 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
216.52.185.72
I was browsing through the recent TAS with the Pass Labs gear on the cover. On page 96 Jonathan Valin (writing about the acoustics of a zither) declares that the sounds "swirl through the large wooden body of the zither like the powerful cross currents in a tide pool".
I haven't been to the beach for many years, but I always thought that a tide pool was a relatively small pool of water (hopefully with some interesting sea creatures) left behind on the rocks as the tide receded. As a closed pool (with no pumps), I was pretty sure that there weren't any currents, let alone "powerful cross currents". Please take a look at the picture of a tide pool from Wikipedia and let me know if you see any "powerful cross currents".
Having never actually played a zither (or even seen one in person), I figured I would take advantage of my time on Wikipedia to see just how large the wooden body of zither is. Take a look at the photo (again from Wikipedia to be illustrative of zithers in general). When I think of a "large wooden body" I tend to think of, oh say, a piano or maybe a double-bass. What about you? Do you see a "large wooden body" in the photo?
Is JV as good as this with metaphors in the books he writes?
By the way, this was a landmark issue for another reason. They broke their self-imposed rule and printed the four letter word that begins with "A". Check out the first letter to the editor.
Follow Ups:
Audiophiles and industry figures fighting over zithers and the strength of currents in tide pools. Hey, here's an idea...the next time someone posts about the latest theory for the death of high end audio, link to this thread. I can't imagine why younger folk want nice looking headphones and MP3s instead of fighting about zithers and metaphors on a forum. Wow. Are they missing out on all of the fun with all of that wacky listening to music that they're doing.
Hansen, Stop acting like a baby. You don't like Valin. We get it. You make nice things. They are pretty, shiny, and make nice sounds. We like them.
Valin, You *DO* have a new reference every month. It makes it hard to trust your opinion. Also, consider a new picture...the current one is creepy. My opinion, of course. Ladies may love it. I don't know.
A final point, that record looks like it sucks. I'd feel better about all of this if you guys were fighting over something that people actually like to listen to.
The only exception I would take is that somebody that is relatively new to this hobby doesn't know the things that you do. He wouldn't know that "Valin [has] a new reference every month" or that I "don't like Valin" (let alone the reasons for that dislike).
I honestly wish that TAS would be a valid, successful magazine. The US audio scene would be much better off with two credible print magazines. (Think Car & Driver and Road & Track, and how they complement each other.)
If you go back far enough, history has some interesting lessons for us. Two of the mainstays of the current TAS used to write for the original TAS under the editorship of HP (Jonathan Valin and Wayne Garcia). At one point there was a mutiny of sorts, involving Valin, Garcia, and one of HP's erstwhile financial backers. The result was the relatively short-lived "Fi" magazine.
Fi started off with an interesting premise. Half of the book was devoted to coverage of music and the other half was devoted to equipment. As I recall, there was a self-imposed limit of $1000 (retail) per component to keep the magazine relevant to the average newcomer to high-end audio. The financial limit kept being broken until it was discarded altogether.
Instead of focusing on budget gear (as some writers do at Stereophile), all the Fi reviewers wanted to be the next HP and review only the best, cutting edge equipment. Valin was the worst of the bunch in that regard. It wasn't enough to only review the most expensive and obscure equipment*. Before long before he adopted many of HP's writing stylisms, referring to himself in the the third person, using archaic English colloquialisms ("anon", anyone?), et cetera.
Not only was the old TAS a better magazine, the old JV was a better reviewer.
*One advantage of reviewing expensive, obscure equipment is that very few people can ever challenge your opinions They simply have never heard the latest handmade, ridiculously expensive equipment that only has one dealer in the US. It is then easier to be an "authority", your judgements never in question...
Someone new to the hobby probably is not reading Valin, given the price point of the equipment he reviews. If they are reading Valin, it is not to get advice on equipment purchases. TAS has other writers reviewing less expensive equipment. By the time the new hobbyist, finances permitting, is ready for the expensive stuff, he has likely read enough of Valin in passing to know he has a new reference every month (exaggeration, perhaps, but only a slight one), and the new piece of audio jewelry will be surpassed in the next month or two.The other advantage of reviewing ultra-expensive gear with a very limited or even non-existent dealership presence, it would seem to me, is that those manufacturers lacking a dealer presence rely more on reviews to get the word out, and therefore may be more willing to give a reviewer a longer term loan versus another company with an established dealer network. That reviewer, perhaps, would be awash is play toys. Which would, in turn, makes a divorce easier when they have invested nothing in the marriage.
Edits: 05/02/12
I found the record on e-bay (Russia). Excellent recording. Worth hunting down.
Glad to see you posting again after a long absence.
I agree with your point re: tidal pools (tho' maybe it depends on whether it's low v. high tide!) but fail to see why you care . . . hell, I'm surprised you would spend even one moment reading JV. Most of us are aware of the Valin-Nordost debacle and have already made up our minds regarding the value of reading POS, oops, TAS. May I kindly suggest that you put your energy into creating the next killer product that TAS will ignore.
Cheers.
Or put his effort into creating another product that Stereophile will spew all over. What makes you think his products are so great? Ever heard one?
> > > What makes you think his products are so great?
Because they sound as good or better than anything I've heard.> > > Ever heard one?
I got to tour the Ayre factory a couple of years back and listened to a few songs in their soundroom. Top shelf Ayre electronics driving TAD speakers. No doubt, the best system I've ever heard. If it had a weakness, I was not aware of it.I also like that they're made in USA and have great customer service. If I win the lottery, I might flirt with something from, say, Lamm or ARC, but will almost certainly go with Ayre. I guess that makes me a "fanboy" in JV's sage eyes.
BTW, Stereophile is hardly the only mag that "spews" all over Ayre. You might check for spewage over at HiFi+, Soundstage, or Audiobeat, to name just three. "Fanboy" would appear to be a communicable, um, ease. Don't bother, however, looking in TAS (well, maybe some pre-Nordost dust-up TAS). The reason is well-recorded in the archives here.
Edits: 05/01/12
With a few mouse clicks you can see what comprises Beetlemania's system.
Ah I see. Hence your help and Beetlemania's man crush.
And can we put you down as a "fanboy" of JV? Or, perhaps, you simply get off taking shots at anyone who likes Stereophile?
My involvement in this thread is much less a defense of Valin than it is a condemnation of Hansen. I enjoy taking shots at anyone that thinks Stereophile is better or "cleaner" than TAS. They both suffer from the same realities which prevent true objectivity.
I'm not gonna claim Stereophile is perfect but they are much more transparent than TAS. Just look at how JA and the others regularly answer their critics on this forum. IIRC, Stereophile once had an comparable situation to the Nordost debacle; the involved writer was sacked. Stereophile actually has policies in place to reduce, if not prevent, misbehavior and they appear to enforce those policies. Beyond debate, Stereophile's measurements set them apart from any print mag in North America.
I personally enjoy Stereophile's writers much more than TAS'. The last several TAS I've read entertained me for <30 min. Even a "crappy" issue of Stereophile can keep my interest for at least an hour and most issues I spend 2-4 h with. That's a pretty good deal for a buck an issue. Finally, Stereophile has several writer's whose ears I trust as I've shared their opinions regarding reviewed equipment that I've also heard.
Remember, JNS despises SP, almost as much as CH hates JV.
Sorry, I should have prefaced that statement by mentioning that Stereophile is indeed better and cleaner than TAS!
crap comment could have gone unspoken.
...regards...tr
an industry member but that doesnt mean we cant disagree. dirty laundry can be aired in private.
...regards...tr
Edits: 04/30/12
Exactly which part did you think was "crap"?
YMMV, but I read Mr. Valin's comments on the reproduction of that album in another review of his. The recording is one of his references. Always on the lookout for good reference material, I bought it myself (on CD), in the hope of adding to my humble collection.
It is a bit of a rarity and so was not especially cheap.
Well, Mr. Valin did say in response to a comment on another forum that the disc was a reviewing tool as opposed to, um, something you would listen to for pleasure perhaps. I should have taken the point. If anyone is tempted to do what I did, I would warn them that, before you begin to listen with pleasure and perhaps even interest, it will very likely be necessary to spend a good number of hours with the music, to give it a fighting chance to grow on you.
I take my hat off to Mr. Valin for finding anything to say about it at all.
...a mere shadow of its former self.
Previously driven by one intelligent, creative man - HP - pushing the envelope to find new ways to describe a component's sound, it now seems like a publication put together by a committee of creative/mental midgets.
Still entertaining at times but nothing like it used to be.
You shouldn't be surprised.
I also miss the higher quality of writing and review depth.
...on what HP is up to?
Haven't seen anything by him in a couple of issues.
He's been threatening to do something on his own for a couple of years now.
Send me a PM.
Hi
Fwiw, my Mom played an Auto-harp and a Zither when i was little.
The old Zither she had looked just like an auto-harp but without the chord buttons.
Best,
Tom Danley
Danley sound Labs
"Is JV as good as this with metaphors in the books he writes?"
Haven't read them? ... surprising given your obvious obsession with the fellow.
Short’s the best position they is. Bullet in the Brain
> Having never actually played a zither (or even seen one in person), I
> figured I would take advantage of my time on Wikipedia to see just how
> large the wooden body of zither is.
I haven't read the review yet, but maybe JV was thinking of a Hungarian
cimbalom, which does have a larger body. The zither tend to be used in folk
or pop music - think the Third Man theme - whereas the cimbalom can be
used in orchestral works, Kodaly's Hary Janos Suite, for example.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
This cimbalom might be considered to have a "large wooden body":
But probably not this one:
If you read the full review it will become clear that JV was not referring to a cimbalom. But thanks for the reference to an instrument I was not familiar with. I also learned that the surname "Zimbalist" refers to one who plays a cimbalom.
We learned early in our careers that one of the most important rules of advocacy is to pick your two or three strongest arguments, hammer them home, and forget about the minutiae which does not change anyone's mind. The risk of doing otherwise is that people may remember the minutiae and forget the important arguments. As another poster pointed out below, does Michael Fremer apparently believing that 25 carat gold exists undermine his authority on all things analog? No. So who cares?I believe I read the same review you did, and at the end of reading the review I said to myself "Wow, a new reference, that's a shock" and "did I miss the comparison between the new reference and the old reference." I re-read the review, and apparently did not miss the comparison. It was not there.
Those points are relevant to his job as an audio critic. Not that I really care what JV writes about audio, but I really can't see anyone caring about his writings on tidal pools. Even if his metaphor was factually correct, would it help me understand the point he was trying to make? No. And I'd be surprised if it would anyone else, either.
Edits: 04/25/12
"does Michael Fremer apparently believing that 25 carat gold exists undermine his authority on all things analog? No."
If it were so it would undermine his authority on all subjects, not just audio.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I remember during the course of the last Presidential campaign then candidate Obama inadvertantly claimed there were fifty-seven states in the Union. Did that remark alone disqualify him from being President of the United States? I'd give Fremer a pass.
"There are exactly 57 card-carrying members of the Communist Party in the Department of Defense at this time!"
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
(nt)
.
Short’s the best position they is. Bullet in the Brain
TAS has perfected the art of post-comparison judgement that involves no comparison at all. If you noticed most reviews do not include a sidebar of "associated equipment" like Stereophile does. A couple issues ago they pronounced a phono pre amp (Zesta Andros) an "instant classic". The review does not mention the turntable or even the cartridge it was used with. Apparently it works with anything or maybe even produces sound on its own. This is worse than McDonalds.
There are only localized, largely stationary nodes that get bigger or smaller.
The air inside a violin for the most part pretty much stays put.
Zones of varying pressure push against each other a bit, at their boundaries.
There are some images of this (I think gathered by vibrating violin backs with fine sand on them) in Alberto Bachmann's "Encyclopedia of the Violin." Which I have in a box somewhere.
JM
Can you prove that there aren't "powerful cross currents" produced by the f-holes? (Just kidding...)
I've seen psycho ex girlfriends come up with better or more apt criticisms.
No offense to you, your ear, your gear, and I'm not jumping to defend someone who must have somehow jilted you; but I'd say at this point you should move on.
Did you bitch at Doug Schneider for saying this about your amp:
Let's keep it oceanic in your honor, too.....
"The quicker-paced “Recusa” sounded so liquid that the speaker end of the room seemed to get wet..."
Did that end of the room get wet like a tide pool? Do you need anybody to rush to his room and then to a tide pool to compare?
If you don't like Valin, good for you, but this was weak cyber stalking. Just 'unfriend' him on your Facebook page, change your status to "unattached," and be done with it.
Actually, I have a pool in my backyard. I rushed back and forth to compare. It was about that wet ;-)
Doug Schneider
Really?
JV's reviews are full of (presumably) clever metaphors. Unlike the example you provided from Doug Schneider (which I would take as humor), JV takes a different approach. He gives the impression of trying to appear to be the expert. He wrote a medium length paragraph on the zither, only at the end to reveal that he has no idea what he is talking about.
Is this also true for the rest of the review?
Oh. And at the end we find that he has (yet again) designated a "new reference". Yawn.
The current crew has turned TAS into the McDonald's of audio journalism. I would hate for readers to take this as the new norm. People tend to get used to things after a while.
What happened to the old TAS that took days to finish, not a half-hour?
What happened to articles that made you think?
What happened to reviews that left you feeling that you actually had an idea of what the gear sounded like?
I miss the old TAS, and would gladly welcome back that old spirit. Their cause is not helped by people that write nonsense about things of which they know nothing.
Reading these old issues provided endless hours of enjoyment, but not in the way that I had envisioned. Sure, the record and equipment reviews were helpful and informative. But none of this captured my attention, wakened my senses, like the letters to the editor. Now here was real theatre. Light sparring, good-natured kidding, stinging invectives, incisive recriminations, unadulterated sarcasm- it was all here and wildly entertaining at that. Manufacturers pelted reviewers for an unfavorable rating, reviewers lashed back in kind. Readers insulted other readers for their dearth of audio knowledge; readers sparred with reviewers. Even reviewers lashed out at one another on occasion.....
Lest one think that this was just a forum for lashing out, an arena of wild insults, let me correct that notion. These were, by in large, literate, cogent, well-thought-out missives. The fact that they happened to be, at times, angry and caustic, just heightened the drama and enlivened the debate.
Alas, things have changed at TAS. . For the most part, I now find the letters to the editor section an eviscerated version of its past self, bleached out and desiccated, lacking drama, lacking humor, in short- DULL! Where is the old vitality, the verve, the conflict, the angst? This is the kind of reading material one might peruse at a ladies tea party. The reasons for this I leave to you. I only know that TAS has lost its way; the pilot light has burnt out leaving only the faint sound of hissing gas. PLEASE, before we all fall asleep, let's revisit the old ways, let's hurl a few insults, toss a few invectives, indulge in occasional sarcasm. At least, then, we"ll know we're alive.
Eric
A tide may be mistaken for Tsunami but I protest belittling McDonald's Double Cheese Burger as Audio journalism.
Cheers
Bill
...you made me laugh. At least I wasn't drinking milk at the time. :-)
What you say about TAS may be true, but I find it very amusing (tragic) you propose that Stereophile is any better. Why on earth you would get involved in threads like this as a mfgr. is beyond me.
JNS said, " What you said about TAS may be true, but I find it very amusing ( tragic ) you purpose that Stereophile is any better " .
I read both and have for many years, my personal opinion is that Stereophile is considerably better, always was, always will be.
Tim
Why not? These posts by very successful designers and reviewers like CH, JA, JM, Alan Sircon and a few others show they dont stay aloof. They are like family here, I feel. They dont pick and choose to express their opinions.
Cheers
Bill
Listen nobody always or nevers.
Such an obvious vendetta that goes far beyond any issues of competency.
Tell me of another mfgr. that goes after a member of the press in this fashion.
The Titanic sinking was tragic...a manufacturer having an opinion is refreshing.
Rick.
I don't recall proposing in my post that Stereophile was "any better", although I personally believe that to be the case (for many reasons).
As far as getting involved "as a manufacturer", that is the way this forum is set up. These are not the views of Ayre, nor any other employees of Ayre. They are simply my own personal opinions. I would prefer to post them either anonymously or as a "private citizen", but that would break the rules of the forum.
The only other choice is to not post at all (which I haven't for many months). But sometimes the temptation to take a pin to the inflated ego of a writer is too great for me. Another inmate once asked me why I didn't simply make these posts at the TAS forum. I tried that once but they were deleted immediately and my account removed. Oh well.
