|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.194.232.150
In Reply to: RE: Just to whine more, What about the fact xxx only gets to review stuff OFFERED, This also is a bias.. posted by Smelly_Socks on May 23, 2016 at 21:39:28
Nt.
Follow Ups:
For Smelly Sox to step to the plate, purchase stereo equipment, and then send the unopened equipment to Stereophile, et al. to review. I won't be holding my breath.
If car review places (in particular MotorWeek) can easily have cars loaned not only by automotive companies, but also dealers AND enthusiasts..
Why not stereophile?
...friends of HP's would bring new equipment by for him to listen to, especially when he was unable to procure it for review.
One period in the mid-1990s when William Johnson of ARC refused to loan the magazine equipment, he asked me to write about the new ARC line-stage I had purchased (which was disclosed in the article) and its update.
They had to come up with the equipment somehow, they had to figure out what was best.Neither Stereophile or the ezines are on a quest for anything. What's best isn't important to them. It's enough to receive and review equipment through the regular channels, and keep it coming.
Daniel
Edits: 05/26/16
Though it was an odd thing. TAS 'MADE" Audio Research famous and successful/
IMO without TAS Audio Research might have never made it big time.
Then the tepid review of the SP-15. Which was basically damned with faint praise.
((PS I Own a used SP-15 I bought for $1,500 used. (new price was $6,000.) And I can thank TAS for the great deal on a wonderful preamp.))I know HP would 'keep' stuff he was sent for review.. Sort of on permanent loan... Though between Infinity and ARC, he really gave them their money's worth in sales.
I STILL want to own the Infinity RS
Edits: 05/25/16
...that TAS also nearly put ARC under with their much less than enthusiastic reviews of ARC's first line of solid state stuff (SP4/A, D100A-Z etc). The reviews made me wonder who at ARC had pissed off Pearson and Co. so badly they would trash ARC's SS adventure to the point of near death.
Steve-O I believe the folks that " pissed-off " ---{your words, not mine, as I would have said extremely disappointed, not pissed off}--- the reviewers at Pearson & Co. were the engineers at ARC that designed, what turned out to be a poor attempt at a developing a line of solid state stuff such as: SP4/A, D100A-Z, etc. In the end it was the fault of these folks at ARC who designed a line of audio gear that was weak sonically in comparison to both ARC's tube offerings and to the comparable solid state offerings by other manufacturers at that time! I actually remember reading those reviews. IMHO I personally don't believe anyone at TAS was out to " get " ARC the company or anyone in ARC as you're stating you believe was the reasoning behind the poor review that ARC received. Instead I believe TAS simply honestly reported the findings of their reviews and let the financial cards fall where they may...
I'm listening to: Make Someone Happy by Sophie Milman
Thetubeguy1954 (Tom Scata)
Central Florida Audio Society -- SETriodes Group -- Space Coast Audio Society
Full-range/Wide-range Drivers --- Front & Back-Loaded Horns --- High Sensitivity Speakers
.
Why do you believe it's lucky that's no longer true?
a) It certainly isn't lucky for folks who ended up purchasing a piece of audio gear that was released too soon and had sonic problems that still needed to be resolved.
b) Nor is it lucky for folks who purchased a piece of audio gear that still had reliability problems that needed to be resolved!
Perhaps you've forgotten how before TAS & Stereophile were around to tell their readers about those types of issues surfacing during some of their audio equipment reviews ---{ often it was by a new start up audio manufacturer }--- steps a & b while not common, occurred more often than it ever should have! It was the realization by new audio manufacturers that a bad review of their audio gear because it fell into either one of those two categories in particular would almost certainly destroy their company financially. It was almost certainly due to that type of honest reviewing by TAS & Stereophile, despite where the financial cards might fall, that brought that practice by audio manufacturers to an end!
Personally I believe ANY audio manufacturer that would knowingly release a piece of audio gear that fell into either of those two categories, choosing to use their clients as guinea pigs to review the sonic merits of their audio gear or even worse to test out just how reliable their audio gear actually was, all the while attempting to make as much money as fast as they possibly could before "the word" about them got out to the public at large, deserved to die financially!
Now perhaps I'm mistaken as I cannot recall a name, but I seem to think I remember that exact thing happening with some amplifier or with some speaker in the 70s or 80s. Does anyone remember anything like that occurring or am I fooling myself with fake memories that I honestly believe occurred?
I'm listening to: Make Someone Happy by Sophie Milman
Thetubeguy1954 (Tom Scata)
Central Florida Audio Society -- SETriodes Group -- Space Coast Audio Society
Full-range/Wide-range Drivers --- Front & Back-Loaded Horns --- High Sensitivity Speakers
...it shows how independent HP was when the sound sucked.
For anyone who knew him...
...I suspect there was a lot more to it than just that sucking sound.
...besides Infinity and ARC many would not have heard of without TAS.
Magnepan, Marantz, Advent, Dahlquist, CJ and many other high end companies.
I heard the IRSs in HPs samllish room a couple of times and they were amazing.
Marantz? was big *WAY* before TAS. Ditto with Advent.
_
Make super easy diffusors:--> http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/everything-else/269366-making-easy-diy-depot-sound-diffuser-panels-step-step.html#post4215464
Horn Design Spreadsheet:--> http://libinst.com/SynergyCalc/
...perhaps.
I discovered TAS in 1977 with issue #6 or #7.
I had never heard of either Marantz or Advent.
That issue rated stacked Advents along with KLH 9s as the best.
I owned a system I had purchased in 1973 at Pacific Stereo in Long Beach, CA (the only stereo store I knew about) consisting of a Kenwood receiver, Infinity speakers (I had seen the brand favorably reviewed in Stereo Review in 1972 back when Julian gave letter grades) and a Dual record changer.
I was looking for new speakers when I heard a pair of Dahlquists at a Federated Store and was blown away.
Then I ordered TAS back issues and discovered Saul Marantz helped Jon Dahlquist build his speaker and HP helped them do the final tuning in his listening room.
"I discovered TAS in 1977 with issue #6 or #7.I had never heard of either Marantz or Advent.
That issue rated stacked Advents along with KLH 9s as the best."
Ah, that at least partially explains your lack of knowledge.
I'm guessing that you still haven't opened "Music, Physics and Engineering", nor "Why You Hear What You Hear", nor "Acoustical Designing in Architecture", nor "Music, Acoustics and Architecture", nor "Master Handbook of Acoustics", nor "Loudspeaker Design Cookbook". Am I right?
:)
Edits: 05/27/16 05/28/16
...when I retire and decide to build loudspeakers, I'll ask you for your reading list.
Have you read Harley's "Guide to High End Audio" yet?
I thought not.
Sounds like you weren't trying. Marantz had been around for a quarter century and Advent for a decade by 1977.
Saul was making headlines with Marantz in the 50's. Not sure when Advent started, but I remember seeing/hearing/lusting after the large Advent in a Lafayette Radio shop around 1970 with my dad.
_
Make super easy diffusors:--> http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/everything-else/269366-making-easy-diy-depot-sound-diffuser-panels-step-step.html#post4215464
Horn Design Spreadsheet:--> http://libinst.com/SynergyCalc/
.
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: