Hi-Rez Highway

New high resolution SACD releases, players and technology.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

RE: Marantz SA-10si Reviewed

Posted by PAR on February 16, 2017 at 12:36:05:
" Only the February issue of HFN is in the shops at the moment. Do you have special access?"
Yes, but only to the extent that I am a subscriber ( print and digital) and if Royal Mail is on its toes.
Yep, that scoring system is pretty impenetrable and, as I have said, just reading the copy makes it redundant. Of course a magazine editor will tell you that some kind of rating system attracts readers who have neither the inclination nor knowledge to read the whole piece.
The cost and quality aspect of the scoring apparently works like this ( as far as I have been able to glean from Paul Miller's explanation). Let's say that a component costs 750 gbp. The reviewer imagines what capabilities such a component at that price would have to exhibit in order to score 100% (in the light of their expertise and experience of similar products). Then he rates the component under review in relation to that concept e.g. this scores 85% of that ideal. So it isn't cost = quality nor is it an absolute measure but more a kind of the best available at that price rating. So an integrated amp from, say, Musical Fidelity costing 1700 gbp may score 83%. Another integrated amp from ,say, Luxman at 7000 gbp may score 85%. But that does't mean that the Luxman is only a negligible 2 points better than the MF which could otherwise be purchased as a cheaper substitute for the Luxman ( see the April 2016 edition for these two amps).
Of course I could have got it all mixed up ( but don't think so). However it is pretty much a rubbish idea to begin with and I think that PM inhertited it from the IMO less than satisfactory editor that preceded him. So there it is (so far as I understand). It could and should be dispensed with but I bow to the superior commercial instinct of the publisher and editor. NB: most other audio magazines do something along the same lines with stars out of five etc. Hurrah for Stereophile - you actually have to read it!