Charles everyone knows that you think Stereophile is better and it doesnt take a genius to understand why.
I dont think it wise for anyone to "stalk" someone, be this person a member of the audio press or a hobbyist. Certainly you are quick to point out Valin's shortcomings, but would you ever point out when he got something right? Or would you lead me to believe that Valin is entirely without merit as it relates to this hobby?
Feel free to take a pin to deflate Valin's ego. You obviously feel he is important enough to deflate. The funny thing is you are helping him and TAS with all your juvenile blathering.
I got a great deal of satisfaction from your apology months back. My 12 year old son often displays more self-control and better judgement than you do on this forum.
"Another inmate once asked me why I didn't simply make these posts at the TAS forum. I tried that once but they were deleted immediately and my account removed."
Some history: "In 1975, Little League Baseball banned all non-US teams from the World Series."
Why? Because the Asian teams were too formidable. At the time, the Little League mentality was: "If you can't beat'em--don't play'em." Apparently, TAS has adopted that same mentality for some formidable posters who are persona non grata at its Internet stadium. But hope springs eternal, Charles, and history is on your side: "After considerable criticism, the ban {on Asian teams} was rescinded the following year."
History notwithstanding, don't hold your breath waiting for a torrent of criticism to descend upon TAS, or for TAS to adopt a policy dedicated to the proposition that sunshine is the best disinfectant. ~:)
A typical audiophile could easily be fooled by TAS. Nice photos, clean layout, bizarre products you never heard of give an impression that they know something that you don't.
What I don't understand is the manufacturers that place ads there. I would hope that most manufacturers would know enough not to be fooled by TAS's act. Placing an ad is basically like supporting a political party with cash donations. You do it because you believe in them -- they have the same beliefs as you and they trumpet those beliefs to a wide audience. What kind of a manufacturer believes in the philosophies that TAS promotes???
"Placing an ad is basically like supporting a political party with cash donations. You do it because you believe in them -- they have the same beliefs as you and they trumpet those beliefs to a wide audience. What kind of a manufacturer believes in the philosophies that TAS promotes???"
Let’s take your last sentence first. I’ll leave it to you and others to debate that since you know *much* more about TAS’s, er, philosophies than I.
Concerning your other point: I think the only thing one need know, when placing an ad, is that he’s getting a decent return on his money regarding eyeballs perusing his ad. I don’t think it’s important that one share the magazine’s philosophy or approve of its methods *if* purchasing an ad in said magazine drives sales to the extent that you can justify the purchase.
What I’d be curious to know, is if it makes good business sense to purchase the same ad (or nearly the same) in both TAS and Stereophile? Isn’t there tremendous overlap? For example, don’t most U.S. audiophiles read *both* publications? If so, it looks like one would be prudent to purchase an ad in Stereophile (due to its greater circulation number) and be done with it. After purchasing best of breed why bother buying the mutt?
I think a lot of the answer to your questions lay in the field of psychology, rather than economics. Stereophile's circulation is roughly triple that of TAS's. (It's hard to say for sure because Stereophile's circulation numbers are verified by the Audit Bureau of Circulation, while TAS's haven't been for many years.)
TAS's advertising rates are significantly lower than Stereophile's. The last time we advertised with TAS it was about a 2:1 difference. Therefore Stereophile's rates are lower per reader, but significantly more expensive up front. Many companies, especially smaller and/or newer ones can "get into the game" much more easily through TAS than Stereophile.
The same is true with trade shows. It is much less expensive to exhibit at RMAF than at CES, which is one of the reasons that RMAF tends to be fun. Many exhibitors there are literally garage operations and there is a huge variety of interesting products there that may not ever achieve mainstream success. Remember when Bruce Thigpen of Eminent Technology created a big stir with his fan-powered subwoofer that would go to nearly DC? That was debuted at the RMAF, but to the best of my knowledge has never been displayed at CES.
As far as overlap between TAS and Stereophile, it has varied over time. I would guess that currently there are, at the very most, only a few thousand TAS readers that don't also read Stereophile. So advertising in Stereophile probably reaches most audiophiles.
Strictly from a business standpoint, I believe that advertising in Stereophile provides a significantly greater ROI than advertising in TAS. At the same time, no audio magazine can exist without revenues from sales of advertisements. So in a very real sense, advertising in a magazine that you don't believe in is akin to donating money to a political party that you don't believe in. (I suppose that this happens all the time, as many large corporations make large donations to both US political parties.)
> Stereophile's circulation is roughly triple that of TAS's. (It's hard to
> say for sure because Stereophile's circulation numbers are verified by the
> Audit Bureau of Circulation, while TAS's haven't been for many years.)
The Absolute Sound does publish its circulation in its annual Publisher's
Statement, which is required by the Post Office. While the rules governing
what can be counted as paid circulation are less rigid than the ABC's,
this does give a year-by-year yardstick. Their most recent figure was
published in their January 2012 issue (p.231). As of October 1, 2011, the
average number if copies sold per issue for the previous 12 months was
25,722.
For comparison, Stereophile's average paid circulation, again as of
October 1, 2011, calculated on the same basis and published in our
November 2011 issue (p.141), was 76,099.
So yes, the ratio of circulations is approximately 3:1 in favor of
Stereophile: 76,099 vs 25,722.
For reference, the following 2011 circulations were published for 4 of
the 5 UK-based magazines on a Norwegian forum a few weeks back:
What Hi Fi: 67,531
Hi Fi World: 16,862
Hi Fi News: 13,500
Hi Fi Choice: 11,420
Missing is HiFi+; I don't have any information on that magazine's circulation, I am afraid.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Yeah, but is here a category for issues stuffed into a radiator at the Waldorf? :-)
> Yeah, but is there a category for issues stuffed into a radiator at the Waldorf?
