2. misc-audio
  3. 995463695

Stereophile "coverage"

Stereophile must enjoy all the negative reaction they get out of their choices of what to cover. Witness the latest cover story, the new Krell LAT-1 speaker. Here, from the biggest of the big advertisers, we get basically immediate cover-story coverage of their latest release, a $37,500 speaker. Stratospheric. The reviewer (who amazingly wasn't Jonathon Scull, with something of this price), is extremely positive while almost seeming to forget the price of this beast. It doesn't go much below 40Hz and it measures horribly. I guess you'll have to wait for their $75K model to get around those obstacles, though the option to pair the LAT-1's with some Krell Master subs is offered up to get down below 40Hz.

So, a super-expensive speaker coupled with other reviews of >$8K components ("you guys never review affordable stuff!"), immediate, feature coverage of a new Krell product ("You guys pander to your advertisers!"), and a very positive review of gear that nobody would argue measures respectably (at any price) ("You guys always give good reviews!"), on top of the usual reduced size of the magazine in the middle of the summer - the August issue should keep the negative feedback coming in full doses.

kthomas

Showing 2 responses by kthomas

kthomas OP
911 posts
 
My original intent wasn't to bitch and certainly wasn't to suggest any sort of conspiracy. I like the magazine, I read about 90% of the content of most issues, and think that for $1 an issue it's an excellent entertainment value. I was interested in the new Krell speakers and enjoyed reading about them.

My point is that the letters section of the magazine and forums such as this over the past year have raised a number of issues multiple times each over the recent past, the three I highlight amongst them. While all of them probably apply to one degree or another to every issue, it just struck me that Stereophile managed to put really overt examples of each into this one issue. As such, I'd expect that we'll get another round of discussion on them. -Kirk

kthomas OP
911 posts
 
I liked the coverage of the Denon receiver, the computer speakers, and especially the sound cards - I had no real interest in purchasing the first two, and only a modest interest in the last one, but I was very interested to see how experienced reviewers compared these to the usual fare, since they don't usually get coverage in a way that they can be compared to the higher-end stuff.

When they put the Denon receiver on the cover and took all the heat for it (not from me), they said they wanted to grab more people's eyes, draw them into picking up and hopefully buying / reading the magazine - extend the reach of the hobby. Great, makes sense, I'm all for it. Now you've got some interested newcomers and you shift into your alter-ego and produce an issue with nothing reviewed under $8K. I'm still reading because I was already reading, but anybody who you happened to snag with your coverage of the Denon is scratching their head and re-confirming that audiophiles are completely out of touch. Sam's space was filled with a rant about how terrible it is that anyone would even consider surround sound (something you might have wanted the Denon for), but more importantly was NOT filled with the usual coverage of something considerably more affordable along with his obvious enjoyment of same. Fremer's column was coverage of the show, which necessarily meant brief coverage of very high-priced analog gear so, again, nothing a newcomer would immediately relate to.

Maybe they're just searching, trying new things and seeing what is well received, what isn't, etc. I'm sure it's tough times to be an audio magazine and I'm glad to see them trying different things. But I also think they're aware of what they're doing and the type of reaction they're going to get, and given the number of instances they provide of things they have to know are going to draw criticism, I have to assume they enjoy it. -Kirk

More to discover