 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
97.113.195.158
I have been in this hobby for 25 years, yes I am aware there are others out there with more depth. This last issue of TAS drove home an indisputable truism. The magazine is fictional entertainment that presents itself as a leader in legitimacy.
2014 Editors Choice Awards. When you place, for example,Clearaudio precision bubble level for $60, as an editors choice everything else in the magazine now becomes suspect. Yes I have heard the arguments if you have the money blah blah blah. This absurdly priced piece of audio foolewry belongs to the same moral underpinnings as the person that wants to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge and then presents you with a museum quality catalog of the remainder of his wares.
Change occurs with one person at a time. Get some cajones and instead of pandering describe , "oh yes you could purchase this $60 bubble level, but why?"
$11,000($5500 per addl. meter) Crystal Cable Absolute Dream. Power cable. Delicate, detailed, powerful, spacious and transparent. No I have not heard it. Please. At least I have the right tool now to line my gilded cage.
Follow Ups:
Laughing...
that's what i object to when they put in these massive guides with excerpts from reviews already in existence. for subscribers, this should be a free extra mailing that doesn't supplant a new regular length magazine.
what i DO miss is the October issue of AUDIO magazine with its nearly COMPLETE directory of components with all of their specs. we called it the BIBLE.
in that issue there was precious little editorial and review content but you could pore over it and refer to it for years afterward.
...regards...tr
> that's what i object to when they put in these massive guides with
> excerpts from reviews already in existence. for subscribers, this should
> be a free extra mailing that doesn't supplant a new regular length magazine.
As I have explained before on the Asylum, Stereophile's "Recommended
Components" issue do include a regular issue's worth of content in
addition to the listing.
And while there is also a lot of stuff I would like for free, I don't
expect companies to give it to me :-)
> what i DO miss is the October issue of AUDIO magazine with its nearly
> COMPLETE directory of components with all of their specs.
Stereophile's 2014 Buyer' Guide, available on newsstands now, is exactly
what you describe, hifitommy.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
John, i apologize for being fooled by the ratio of directory to editorial content. i guess i didn't count pages and only went on visual assessment.
in a way, you can't blame me for the nostalgia i and others have for the October Bible from AUDIO. perhaps its my age or not, the print looks a bit tinier than that of the AUDIO issues.
i have a feeling that they were just a bit more complete. gene pitts may have been more obsessed at getting nearly all manufacturers' products listed.
is he still around?
...regards...tr
Great magazine - caused me to write to Richard Heyser!
Warmest
Tim Bailey
Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger
> i apologize for being fooled by the ratio of directory to editorial
> content.
No problem, hifitommy.
> gene pitts may have been more obsessed at getting nearly all
> manufacturers' products listed.
It was actually the late Kay Blumenthal who was responsible for compiling
the Audio directory. She did it all with 5x3 index cards and put off
using a computer for years.
> is [Gene Pitts] still around?
Since leaving Audio, Gene has been publishing and editing The Audiophile
Voice (see link below).
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
hi john,
i knew about TPV but when you look at the website, you can't tell a date from the mag cover. only volume and issue #. i wonder if what is shown in current output or not.
form your professional POV, is he still actively producing TAV?
...regards...tr
I first came across The Audiophile Voice when Listener Magazine ceased to exist. I was sent a card stating that my issues of Listener would now be replaced with TAV. It raved how this magazine was found on many bookstore shelves. I never saw it once in any bookstore I frequented at the time. It ends up this rag is about thirty pages in length (maybe.) When you discount the ads you are maybe down to fifteen pages. They must have sent me an additional two years worth of this magazine but I was never going to sign up for this sad excuse for an audio mag.
its too bad it turned into a flimsy little thing but i would bet GP financed it himself to keep the AUDIO mentality alive. if it came free in the mail, it would be fine but....
...regards...tr
"No jargon, No cult of personality,
No arrogant insiders, No engineering degree needed,
No nonsense, Just good reading"
Great!
Thanks, that link was interesting, until I noticed that a subscription to six issues is $12.00 US and $39.00 cdn.
Why? Maybe I should ask them.
on TAS they are off you. ~:)
Amen! The late "Audio" magazine is greatly missed. Terrific equipment reviews, informed technical articles and the annual fall bible: the good old days!
Those were the days, girls were girls and men were men...
had equipment reviews there.
...regards...tr
Don Scott reviewed tuners.
Bascom King.
...regards...tr
And Professor Lirpa!
ahhhh yes, the Lirpa Bazoom 1000 amplifier-DC to Daylight!
...regards...tr
...How did a manufacturer get the text of a SHOW REPORT to use in an ad in the SAME ISSUE that the show report appeared? I can understand TAS sending a manufacturer a component review ahead of time so the manufacturer can make comments, but a show report? Do the reviewers writing about the shows not care that their reports are now being made into instant advertising copy? Or worse, do they know, and do it anyway?
If the right people say you've got to have it then cost is no object and those around you will be awed by your financial horsepower for attaining such capricious items. Snobbery is the number one problem with the hobby and unfortunately the priest class (reviewers, publishers, manufacturers) perpetuates this bubble of desire and envy. Perhaps there should be an Audio Bill of Rights or Ten Commandments to reshape the industry and its purveyors of rhinestones and flashing lights.
You are allowed to say such things here without getting stoned?
but an Editor's Choice Award for a bubble level? That's pretty sad.
There is a crack in everything, that's how the light gets in.
—Leonard Cohen
"but an Editor's Choice Award for a bubble level? That's pretty sad."
"Pretty typical" would be more accurate. High-end audio is unique in that there is no other hobby in which the outlandish, the vague, the willfully obscure, and the patently ridiculous are tolerated in such lavish quantities.