> :-)
Those were copies of both Stereophile and TAS featuring its products that MBL
had bought. The audio magazines, of course were much more effective at
damping resonances than general magazines, due to the denseness of the
prose.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
~!
The Mind has No Firewall~ U.S. Army War College.
I am sure Audio magazines work for MBL like speakers. For the common man's speakers however, Playboy may be a better choice because of the denseness of the pictures.
Cheers
Bill
density and firmness???
:-)
So there's a reason to have two audio magazines after all -- dissimilar publications damp radiator resonances more effectively.
> So there's a reason to have two audio magazines after all -- dissimilar
> publications damp radiator resonances more effectively.
And I think it safe to predict that a Web-based audio publication is useless
when it comes to providing any acoustic damping. :-)
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Awe, c'mon, it's the Waldorf, their radiators have been equipped with USB 3.0. :-)
that the combined figure for the UK publications is so high, particularly for What Hi-Fi? .
Given that the population of the United Kingdom is approximately one-fifth that of the U.S., and allowing even for a sizable penetration in offshore markets (presumably European), that would seem to indicate a proportionally greater interest in the field than exists in the U.S.
For fifty years the mainstream consumer has been told by "Consumer Reports" and "Stereo Review" a lot of bunk about how everything sounds the same (except for speakers). Their combined circulation is probably 50x that of all of the specialty magazines in the US.
The result is that anybody who promotes an alternative viewpoint, whether a reviewer, a salesperson, or a manufacturer is viewed with suspicion. The high-end in the US is essentially still-born. In contrast, even the largest circulation "mass-market" magazine in the UK acknowledges that every component sounds different (and some sound better than others). So despite the smaller population and the weaker economy, the UK remains an important part of the worldwide audio market.
Interesting. I dismissed Consumer Reports as far back as the 1960's because their reviews of speakers and automobiles were obviously bogus, based on my first hand experience of several speakers and cars.
As far as I know it's pretty much the AES position that CD sound is perfect and all players and amplifiers sound the same. I thought the problem was world wide.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
If it were not for Ralph Nader we would still be fishtailing on our Corvairs. And Epicure was a very good speaker.
Cheers
Bill
At the time, I couldn't understand why anyone would buy a book about cars written by a man who didn't drive.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
...we would never have invaded Iraq.
The story I like to tell about CR is about a shampoo review probably a quarter century ago. I have had dandruff since I was quite young. In this review of shampoos, the only mention of dandruff shampoos was this dismissive comment: "Any high-quality shampoo should remove dandruff flakes." The clear implication is that dandruff shampoos are a waste of money.
So I slapped my forehead and went out and bought their #1-rated shampoo. Within 2 days the flakes were raining down and my head felt like I had flees.
The other problem with CR is that their hypocrisy. Their methodology has serious problems--most importantly, that they fail to account for unit-to-unit variation, basing their judgments on a single sample. But sample-to-sample variability is one of the most important manufacturing faults.
There are other problems--like the fact that they seem not to pay attention to quality of construction. One product may have tighter tolerances and be built out of better parts than another, but if the other performs better when it's new--during their tests--they'll recommend it instead.
I haven't read the mag in years. Maybe it has changed.
Jim
Jim, just wondering whether the audio reviewers consider sample to sample variation. Say two Made in China samples of Acoustic Energy or PSB speakers to name just two. I can never be too sure if I will get a sample similar to the one that a reviewer raved about. Perhaps the magazines should review three samples and Measurements taken so that we can judge the approx max deviation in sound.
Cheers
Bill
Bill,
Let me first say that I'm an expert only on my own reviews and don't speak for Stereophile, and certainly not for the industry.
The best short answer is "no", apart from channel matching, which is revealed during testing, and is a good (but hardly perfect) indication of consistency. (That, by the way, is a very important reason why Stereophile's measurements matter.) There's also speaker matching, which isn't really fair because high-end speakers usually matched up either during manufacture or later). What I do is pay attention to workmanship and other indications of quality control, which would tend to indicate better uniformity. But ultimately I'm always working with just one (or, in the case of speakers, two) unit(s) (unless one fails and has to be replaced). It's just not practical to test multiple units, if only because manufacturers usually can't provide them.
An aside: This is one argument in favor of expensive parts: Apart from any cryo'd qualities (or whatever) they might possess, they're more likely to be in spec than the cheap stuff (but some manufacturers will by cheap, test it in-house, then match it up, which saves money). Parts with a tighter spec lead to electronics with more consistent performance.
I believe, however--and this was my point really--that there is a difference in claims and reader expectations. Even when it comes to measurements, Stereophile (eg) makes it clear that they're presenting information about that particular unit. One hopes for general relevance, but ultimately that depends on the skill and standards of the manufacturer (not just the designer). CR presents their measurements as objective and rigorous--a standard that, in this respect, they do not meet.
Readers of audio magazines should, in my opinion, consider that it is at least possible--I'm not sure how likely--that the sound may differ from one unit to the next. (And if you want an indication of how likely this is, note how often reviewers at Stereophile report that their review samples didn't sound quite right, or didn't work at all, and had to be replaced--then consider how often, in magazines and online pubs with lower editorial standards, such things go unreported. I think its reasonable to assume that a company that sends out a review unit that doesn't work right is more likely to send an out-of-spec unit to a customer.)
