|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
72.49.26.88
In Reply to: RE: Not sure what you mean. posted by Rick W on February 06, 2018 at 09:23:48
If Hansen had criticized Stereophile for what it did or did not do in the recent past, fine. But my issue was that he dug up criticisms that were double digit years old, and, for some reason, never mentioned the failings at the time of the failings. Why not mention them when they occurred, but rather wait ten years or more. It seemed strange to me, I questioned so, and soon thereafter I think we knew the reason.
Now, to Salvatore. He criticized Wes Philips for posting a rave review of the WP5, who then neglected to print negative comments which apparently developed over time until Wes Philips reviewed the WP8, which, presumably according to Salvatore, Philips raved about as well. I think that is a fair criticism.
But then he cites Hansen's criticism of Stereophile, without mentioning that Hansen essentially did the same thing Salvatore accuses Philips of doing - which is formulating an opinion and then keeping quiet while the shortcoming exists.
I conjecture that Hansen kept quiet for all those years because, one, Stereophile very positively reviewed his products, which led to an increased revenue stream from Stereophile, and, two, because of his conflict with TAS, Stereophile was the only major print publication in which he could advertise. That is not a criticism of Hansen. Its good business. At the end he had nothing to lose.
I just find it ironic that Salvatore uses a source (Hansen) to support his argument when Hansen basically did the same thing as the target (Stereophile and Philips) of Salvatore's arrows.
Follow Ups:
You provide your speculations regarding Charles' motivations but have nothing to say about the actual *content* of his criticisms of JA/S'phile - especially as related to MQA, which as I mentioned was the spark that lit Charles' fire.
To me whatever Charles' motivation was is mostly irrelevant. What matters is the content of what Charles had to say. If Hansen stifled voicing his criticisms for years due to not wanting to offend a mag wherein his products received good reviews it might negatively affect my view of him to some extent, but it'd have no bearing on whether his criticisms had merit. My view is that most of 'em did have merit.
As for Salvatore.....I don't care. I agree with some of his points, disagree with others.
We all know Hansen was never shy about expressing his opinions, and did so with respect to TAS fairly frequently. But not Stereophile. Until the end of his life. You can call it speculation, but there is a reason he pretty much kept quiet about Stereophile and some of its contributors until the end of his life. If you've got a better explanation for why the vault was closed until the end of his life, I'm all eyes, but consider that despite all the issues which he apparently had with Stereophile and its apparent credibility, he never stopped advertising and submitting review samples. Do the math.The MQA issue is different. One, it is more recent, and so I don't lump it into the litany of his other criticisms of Stereophile that were a decade old. Second, the book is still open on MQA. The dust will settle, and eventually we'll see if he was right or wrong, at least in terms of the merits of MQA.
The irony is with respect to Salvatore is that he claims folks like Philips kept quite regarding their issues with a product due to commerce, but then cites as support for criticizing Stereophile a manufacturer who did the very same thing. I hope Salvatore is not the only person who fails to see the irony.
Edits: 02/07/18
A deathbed confession is better than no confession at all.
Big speakers and little amps blew my mind!
that Hansen both defended *and* criticized Stereophile for many years, not just last year. Go back, for example, at the "Chips for Chumps" episode with Jim Austin.
I don't forget it. He had his issues with Jim Austin. But did he unload on Wilson speakers, and Fremer's choice of them? Did he unload on Fremer's choice of turntables and arms? Did he claims that Fremer shops by the label? He claimed that Fremer wanted to listen to the Ayre sourced turntable simply to torch the turntable in print. Where was that posting at the relevant time period? He wrote that he remembered reading a review where JA fudged the numbers in his measurements. Where was that post when the review was written, one that, in response to a query from JA, he responded that he could not recall, it was many years ago? Or where he criticized JA's measurements of the Harbeth 40.1, reviewed in 2008? These are but a few examples.
The point here is that while Hansen lobbed a grenade or two over the years at Jim Austin, who I would characterize as a lesser contributor to Stereophile than either Fremer or JA, he opened the vault and went back a decade to dig up criticisms that he never bothered to mention until the end of last year. Sort of like Philips.
I guess, but regardless of motivation not sure that he should have posted for each little thing that he disagreed with. Who would that have served?
I think RickW is correct that Stereophile's full-throated support for MQA was too much for him. Clearly he'd seen enough and hoped to steer Stereophile to a different course. I wonder how much of this he'd shared privately with JA before the posts that Salvatore highlighted. It seems they communicated beyond what we read in print or on this forum.
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: