Audio Asylum Thread Printer

Get a view of an entire thread on one page

Critic's Corner

RE: If that is the case, I wish him or them the best of luck.

72.154.218.177

In Reply to: RE: If that is the case, I wish him or them the best of luck. posted by John Marks on February 09, 2008 at 07:32:35

The conservative estimate (7,500) is probably more accurate. I suspect there is a growing subscriber population or both publications that don't even know who JGH or HP are and what they accomplished.

However, I would disagree that HP's potential readership is limited to a subset of subscribers to current high end publications. I would give anything HP or JGH published a try, even though I haven't, nor have many of my audiophile friends, subscribed to any to high end publication since Listener ceased publishing.

While I had subscribed to both TAS and Stereophile since the early 80's, I, and many of my friends, simply lost interest in both publications in the late 90's. While there were a lot of reasons for this, one reason was they both became less interesting than they were in the 80's when they had a more hobbyist feel, e.g., reviews on "modded" equipment, reviews on equipment from little known manufacturers, occasional DIY articles, etc. Listener filled that void for awhile.

A second reason was that the reviewers, with a few important exceptions, lacked JGH's and HP's rigorous approach. Based on the reviews that were published when I was still a subscriber (and the occasional review I read at Borders), most reviewers have less knowledge of the equipment (from an engineering standpoint) than myself, and based on their recommendations, worse hearing.

As a consequence, there was/is no reason for me to subscribe to these publications. However, if HP or JGH started a new publication that was more like the old TAS or Stereophile (which, by their nature, have a much smaller audience), I would at least give it a try. I'd even give TAS and Stereophile a try if they had at least one reviewer who actually knew who Lynn Olson and Kevin Carter are and discussed their designs.

Follow Ups:

I guess you missed... - Bill Leebens 21:52:09 02/23/08 (0)
...Art Dudley writing about Kevin's Lundahl-based MC stepup kit, coupla months back in S'phile.

Cheers, Bill
RE: DIY, kits, and modded gear reviews - Steven R. Rochlin 09:01:37 02/14/08 (0)
Wade,

Thanks for your posting and agree with you on the lacking of the 'hobbyist' side of things as many enjoyed decades ago. Listener was a great magazine and when Art sold it, he lost control and it went out of business shortly thereafter. This was indeed a very sad day for the high-end audio hobbyist.

Your comments are precisely why i asked Joe Roberts to republish articles from Sound Practices magazine within Enjoy the Music.com (plus it is a very cool magazine). My dad taught me to solder at the rip ol' age of 5, and my first day job (was/am also a musician) when i was of age was working at Heathkit electronics. Over the past 12 years, Enjoy the Music.com has reviewed various kits and DIY projects including the recent LS3/5 kit, Bastanis speaker kit, our senior editor Dick Olsher has a speaker kit he designed, Hammer Dynamics Super 12... and am artile written by none other than Kondo-san with schematics so you can build the Ongaku....

Mod articles include Denon 2900 modification, Bolder Cable modified Slim Devices Squeezebox 2, V-Caps mod, ModWright Instruments/Denon 3910 mod... and the factory modified JoLida JD 102B, Bottlehead Paramour ....

Cables are another factor, and many know of the Max Rochlin memorial digital/video cable DIY project, which has been republished in print in Hi-Fi News magazine.

The above is not to break my own arm to pat my back; the point is that i am ALWAYS open to publishing DIY projects, kits, tweaks, mods, etc. This includes having me or one of our writers cover DIY-type shows (check out the PA Tube Show, nyNOISE, and others on Enjoy the Music.com). If you (or anyone reading this) have a great mod or show please feel free to e-mail it to me for consideration.

There are many facets to high-end audio and diversification is better than limited focus imho. Thanks everyone for your time and in the end what REALLY matters is that YOU...

Enjoy the Music,

Steven R. Rochlin
You know, Wade, PFO does publish... - David W. Robinson 09:45:27 02/11/08 (3)
..."reviews on 'modded' equipment, reviews on equipment from little known manufacturers, occasional DIY articles, etc."