Here's another aside: I had a long chat with Caelin Gabriel from Shunyata a couple of months ago. I'm not quite sure what to make of this new cable-measurements regime that they've come up with (i.e., I'm not sure how it relates to sound), but it certainly does allow them a degree of reproduceability (in, eg, electrical connections between wire and terminations) that, as far as I know, other manufacturers can't match.
I'd be interested to hear from manufacturers on this one -- Charles? Vic? -- as well as from other reviewers and editors. If it's true as most people in this industry claim that the tiniest changes are audible, sample-to-sample variation is likely to be a serious concern.
Jim
Subjective listening tests are quite time-consuming to perform properly. Some manufacturers claim to listen to every unit before it is shipped. I personally believe that this would be close to a waste of time. The logistics involved in ensuring (for example) that each unit had an identical amount of break-in time would be daunting, to say the least. It wouldn't work to keep a "reference" unit on hand for comparison, as it would always have more run-in time than the test unit.
I could go on and on, but it doesn't take much imagination to see the limitations of using listening tests on the production line. I once asked a manufacturer that used these methods if they had ever rejected a unit because it didn't sound right. He said that there was *one* piece that had some ground-loop noise that didn't show up on their test bench.
At Ayre we go to extremes to ensure the consistency of sound. We never allow for substitute parts to be used. 99.9% of all solder joints are on PCBs that are soldered by robotic machines to ensure consistency. Every unit undergoes a battery of bench tests two separate time, once when first assembled and again after a burn-in period.
Occasionally a part is discontinued by the manufacturer (or the manufacturing process is changed). This probably happens to us more than most companies because our products stay in production for a much longer time than average. If a part is changed (as has happened twice in the last 20 years with Roederstein resistors), we perform critical listening tests to assess the impact of the change. Luckily for us, both changes had very small sonic impacts. In other cases (such as with the now discontinued Toshiba JFETs) we purchased a minimum 50 year supply as a lifetime buy.
The last thing we want is for the unit a customer purchases to sound different from a review unit, or for people to say things like "the latest version of such-and-such product doesn't sound as good as the earlier ones".
Of course we do offer sonic upgrades (at a reasonable cost) if and when we determine how to improve the performance of a given design. But that is a different story altogether.
A couple more things:
"Of course we do offer sonic upgrades (at a reasonable cost) if and when we determine how to improve the performance of a given design. But that is a different story altogether."It is, but it reminds me that it's not uncommon for manufacturers--usually at the lower end of the market--to "upgrade" a unit in order to lower their manufacturing costs. To be clear, I am NOT talking about Ayre here. This can be legitimate--sometimes you can improve sound while saving money--but more often, I suspect, it's a way of spinning cost-cutting as improvement. (Certainly it's an improvement for the manufacturer--just not the customer. Industry associations in some industries give awards for this sort of thing: Congratulations to ABC Industries for increasing their profits while fooling their customers! Congratulations to XYZ Foods for figuring out how to get customers to pay $15 for a jar of strawberry jam!)
Also notable that many manufacturers will make changes to their design or (more often) parts over time without telling customers, whether it's because the old part became unavailable or because they found what they think is a better part. Either way, if you trust the manufacturer's judgment--and probably you should if you're going to invest in their expensive equipment--then this either doesn't matter or is a good thing. But, given that sound is subjective, it does make it likely that the sound of your unit will vary from the review unit. (This is also an argument for continuing to review--and measure--older designs--CAT, Vandersteen 3, some Ayre units--over time, as Stereophile has often done. This practice has the added advantage of NOT motivating manufacturers towards planned obsolescence (or at least frequent changes in the product lineup).
And then there is the fact that tubes--which I continue to enjoy--are a huge and difficult to control (for consumers at least) source of sample-to-sample variation. Charles mentioned break-in in solid-state gear, but with tubes the performance of a product continues to evolve over the lifetime of a set of tubes. For some people, that's just part of the fun.
Jim
Edits: 05/02/12
Changing an existing design to reduce ongoing manufacturing cost is called "value engineering". In the computer company I used to work for this was often done by engineers working in the Manufacturing organization rather than Engineering. It was necessary to keep a close watch on what these people did, because their focus was primarily on cost.
A friend of mine told me that in the ancient past his father was the purchasing agent for a company that sold audio kits. If his father saw a good buy on a capacitor that had a value close to the one designed by the engineer he might just make a swap. Of course, these were kits, so if the resulting product didn't sound so great, that would be the customer's fault for building the damn thing incorrectly. :-(
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
I am not sure on this but the last time I read Hi-Fi Choice at Chapters it was $13.50 Cad. The sales figures certainly don't indicate quality IMO since Hi-Fi Choice is better than What Hi-Fi for in depth 2 channel reviews.
I could not order Hi-Fi Choice as a subscription to get a lower price - so as much I liked it I really didn't want to spend $13 a month on it.
Hopefully they changed this - or perhaps I missed the foreign nation subscription rate??
I like Hi Fi Choice. Seems like a good magazine to me. Perhaps not as high end as some would like but interesting. I really like their comparison reviews. I buy it and Hi Fi News at the local Barnes and Noble. They cost me $10 US. I looked into subscribing but I'd only save about $9 a year for Hi FI News and nothing for Hi FI Choice. So I don't bother.
When they discover the center of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it. ~ Bernard Bailey
"When they discover the center of the universe, a lot of people will be disappointed to discover they are not it. ~ Bernard Bailey "
Unless your from Ontario (a Canadian in joke).
> that the combined figure for the UK publications is so high, particularly for > What Hi-Fi?.
What HiFi is a mass-market buying guide publication that also covers home
theater - its closest US equivalent is Sound & Vision - so its circulation
shouldn't be taken as typical of specialty audio titles.
