Critic's Corner Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

---

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Critic's Corner ]

---

[ Alert Moderator ]

---

Characteristics of consumer-oriented audio publications

Posted by Avocat (A) on March 20, 2007 at 09:37:07

The suggestions offered below are made after reading Stereophile, TAS, Stereo Review, High Fideltiy review, etc., for many years. One of my concerns is that the high-end audio industry appears to have become an expensive hobby for a relatively narrow interest group. I think that good audio reproduction, and listening to great music on a good system, should be conveniently available at affordable prices to all. And at least partially due to the policies of Sterephile, TAS, etc. (along with a number of other factors, of course), market forces are essentially inoperative in the quality audio field. The result is that manufacturing efficiencies are lacking, and most members of the public find the costs of even a mid-range stereo or surround system incredible and out of the question.

Although I wouldn't want an audio review periodical published by the CR staff, a truly consumer-oriented audio publication would, in my view take a very different approach. Changes might include some or all of the following, relating generally to SF, of which I am a long-term subscriber:

A. Instead of posting reviews of individual, usually newly released components, I suggest including at least some reviews (and frank comparisons) of components of the same general type or "family." For example, review and compare four or five amps, speakers, or decks that readers might want to consider for a particular application. (Isn't that what we audiophiles would try to do if we were considering a new amp, speaker, etc.)

B. Instead of eliminating components from the SF "recommended components" list three years after they were last reviewed, include a listing of other possible choices, including some reviewed in prior years. Note that I'm not suggesting extensive, detailed reviews of all possible choices, but rather, a listing of reviewers' suggestions of other interesting candidates, particularly best buys with good performance at reasonable cost. (Again, isn't that the kind of thing we audiophiles would be checking out if we were considering a component of a particular type? In fact, I suspect it's also what reviewers themselves would do if they were considering the purchase of a new component.)

C. As in wine reviews (which are as subjective and difficult as audio, or more so) information regarding the availability of a particular component and the history and reputation of the manufacturer would be helpful. - For example, a manufacturer with a known reputation, and a reasonable high production rate, might be of more interest. - Please avoid the caracatures. - I'm not suggesing that smaller, newer companies offering hand-built, specialty components shouldn't be considered. But some of us might prefer to shop for the best sound for the money rather than paying for great, custom work by a small specialty shop. Opinions may differ, but I'm suggesting that we should at least have the information.

D. I find that many reviews consist of multiple pages of personal "meanderings", seeming attempts to write a novella or other literary work, expressions of personal philosophical views on various subjects, etc. This requires the reader to wade through several pages before he or she gets the gist of the report. While some readers may enjoy such articles, for those of us who have some priorities and limits on our time, it would be helpful if there were a clear summary of the review at the beginning of such long-winded discussions. We should be able to determine conveniently what's being reviewed, what's different or distinct about the component, the price (E.g., I may not want to spend lots of time wading through a review of a $50K amplifier.), and the gist of what the reviewer thought about the component. Also helpful would be what the good and less good features were, how the component compares to other possible choices in the same category, and what other alternatives may be available. Apparently, this suggestion has been considered and rejected by SF. To me, this suggests a truly snobbish attitude on the part of SF and a total disregard for the time and priorities of its readers.

E. If the mag were truly "consumer oriented", I think that more articles suggesting ways to improve and upgrade our audio systems would be appreciated. For example, more emphasis on articles suggesting ways to find good buys on various new and used equipment, comments on kits and audio-related projects such as testing, evaluating, and improving room acoustics, etc., would be appreciated. Note that I'm not suggesting changing to a "how to do it" or kit building format. Just a recognition that the audio hobby comprises more than reviewing, discussing, and buying the latest and greatest equipment.

F. Lastly, get off the "either or" - "you're for us or against us" syndrome regarding blind testing. I think that most readers would like to see at least some reports of blind testing IN SOME FORM (for example, permit the use of more extended listening periods) in addition to the extensive, philosophical reviews of single, individual components.

Knee-jerk objections immediately arise, and are essentially repeated month after month. - DBT is too expensive? Let the readers decide whether it would be worth an increase in the (ridiculously low) subscription price. - The results are sometimes inconclusive and inconsistent? - That in itself is of interest to the reader, since it suggests that performance improvements, if any, offered by particular components may not be as significant to a listener than they are with respect to other components in which test results show clear, repeatedly discernable improvements. Effects of the placebo effect are far more significant that we like to admit, which may be one reason we see so few blind test results.

OK, fire away! - I'm suggesting consideration of at least some of the above suggestions. Again, they apply only if an audio publication is truly "consumer oriented." Otherwise, forget it.

Jim

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 ]

---

[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]

---