++++StereoPhile Class A components+++++

Here's my problem with the ratings: "Editor's Note: Class A Loudspeakers are sufficiently idiosyncratic and differ enough from one another that prospective customers should read Stereophile's original reviews in their entirety for descriptions of the sounds."

What does this tell you? The reviewers don't know what speakers are supposed to do. As one reviewer who does know what he's talking about said: "There is something on the recording. Reproducing it correctly can produce only one result. This "different perspective" is a way for audiophile reviewers to conceal the obvious fact(just compare Stereophile's measurements to the reviewers
comments) that audiophile reviewers mostly have no clue as to what things ought to sound like."

To my mind, first class speakers shouldnt make sounds of their own. I'm fairly easy with respect to speakers, I think. There are a few that I think sound ok at their price points, some I think sound very good. But there have been some Class A rated speakers that are unlistenable.

Ultimately, the rating system is worthless, except in generating demand for the products.

Socrates, some "pro" reviewers know what they write about, some don't. Just sticking with Stereophile, John Atkinson, for example, certainly knows his subject. Others are "pros" only because they are fun to read and somehow someone has paid them for what they have written, not because they have any relevant knowledge. There are more and more of these guys now, especially with the ezines.

Stereophile has in the last few years adopted an unfortunately misleading editorial policy with regard to its recommended list. They used to say that a recommendation required measurements or at least full reviews. Recently they have said that the recommendation of two writers is sufficient, and yet they include components in the recommended list that only "Sam Tellig" has reviewed. Even if you add someone else who has heard and recommends these components, all you add is another incompetent opinion. Why do I say that? Well, I am reminded every April and October of what he said in his review of the Kimber Silver Streak interconnect: "It's secret? Only the signal-carrying portion of the braid is silver - the returns are copper." If Kimber figured out how to get the signal to behave in that fashion, that is certainly still a secret.

Helcat, Kal, John Atkinson, "Sam Tellig," John Marks and other Stereophile contributors have participated from time to time at audioasylum.com, where Sean is also a regular. Sean has had some arguments with "Sam" and, in general, is one of the members there who seems to be very interested in audio reviewer "ethics" and Stereophile's policies.

I find most of these discussions rather tedious. Though I have had an argument with Kal regarding speaker frequency response (I like presence dips, he doesn't), I think all of the contributors to the print mags are decent guys, and almost all of the components they review are recommended because most things made and sold by audio manufacturers do what they are supposed to do. My only discomforts are with the increasingly stratospheric prices of the components they review and the proliferation of "Class A" loudspeakers (I think a lot of them belong in a lower class or are too expensive to recommend for the performance offered, but that's just the personal pov of a listener not connected in any way with the industry). It is unrealistic, however, for anyone to expect a component to be trashed in a review. There just aren't that many of them that are so bad.

Just remember that Stereophile is a buff mag published to entertain and to provide a vehicle for advertising. (There isn't anything wrong with advertising.) Unlike Sean, I would not pay more for Stereophile. I have less and less interest in component reviews anyway, but the components they are reviewing are just getting too expensive.