> Given that the population of the United Kingdom is approximately one-fifth
> that of the U.S., and allowing even for a sizable penetration in offshore
> markets (presumably European), that would seem to indicate a proportionally
> greater interest in the field than exists in the U.S.
Even without What HiFi, I think there is some truth in this, given that there
are 4 magazines in the UK compared with 2 in the US. But if you discount
What HiFi for the reason I gave above, note that Stereophile has a
circulation greater than those of all the other English-language magazines combined.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
nt
By using your own ears.
If you think JV missed the boat on his sonic impressions of the piece in question, that's a completely fair and fun thing to challenge.
If you base your final take on a review or reviewer on whether or not he or she blows a metaphor or science-y-ish reference, then where was your post bitching at Fremer for thinking that there is such a thing as 25 carat gold?
;D
Your agenda is obvious, as is your disdain for JV and TAS.
That's fine, too. I was just pointing out you need better ammo.
Thinking you just won a 'gotcha' point by going after a fumbled tide pool zither metaphor is beneath you and takes away from your message, actually.
So, have you listened to the piece of gear in that review?
How do you compare and contrast your impression with JV's?
Is JV off base?
On what points?
> > If you think JV missed the boat on his sonic impressions of the piece in question, that's a completely fair and fun thing to challenge. < <
In my opinion it is not appropriate for one manufacturer to review a competing product in a public setting. I have no comment one way or the other on the equipment under review. My only point is that either JV is becoming senile or is completely out of his league. Making such absurd allusions in any writing intended for public consumption is simply embarrassing. I suppose I could ask if his editor was asleep at the wheel, but I think we already know the answer to that.
I've lolled in wonderfully calm tidal pools, also seen them pounded by huge swells, in fact, I have some spectacular slides of that somewhere, taken with a plastic bag around my camera during a storm in the Caymen Islands. So JV's simile doesn't strike me as clumsy. In fact, I found it very evocative.
BTW, some of those creatures are interesting indeed. This charming fellow can kill you if you're so rude as to step on the spines of his back (as I almost managed to do once, albeit not in a tidal pool):
You mentioned[In my opinion it is not appropriate for one manufacturer to review a competing product in a public setting] But I recall a bit about you mentioning a issue you felt was poor design in Regas DAC in print and maybe while not priced similar to your offerings you do sell DACs do you not?
I did not comment on Rega's DAC design in any way, let alone review it or say that it was "poor". Instead, for some reason a representative from Rega made some inaccurate statements to Sam Tellig when he wrote about the Rega DAC in his column. Ideally these would be filtered and/or corrected by the writer or editor. In the real world we cannot expect journalists and editors to be technical experts on cutting edge technology. I wrote a letter to the editor explaining the technical errors. I believe that Stereophile printed this in the "Manufacturer's Comments" section.
:D
You've gotten some decent advice from others on the thread, you should think about it.
Sorry Charles, I read this is morning and thought the same thing as Winophilia. I certainly understand trying to shed light on situations that should have light shed on them. Just check out some of my posts with an AA member in cables who chose to delete his moniker then come back under a new moniker because of shady dealings.
At some point even if you’re right and justified people end up viewing it as unpalatable. Not that your company will be affected (except Steve should be nicer to lowly cable guys) but man, maybe it’s time to let it go. He can make himself look silly all on his own.
like those from a month or so back when you outright accused a company of fraud, but then had to cough up an apology.
Oh, illuminating in the sense of demonstrating the truth of the phrase A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
Oh wait, some of that mess got conveniently erased from the public record, didn't it?
Oh well ...
Short’s the best position they is. Bullet in the Brain
You got me, the apology police stopped by and made me post that and then the cyber fairies made it go away whoooo!
You are a demented little man aren't you?
Steve left Ayre over a year-and-a-half ago. He now works for AudioQuest.
Let me ask you a question -- If (say) a cable company made really poor product year after year, how long do you think people should wait to stop pointing that out?
My brief dealing with him was about 2 years ago maybe a bit longer.
I understand that point and there are plenty of cable companies based in BS and hype that should be outed till people understand that they are spending money on gear that is either crap or dangerous or both. But coming from someone in my position that message usually doesn’t have the desired effect.
Unfortunately because of you prior issues with JV, as justified as they were, I felt the same way you did, that type of situation really raises my hackles, this current post over something so inconsequential comes off as somewhat petty. I stopped reading TAS a long time ago because reviews seem more hype and fluff instead of anything meaningful, in my opinion (oops there goes any chance of a Tel Wire/TAS review).
I am sure there are plenty of people out there who you respect that enjoy that type of reviewing. People have to come to their own conclusions, telling them not to go to MickyD’s because they’re eating crap tends falls on deaf ears until they realize it for themselves, even then some will still choose to eat crap.
You’re a person I hold in high regard, as a fellow cyclist I doubt highly I would have been able to persevere as you have after what you’ve gone through. Again let him make himself look silly, he doesn’t need your help as much as you’d like to give it.
No doubt about it. Possibly "swirl through the small wooden body of the zither like the powerful fore and back currents in a fast ebbing tide".
