Home Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

What you call "More whining" is an explanation of why I no longer subscribe (& your "Julian Hirsch defense" is weak)

"Ah, Mr. Greene -- or may I call you "Bass Nut"? -- it must feel
good to be so righteous."

RG: Meaningless character attack #1
.
.
.
"Yet the fact is that you don't appear to have comprehended my post and its data."

RG: Meaningless character attack #2
.
.
.
"I was clearly responding to the statement made by Gregg Straley of Reality Cables on his website that "Magazine [sic] like Stereophile and Absolute Sound require you to advertise with them for about 6 months before they review your products." I thought the fact that in 7 consecutive issues of Stereophile, 48 out of 90 brands reviewed do _not_ advertise definitively proved Mr. Straley's statement false. Why is that a "red herring"?

RG:
Someone slings mud at Stereophile.
Stereophile is bad!
You counter with statistics to prove him wrong.
Now Stereophile is good!
You win the "battle".

However this was a meaningless "battle" over a false charge which served only as a distraction (red herring) from the real problem with Stereophile: -- Too high a percentage of positive reviews and far too many recommended components.
.
.
.
>The odds of a favorable Stereophile review are so high that if you
>merely assume the component received a favorable review, you will
>almost always be right, and won't have to read the review!

YOUR REPLY:
"This is an old strawman argument that has been addressed both here
and in my magazine, Richard. As I have patiently but apparently
fruitlessly explained before, Mr. Nut, we attempt to cherry-pick
products for review on the grounds that they are worth writing about,
ie, will probably sound good. If we do that job perfectly, 100%
of the products we review will subsequently appear in "Recommended
Components." The fact that the percentage is less than 100% suggests
we should try harder at that goal. :-)"

RG: The argument may be old but it is correct and can't be refuted by the infamous and lame "Julian Hirsch defense". Stereo Review readers also complained there were too many positive reviews. Hirsch defended himself by claiming his editors selected only very good components for his reviews. It was suggested that if a reader was very careful reading each word of a Hirsch review, he might be able to differentiate between good products and very good products.
In StereoReviewLand, just as in StereophileLand, virtually all products are above average!

If Stereophile editors are so good at "cherry picking" above average products, then there's little need for publishing detailed reviews. Just present a "cherry-picked list" of products every month and readers can assume they are all good products. The probability of that assumption being wrong seems very low. The magazine could have one dozen components on each cherry-picked list -- versus only 4 or 5 full reviews every month. Much more useful for readers!
.
.
.
>a high percentage of positive reviews keeps the advertisers happy.
"But no, we don't do this to please advertisers. Otherwise, how do
you explain why so many products from _non_-advertisers also appear
on the list? Why would we want to please those people? Or are you
going to retreat, as one inmate did a while back, into spluttering
that _that_ merely proves how tricky we are?"

RG:
Your analysis does not support the conclusion (I'm assuming the questions you write imply conclusions).
You review products from non advertisers for three reasons:
(1) You would be accused of favoritism if you did not
(2) You would have too limited coverage of all available products (many, perhaps most, manufacturers do not advertise in Stereophile)
(3) Non-advertisers today are potential advertisers tomorrow.

Advertisers want to be confident the money they invest convincing Stereophile readers to buy their products over many months or years is not likely to be offset instantly by a negative review. They can be confident their investment will not be undermined by a negative review if the magazine rarely publishes negative reviews! This is true of Stereophile, Absolute Sound, Sound & Vision and possibly every magazine supported by advertising that wants to stay in business!
.
.
.
"You can get back in your box, now, Mr. Bass."
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

RG: Meaningless character attack #3


PS: My local Birmingham Michigan library is one of the few that has Stereophile in its magazine collection -- maybe the only one!. I can read your magazine for free ... but I don't bother.

Reason: Any magazine editor who thinks a 500+ Recommended Components list is useful, and writes: "If we do that job perfectly, 100% of the products we review will subsequently appear in "Recommended Components." " ... is the king of "Happy Face Reviews".

Move over Mr. Hirsch, Mr. Atkinson wants your title!

Mr. John Atkinson
Future Title: World Champion Audio Happy Face Review Editor



This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Herbie's Audio Lab  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
  • What you call "More whining" is an explanation of why I no longer subscribe (& your "Julian Hirsch defense" is weak) - Richard BassNut Greene 07:23:47 01/28/06 (1)


You can not post to an archived thread.