Art Dudley's column is one of the only redeaming features that keeps me subscribing to Stereophile. I also like the music reviews and interviews. I prefer TAS though for the monthly centerfold and full-on wet IEC outlet shot. Marco PS Rumor in the industry is that Von Schweikert's speakers don't "put out" so the Stereophile editors blackballed'em. |
Did you ever notice that there aren't negative reviews any more. I used to think/say the same thing. But in reading the reviews, at least in the past year or two, I'd say there are certainly those that are luke warm and it's not very difficult to read between the lines. Just read a few of the reviews in the current Stereophile and there are some examples of this. I've been in this hobby since 85' and, though I've heard things I have not liked as much as others, I cannot recall hearing anything that would really push me to say to someone that some particular component is an outright piece of garbage...at least in the ranks of components that are mostly being reviewed in these rags. Most of the stuff being built today sounds pretty darn good, and it is more a matter of synergy with other components and then comparisons with competition. I don't think a component in the ranks of the high-end that actually really sounded horrible would have any chance of lasting very long in such a competitive market. I do recall reading a few reviews where the reviewer just didn't like what they were hearing, but indeed they are few and far between and often remedied somehow by further instructions from the manufacturer. But really, can you actually think of many high-end components that are so bad under most conditions that they'd actually warrant a really bad review? Nothing comes immediately to mind for me. Maybe I've been very lucky, or am just not discriminating enough. I certainly have my own personal preferences, some of them quite strong, but that still doesn't stop me from appreciating the merits of what other contenders have to offer where a specific component is concerned. I do wish there were a greater diversity in the reviews - some of this may indeed be the smaller manufacturers lack of initiative or perhaps desire to have get their stuff reviewed by the glossy rags. I dunno, but I would definitely not be loosing any sleep if I never saw another B&W speaker review, or Musical Fidelity article. There's so much great stuff out there that simply doesn't get any press. I think Dudley did an article within the past couple of years that thoughtfully addressed some of these very complaints and questions. Yet I'd still like to see more diversity, whatever the obstacles to be overcome. I think it should be the magazine's obligation to go and seek out some the more obscure manufacturers, especially those who've created a buzz on public forums like this one, the speakers in question being perhaps a good example, and not just respond only to those who approach them with products to review. I wonder how often this happens. I'm sure all these reviewers are barraged on a daily basis with manufacturers asking for their products to be reviewed. But there also must be a substantial number of manufacturers out there who don't have the savvy, initiative, time, confidence, don't show up at the big shows...whatever...that it takes to pursue that. I'm only guessing here. Do the reviewers actually go out after ANY of these components they're writing about, or do they all come to the reviewer, or show up at some show the reviewer attended? There are reviewers reading both here and on AudioAsylum...do they ever get a clue from those places that some specific component may be worthy of their attention and go and seek out that manufacturer for a review sample? Marco |
Why waste review space on rubbish?!? I'm not sure what you're saying here Nate. I don't see a great abundance of rubbish out there in the high-end (other than perhaps in the wires and tweaks market). Studioray - I hear what you're saying and I can't argue with you much about the vocabulary they use. I agree, it gets a bit too effusive at times and does blur what otherwise may be a more clear distinction. But then again, this hobby is so subjective, I wonder how fare such distinctions actually are. As far as the stars, well I gues Stereophiles version is the Class A, Class B bit. I suppose you could just assign your star ratings as appropriate. Other than that I have not read HiFi Choice enough to comment further. I do agree with you...with the American glossy high-end rags it is more a matter of reading between the lines in many cases, and I also get a bit tired of the effusive and the wishy-washy. Then again, as I said, it is difficult to really say that a given component is a piece of crap, as I've personally heard nothing in the high-end that would cause me to yield that opinion. Have you? Perhaps I've been lucky, or just don't have enough experience with a wider variety of gear. Or perhaps I'm just not discriminating enough. I need to eat more Grey Poupon...do you happen to have any? Kal - Thanks for responding and glad to hear you are actively seeking out manufacturers worthy of review who don't come to you. Still, I sure would like to read more evidence of that in the magazine. It may not be a fare sampling of your choices, but I grabbed a couple of issues, on recent, and one older. In it you were reviewing Denon multimedia gear, and, in the older issue, a comparison between PS Audio, Brickwall and Panamax and Empower. Both were interesting articles, but not exactly the kinds of components/companies that I find missing in the pages of Stereophile. I got 751 hits searching B&W on the Stereophile website including many major reviews. Yet Silverline Audio nor Tyler Acoustics do not yield a single