Regards,
Geoff
On the subject of tide pools, I was under the (perhaps mistaken) impression that tide pools (or at least those formed in high tide zones) were subject to strong currents. Indeed, that they were (daily) made and unmade by same. Consider the following quote from the selfsame Wikipedia article that The Tuna took the photo from: "The high tide zone is flooded during each high tide. Organisms must survive wave action, currents, and exposure to the sun. This zone is inhabited by sea anemones, seastars, chitons, crabs, green algae, and mussels. Marine algae provide shelter for nudibranchs and hermit crabs. The same waves and currents that make the life in the high tide zone so difficult bring food to filter feeders and other intertidal animals."As for the size of the Hungarian zither. No, it is not large like a piano or double bass (nor did I claim it is). Above is a pic of same, taken from the back cover of the very album I was referring to. No, not the size of a piano, but not a violin, a piccolo, a mandolin, a harmonica, or a tuning fork either.
I guess I should also point out that the phrase "like the powerful currents in a tide pool" is NOT a metaphor, which is what that great literary critic Charlie Hansen accused me of "breaking" (whatever that means). It is a simile. What was it that some slavish fan of his said? "Falsus in unum [sic], falsus in omnibus." How 'bout getting YOUR facts right first, Charlie?
Well done, indeed.
Edits: 04/26/12 04/26/12 04/26/12 04/26/12 04/26/12 04/26/12 04/26/12 04/26/12
Here is another photo of Bozay's Hungarian zither, this time taken from a different perspective, and without the wide-angle lens that magnifies objects in the foreground.
On the Big Island of Hawaii, in the Puna district, beckons the volcanically heated large tide pool (big enough to swim in) of Ahalanui State Park.
I can assure you from personal experience that there are strong tides and current here, in a basin perhaps 20ft deep and 150ft in diameter, due to fresh seawater crashing in through openings in the oceanfront rocks.
Thanks, Brian.Hansen is so full of vitriol that he will say anything to disparage TAS, Robert, and apparently me--that is until he's threatened with legal action and then he cries like a little girl. The thing that astonishes me is that so many of his small circle of fanboys just chime in in agreement with a whatever he says, no matter how ridiculous or mistaken.
Meanwhile we poor mental midgets at TAS editorial continue to soldier on, doing the best we can to keep our readers informed, entertained, and well advised.
Edits: 04/26/12
I'm not in that circle.
You have to write to "keep our readers informed, entertained, and well advised" and so you do. I've been reading you for a long time.
There's clearly animosity here that's affecting your perspective - for me it was a comment on a poorly drawn figure of speech. I bet you could have revised it and polished it if you had the time and did not have to meet a deadline.
It's not a big deal and I've been caught in the blowback.
Regards,
Geoff
I was going to link to JV's blog but now I don't need to.
I'm not sure what was poorly drawn about the simile. Tide pools have very strong cross currents. The simile may not be particularly fresh, but my point was that when you hear a zither in life, as I have, or on the particular record I was describing, strummed mightily, the sound swirls through its body (and off its sounding board), generating surprisingly rich, complex timbres and long decays.
I'm sorry if I included you in the Hansen cabal. My apologies.
People who threaten others with legal action for what they say or write are usually scumbags. They certainly don't follow Richard Feynman's philosophy.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
Big generalisation Tony. That very much depends what is said or written.
Gee, it's odd that Charlie didn't see things your way, Tony. No, he groveled for forgiveness and took back every word he said about RH, TAS, and the products under review--in print, in public, on this very site. And It wasn't RH or TAS who threatened legal action, BTW. It was two big-name manufacturers--one of world-class digital gear and one of world-class loudspeakers--whom The Tuna managed to gore in the course of his usual dumb-ox diatribe against TAS.BTW, none of this has anything to do with the outright nonsense that Hansen wrote about tide pools and metaphors and the highly resonant sounding box of a Hungarian zither--an instrument I would bet Hansen has never actually heard in real life.
Edits: 04/26/12
I don't know who these people or companies were, but I'll bet they are the scum bags. Sometimes the little guys have to give in to bullies, even when they are in the right. That doesn't mean the bullies are right.
Without names of the companies involved or links to old posts, your comments are nothing but blather.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
You'll lose your bet.You think I'M the bully here? Lord...
Edits: 04/26/12
You should feel fortunate to have a stalker of Hansen's pedigree!
I asked for the names of the companies involved or links to the posts. Unless you provide these, I will assume that you are blowing smoke.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
"I asked for the names of the companies involved or links to the posts."
Suppose those companies don't want to play in our mud?
That would be their business. We could at least have an intelligent conversation.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
You were told, "And It wasn't RH or TAS who threatened legal action, BTW."
What's unintelligible?
I was told nothing useful about the identity of the two big-name manufacturers.
Does the statement, "I don't believe you are a unicorn," tell you anything about my opinion of you? Do you see the parallel?
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
"I was told nothing useful about the identity of the two big-name manufacturers."
Useful? Catering to your lack of discretion aids nothing nor any parties involved.
"Does the statement, "I don't believe you are a unicorn," tell you anything about my opinion of you? Do you see the parallel?"
You're not a unicorn! That's a fact.
Are you sure I'm not a unicorn? Perhaps I'm a bot. Can you tell?
It is not indiscretion to expose litigious companies and irresponsible individuals so that others can have informed participation in the marketplace. It can be a matter of moral duty, but it is not something that one should undertake without personal integrity and courage. In some cases, people and companies are not free to comment because of court orders, etc.. The existence of such situations may sometimes be grounds for suspicion of these individuals and companies, IMO.
Tony Lauck
"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar
"Are you sure I'm not a unicorn? Perhaps I'm a bot. Can you tell?'
I can tell you can't be taken seriously.
You think I am the bully!Jesus.
Edits: 04/26/12
"Hansen is so full of vitriol that he will say anything to disparage TAS, Robert, and apparently me..."
Duh.
"...that is until he's threatened with legal action and then he cries like a little girl."
LOL, really?
Oh BTW, Welcome!
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
