Stereophile claims about Magico


Stereophile claims Magico has revolutionized loudspeaker design. All I see is standard design. Only 1 thing is slightly new, carbon nano tubes the carbon fiber cones already been done, aluminum cabinets been done. The driver array 1 tweeter 1 mid 2 woofers been done to death. The way magico attaches drivers old as the hills Ive got 50 year old loudspeakers that mount simlar. The way he designs crossovers is fairly standard. So whats the revolution the nano carbon tubes? Or just another bold claim on mag cover to sell issues.
128x128johnk
I think that we are all expecting too much from these magazines. It is obvious, from reading these forums how hard it is for people to make decisions on their own and how emotional this activity is. Why is it that people need so much a affirmation when it come to audio equipments?
Dhaan,

I think you stated the reason why people need so much affirmation. Its because it IS hard to know for sure exactly what something will sound like once you take it home, and, perhaps even more importantly, it is costly to make poorly informed decisions whenever purchasing products based on technology, especially when investing large sums on new equipment that will generally depreciate in value over time.
Wireless,my comments were merely expressing an interest in a fine looking design,in the KEF.From a fan point of view,not as someone running out to spend money.

I certainly like the coaxial mid/tweet,and well matched woofer employed.Not cheap,but the "about to hit the market" TAD monitor will,also be a coaxial mid/tweet design(three way too)but be five times the cost....
A decent reason to shine a light on the KEF,for those interested.

Best
Yep, somebody's got to buy 'em new. I find the best way to evaluate a product is to read dozens of reviews. A lot of times you can read between the the lines of the magazine reviews and then read the discussions in the forums here and really get a good idea of what a piece is going to sound like. But it takes a lot of reading. Of course I think we all enjoy that.
Not all magazines are like that. For example cars (Car and Driver) and computer products (Cnet online) are often accurately reviewed. But it's quite clear audio is not that way. The market is probably just not big enough to support a print maganzine and dozens of esoteric products without an at best synergistic effort between the magazines and manufacturers. One thing I noticed reading Stereophile (I recently subscribed to the print version) that I hadn't noticed before is that the writers are very serious about the hobby. Almost serious to a fault even thought they are clearly over-hyping almost everything they review. They know where their bread and butter is (advertising) but they do seem to be genuinely into it to a strong degree. Like I said since they are clearly over the top I just take their reviews with several grains of salt and enjoy the fiction as well as the true.
Does seem like its the best loudspeaker of the month club. Every month or so a new revolutionary loudspeaker design is reviewed. I feel for the poor soul who buys these loudspeakers based on reviews only to read next month a new favored son is available. Most of the gear Iam interested in never gets tested and if so not by major mags. Very rare they have reviews that realy interest me. I do enjoy phile and other mags but the reviews are not much use system wise to me. But to be fair sure we all could list kit we would like reviewed maybe I should start my own mag and quit complaining about phile;)