review. Both would occur to me as having worthy offerings that would give the likes of B&W a run for their money. No sight of Terry Cain's offerings either (in a more esoteric realm). Plenty of spreads on Musical Fidelity's fine digital players and DACs. No mention of smaller, more affordable gems like Scott Nixon, Audio Mirror, AckDAC. There are pieces on Unobtanium items for the money-no-object crowd, but how many articles can you write about Halcro stuff...what about a company like Electronluv that takes audio to an art form in more ways than one. It was great to see the very worthy offerings of Mike Sanders company, Quicksilver Audio, get some attention last year, and I do hope to read more on his offerings. What about George Wright of Wright Sound, whose little 3.5 amps have a near cult following...or the new preamp by Dan Wright of Modwright (no relation to George) which is getting stellar notice from folks here in the forums. None of this stuff is "rubbish" by any means, nor would it be a waste of time. These companies are offering a very valuable alternative to the Big Brother audio corporations that otherwise litter the pages of Stereophile both in advertising and in editorial. Often they are offering a product of equal or greater value/performance at a much more affordable price, and for that reason alone would seem to be worthy of bringing to the attention of your public. Now I'm not saying companies like this are completely ignored in the pages of Stereophile and TAS - they aren't. These are just a few I have not seen any mentions of and that I happen to believe are worthy of mention. I'm sure there are others, and I'm sure the magazines don't have enough pages/time/staff to give coverage to all of them. What I'm saying is that what I do read there occurs to me to be out of balance to what the average Audiophile may be after, if I was to judge such things from what we read both here and on AudioAsylum, and from the handful of Audiophiles I've known. Sure there are the fans of B&W, Musical Fidelity and Mark Levinson, but there are also a huge contingent of others who are actively seeking out something different/better/with greater value-performance, and there's plenty of manufacturers out there who offer just that. Marco |
I just want to know who the peanut-head is who listened to the Von Schweikert speakers line, and pronounced them all "rubbish". Blame this dude! Stereophile's new reviewer. From the looks of this photo he may have a propensity towards horns. I don't know about you, but I sure wouldn't trust his opinions on audio: Dude's got no ears whatsoever! Marco |
....You can't really see it in the low-rez version, but if you blow-up the "handshake" in the photo I linked to you should be able to make out the handoff of a fistfull of dead presidents and some front-row concert tickets. Little dudes are actually paying off the Peanut-head for some favorable ink on their new line of horns. The head of marketing, seen to the left, is demonstrating one of their $10K BozoHorn models. At the left edge of the photo the CEO of the company can be seen looking on from his secretary's arms. Who says small manufacturers can't get reviewed in Stereophile?! Judging by the size of the wad of greenbacks I'd say the BozoHorns are sure to make it into Class A this year! Marco |
Say what you will about Art, and I happen to think he is currently the best thing at Stereophile by far Amen. His contributions to Stereophile are the one thing I can look forward to, and can count on being consistantly the most enjoyable and thought provoking every month. Humanistic, wholistic, written with intelligence and wit and always thoroughly enjoyable: Makes it worth the cost of a subscription in my book. Marco |
Of the population that reads Stereophile, the best demographic, us, is reachable without paying their preposterous price by simply reaching out to the Audiogoners. As successfull as Audiogon is (it's also a partner with Stereophile now, by the way), I think "we" are only a very small part of the demographic that Larry may wish to reach. There's a whole other world out there who use and appreciate this kind of gear and do not visit Audiogon and do not read Stereophile. Best strategy is to pepper all the venues, as the previous owner was doing very effectively, and keep that buzz going (though I do think the original owner went a bit far in his efforts as all the deleted threads may have attested to). Regardless, I think his campaign was very effective. Larry, I truly mean no offense by this, but the current full-page ad you've been running with the Photoshop-obscured view of one of your amps....well, from both a consumers point of view, and from someone been in the advertising business for over twenty years, that really needs some reconsideration. I have no idea what you are trying to do there, but it almost looks like someone accidently ran the comp for the ad. Those full pages have to cost you a goodly amount of coin...I'd invest in some better photography and graphic design to make that investment work for you more effectively. Just one man's unsolicited opinion mind you. The previous owner was running some very slick ads, well designed, with excellent photography, that made the product appear to be worth much more than he was charging for it. The current ads I'm seeing do not draw me in to read more about the product, and do not speak at all visually of the product itself. If your ad doesn't make the reader stop and read about the product, it's a wasted investment. Anyone else finding that with the current run of Larry's ads? Maybe it's just me as I am a very visual person and put a strong emphasis on the visual, especially in this 5-second attention span culture we live in. Marco |