And Lynn Olson has been associated with us from the very beginning (c. 1990). Whenever he's moved to write on things audio for PFO, we publish.

You and your buddies are welcome to drop by any time.

All the best,

david

David W. Robinson
Editor, Positive Feedback Online
- A Creative Forum for the Audio Arts (Open in New Window)
- RE: You know, Wade, PFO does publish... - Wade Davis 19:06:28 02/14/08 (2)
  Hello David & Steven,
  I am an avid reader/site visitor of both PFO and ETM, as well as 6Moons. I was really referring to the print publications. I think the important thing both TAS and Stereophile need to consider is that many audiophile's interests progress over time. And this progression doesn't simply mean being able to afford more expensive equipment, but an increasing understanding of equipment design, a desire not to be limited by commercial offerings, etc. As a result, both publications, IMO, eventually lose the interest of seasoned audiophiles if they don't do more than review the same equipment from the same manufacturers year after year. Of course, no magazine can satisfy everyone so I am thankful publications like yours exist, as well designers like Nelson Pass who avidly support DIYers. Maybe one day either TAS or Stereophile will reconsider if only to distinguish itself more from the other.
  
  Edits: 02/14/08
  - It's true that you need to bring in the newbies... - David W. Robinson 20:56:19 02/14/08 (1)
    ...without losing the interest of the more mature in any social gathering. Otherwise, you lose one end...or the other.
    
    Maintaining a balance is hard to do, though...particularly when paper and ink as a medium are so costly to produce, and to distribute nowadays. One of the major blessings of the Internet is the massively reduced cost of publishing and the far greater reach for distributing one's content.
    
    In that regard, web-based publication represents a true paradigm shift (that all too often misused concept) in human history. All sorts of new possibilties open for creative work, well beyond those of the printing press. And the crushing economic burdens are wonderfully reduced. (The question of quality in the midst of the resultant tsunami of expression is quite a different matter, of course.)
    
    FWIW, I'm sure that both John Atkinson and Robert Harley feel significant pressure all the time. I certainly did back in the days of *Positive Feedback* as a print magazine (1990-2001).
    
    I don't envy them.
    
    All the best,
    
    david
    
    David W. Robinson
    Editor, Positive Feedback Online
    - Well said... - Steven R. Rochlin 09:29:03 02/15/08 (0)
      David,
      
      Could not have said it better.
      
      If i may add... TAS, Sphile and others do offer Internet versions of their print publication. This allows them to reach a wider audience without *some* of the constraints of printing/shipping. This diversification helps to mitigate the print-only costs (both financial and in readership reach).
      
      ----
      ----
      Wade,
      
      As for product (content) and business decisions, each adjusts accordingly to serve the market they feel best benefits their objectives (possibly as directed by those who hold the financial purse-strings). This is true in virtually all ongoing business ventures.
      
      As i can only speak for Enjoy the Music.com, the goal is to provide an enjoyable and educational site with plenty of diversification to serve as many aspects of the industry as possible including newbies, DIY'ers, and seasoned hobbyists/audiophiles. (this is a *major* oversimplification)
      
      Print magazines naturally pay their writers as does Enjoy the Music.com, while some online audiophile sites seek out those who will write at no cost. As for the quality of content plus experience from paid writers versus those who are free, we can each debate which may be best on a writer by writer basis (but lets us not go there, can-o-worms and all that). Regardless, the fact is paid writers do add to the costs of production for print publications and Enjoy the Music.com and must also be factored in.
      
      The above shows just a hint of the many facets at work for both print and online publications. So as to why the print guys do XXY and Internet does XYY versus...
      
      Wade, write to the magazine editor and let them know your feelings. Perhaps if enough people have the same desires as you and also write in, they will find a way to fulfil the requests on a regular basis. If a business does not fulfil your desires, go elsewhere. As an example, i prefer Heinz over Kraft ketchup so i buy Heinz.
      
      In a perfect world things would operate as I wish them to. -- ???
      
      The reverse side also has a reverse side. -- Japanese proverb
      
      Enjoy the Music,
      
      Steven R. Rochlin

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.