yes, you have to be careful of the advice from any of the people in the forums, but a trend can be found. I say, read all the mags for fun, but when the time comes to put the money down, check here first.

No problem!
Just vigorous discussion. No offence received or intended.
I like discussing these areas. Many do treat science like religion and it turns into good debate. But that is okay for the individual. We all have the right to live as we choose. I did figure that you were speaking in human spiritual terms. If not then I just read wrong. From my window things are different but I am left handed and have odd focus and reasoning. I read what I like and think alike. Dale
Sorry if it sounded defensive.

Mcne, I have not mentioned GOD, I am opposed to people who relegate science to some form of belief when, in fact, science seeks the best use of our cognitive abilities as humans to try to understand the universe (which abilities could very well be intertrepeted as a gift from a higher power) , I don't think you quite got my reference to "Bose-like" speakers, the pattern appears to be your personal observation. I think you have some form of problem in properly interpreting the written word. If I offended your beliefs, religious or otherwise, please be advised it was not my intent. Science is not a religion. That is simple fact. Science is not absolute. That is another fact. To misinterpret my words as stating anything otherwise is ludicrous.

WOW Pbb? You hate GOD, ridicule creation, place science as god, and you love Bose speakers. Gee? Is there a pattern here? Dale

Pbb: If all receivers and CD players measure and sound great (Bose? Bose??!!), there's still a great hobby to be had working on speakers, speaker-room interactions, finding great software, even DSP, if that's your cup of tea. And that's not to mention the appreciation of the non-sonic attributes of great engineering. And the only mag that speaks to that kind of a hobby is the much-reviled Audio Critic.

Mr. Cyrus is quite right. Only problem, his approach would undermine most high-end manufacturers and all of the cable mongers. I have now come to understand (Hallelujah!) that objectivity is only a ham-fisted sort of subjectivity: it is the subjectivity that logical people wish to impose on an illogical pursuit in an illogical world. I was told in this forum that science is a religion, go figure. With that kind of thinking creationism becomes a valid scientific pursuit. Post-modern thinking (or is it the lack of thinking?) seems to hold that science is a bad thing. No, science is a good thing. Only better science can cure the problems of poorer science; magic thinking sure is not going to do it. Relegate the whole field of hi-fi to aesthetics and the problem is solved: so-called writers, in so-called magazines can opine to their hearth's content without anyone being able to prove them wrong. A pure subjective approach enables the high-end market to bear extravagant pricing which even a semi-objective approach in which a very liberal cost/performance analysis would be used would put most of them out of business. Just look at an other thread were a number of participants believe that up to approximately $80,000.00 for a system to reproduce music the law of diminishing returns does not kick in to convince yourself that the manufacturers have managed to push the limits of price acceptability so high, that the death of the more objective press at the hands of the more subjective press (the spectrum being from totally devoid of any scientific approach to those paying lip service to measurements) has only had beneficial results to all financially involved in high-end audio. As another participant said, who wants tests of receivers, run of the mill c.d. players and Bose-like speakers where the conclusion is always that they measure great, sound great and offer great value. Not much of a hobby in that if you ask me. All the best of the season to one and all, whatever your approach and audio beliefs are. And by the way, may I wish everyone the joy of spending more money in the coming year on the music software, rather than the hardware, so that the real source of this hobby be better celebrated.

hot-air free net mag, no advert's, tons of info (Italian, but all articles are in English as well)

The first magazine who would honestly use blind tests to compare products would gain a lot of respect from the audiophile community IMHO. Cyrus

audio critic is the best and we should all be supporting it-they tell you the actual value of the components in the component(something ive never seen done before)which tells you whether the product is a good value and can tell you whether the manufacturer is full of it in their claims(one recent review i read).also on my list is hifi choice(uk),what hifi(uk),and hifi world(uk).

New Positive Feedback just out!!! Gotta' get one.

Honest, hey? Well they speak the truth as they know it. I can take Stereophile in measured doses and I miss Audio. There, that should give you an idea of how old I am and some indication that I still find a scientific approach valuable, although good science would probably give you a Sara Lee cake and good science plus the "magic touch" an incredibly delicious fresh Viennese or French pastry.

I would like a balanced approach of scientifically accurate and proper measurements (I know, I know, what to measure? what to measure?) and explanation of the theory behind the product (no, not marketing theory...) on the one hand, and of quality, sane and sober subjective appraisals on the other. Who's next in line?

The three most powerful mags, Tommy, that mostly set the standard for the entire (*2nd Golden Era) of high end (72 thru 84)were:
The Absolute Sound
IAR
The Audio Critic
Peter Aczel may deny that he hears differences in gear today, but in the 77-81 era of his mag, his ears were certified golden. Perhaps a better judge of loudspeaker quality than any other reviewer. Unfortunately he lost his hearing..........Frank

there isnt any ONE mag that can be trusted. read several and the different points of view become meaningful. i dont think they all have to arrive at the same conclusion to be credible.
tas has had my respect and support for the longest and will to the end. stereophile has proven to be the most variable of late although im not thinking of cancelling soon as are the knee jerk reactionaries every other month!
in tas, its comforting to know that reg is a math prof at ucla, isnt anti digital, and still plays LPs on his disc centering nak tt.
i for one am a died in the wool vinylphile (7k) who also likes his CDs and would be happy if sacd wins the war.
the concept of sensible sound is good except they are too focussed on ava and shure equip.
audio critic? duh!? as jay lenos character 'mr. brain' would say: 'IDIOT!'.
rip audio. bert whyte was one of the first i ever heard evaluate a monitor sized (small) spkr with a krell amp, followed by many others. what a loss!
give us back fi and audio adventure.
thats not all of them, but my significant cross section.
all that said, i just dont want to have people think ive hidden behind another name, im known on all the other forums as hifitommy. ill get around to having gon change this one day.
.......regards.......tr

Positive Feedback is a great mag as well, when they decide to put out an issue.

Audio Critic... this mag was recommended to me by Don Morrison. This is the only mag he reads. Don believes in it so much he actually sent me two copies for free. If you haven't heard of Don check out his website www.donmorrisonaudio.com.
Anyhow, Audio Critic measures everything they get their hands on. Their conclusions (not opinions) of a products performance are based on science. The editor finally found a publisher (after 20+ years) that will let will let him write based on his morals, not the advertisers influence. Now that its published on a grander scale its available everywhere. This is an entirely different audio publication.
Now I have to go find an electronics book to figure out what all their measurements mean.

I think Stereophile will be around a long time, with or without MF and LA, especially if they keep their subscription price at $1/issue. I think their credibility would go way up if they ditched Jonathon Scull, and if they could broaden their choice of manufacturers to review. I think they've more than covered Cary and Musical Fidelity for the time being. -Kirk

Dds_hifi you are right about Stereophile: When Michael Fremer & Lisa Astor jump ship they are "Done Like Dinner" as Wendel Clark (retired Toronto Maple Leaf hockey player) once quipped.

Like most of the posts above, I have a general skepticism of these magazines. With that said, I think some are better (TAS) than others.

For me, though, the key is finding reviewers with like-minded ears and sensibilities as you (I can't relate to HP's sense of value). This is a courting process and takes time. My votes for most reliable writers are Robert Greene (TAS), Neil Gader (TAS) and Paul Seydor (TAS). They aren't pundits of myth and folklore or manufacturer reps, and they call a spade a spade without the incredible arrogance that is typical of their peer group.

While this post may seem irrelivant to some, I think it's important. Forums like this can influence magazines - so can sales rates.

One closing thought. I've tried to stay positive here, but I just have to say it. Something smells at Stereophile! I'm discontinuing my subsription becuase I just can't trust them (although I enjoy the music reviews).

If you live in the tweak kingdom you will be happy with most magazines. If you are an engineer, or demand that all claims be proven you will be served better by Audio Critic. In the end, just enjoy the music, show off your new stereo, and enjoy the music. Music is after all the point isn't it?