...Road and Track, Golf Digest, Popular Boating or the National Review.
I'm afraid you have it exactly backwards...again. NR is especially adept at ferreting out the patently ridiculous.
Snippet: In America, we constantly, almost obsessively, wrestle with the “legacy of slavery.” That speaks well of us. But what does it say that so few care that the Soviet Union was built — literally — on the legacy of slavery? The founding fathers of the Russian Revolution — Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky — started “small,” merely throwing hundreds of thousands of people into kontslagerya (concentration camps).
By the time Western intellectuals and youthful folksingers like Pete Seeger were lavishing praise on the Soviet Union as the greatest experiment in the world, Joseph Stalin was corralling millions of his own people into slavery. Not metaphorical slavery, but real slavery complete with systematized torture, rape, and starvation. Watching the opening ceremonies of the Olympics, you’d have no idea that from the Moscow metro system to, literally, the roads to Sochi, the Soviet Union — the supposed epitome of modernity and “scientific socialism” — was built on a mountain of broken lives and unremembered corpses. But when the hammer and sickle float by, there’s no outrage. There is only the evil of banality.
Thanks for playing...
Oh, right, it's not a hobby.
I should let you know that I have formed a manufacturing company called Austen Harmonics and this is the first product that we have made.The Austen Harmonics Bubble Level that I have designed with a team of people from Russia, Denmark, Latvaria and Kansas for a true international design (note not made in China).
Our Bubble Level is no ordinary bubble level - we are having it machined in a Ferrari with a special kevlar wrapped, diamond weighted tip system and separate power supply to energize the bubbles in a special blue solution which adds to the relaxing qualities you will hear from your turntable (though it is also said by someone to be as good with CD players). The sculpted sides of the level are made from a special recycled tin (green all the way) and we even sell a tube option to energize the bubbles because SS stresses the bubbles. I say bubbles because they're unlike other levels on the market. Our system employs no less than 6 bubbles that form a ring around the main bubble. We have 8 Patents pending pending (pending when we send them to the Patent office).
Our retail price for the bubble level is $18,000US but we will be offering our Diamond Energy Kevlar Graphite Special Edition Signature Reference Bubbles 8.1xq Blue for $9,000 to the first 10 people who order.
Note, product specifications/materials are subject to change without notice. The level may not be 100% level. Deviation like a fine Rolex is sometimes off 5%.
Distortion of our bubbles is 0% at most frequencies in an anechoic chamber.
Edits: 02/12/14
RGA, are you sure that you're not really Geoff Kait in disguise?
Cheers,
Al
"I should let you know that I have formed a manufacturing company called Austen Harmonics and this is the first product that we have made."
Any truth to the rumor that you guys have a quartz controlled FM antenna rotator (prototype) that will retail for under $15,000 when introduced to the public early next year?
.
nt
Will you take a check ????
a neverending list of gadgets like bullets (resistors) and $2000 mains cables that improves sound no end. These are regularly posted here.
.
I agree one thousand percent.
It doesn't all sound the same, but the levels of credulity required to feel at home in the audio "hobby" nowadays is nothing short of stunning.
I like the cream to smear on audio equipment sold by that British woman the most...
My problem is that they WASTED at least 80 pages with their recommended products and other such nonsense. There were probably 3 or 4 reviews in the entire magazine! I kick myself for renewing a 2 year subscription.
"Far away across the field
The tolling of the iron bell
Calls the faithful to their knees
To hear the softly spoken magic spells."
.
Never trust an Atom, they Make Up everything!
"When you place, for example,Clearaudio precision bubble level for $60..."
Harbor Freight sells a nice one for .79 cents.
I wouldn't go that low, but a nice Johnson bubble level now you're talking!
One can also pay more for one, so what, why do you care?
Do you remember when thriftiness was an American quality?
Neocons now rule and they know the price of everything and the quality of nothing.
.
Mkay, when?
Why care?
Simple. It's a 'rip off '. No doubt, people are free to buy what they will, and they do. Regardless, Some times one has to " Give it a name".
I would enjoy "best product of 1970" more.... as I could go out and buy it
I imagine that it works just fine. Is that fiction? So, it's expensive does that mean it doesn't work for the intended purpose?
Hey, you can drive a KIA or a Benz and both will get you home. That's just a value judgement on how to allocate ones funds. I certainly would not tell others how to spend their money though many products strike me a poor value propositions.
Cost / benefit ratio is part of life, if paying a bunch extra to get one "for hifi" as opposed to for a telescope or from a hardware store makes one feel more confident, happy, then maybe it was worth the extra cost.
when they named a Raidho speaker as their overall component, and then a Wilson speaker as the high end speaker of the year, or something to that effect. Those awards got the wheels spinnin'. If both products are in the same class, and they are if you consider that both are speakers with a very high price point, if the Raidho is the best overall component of the year, then would it not be better than the Wilson, and therefore also high end speaker of the year?
If the Wilson is the high end speaker of the year, would it not be better than the Raidho, and therefore also component of the year? I suspect TAS doled out these awards with a mind's eye to list as many components as possible, which the manufacturers will naturally use in their promotion materials, which will result in more publicity for TAS.
I think Stereophile's method is more honest. The overall product of the year comes from one of the winners from one of the catagories, not from a product that looked like it crashed the party after the fact.
I just don;t get why Stereophile doesn't show the ballots. I like transparency and the magazine isn't transparent.
There are say 10 items up for voting. Each reviewer gets a 1,2,3 place vote with the most points going to first place votes then second then third. A total is arrived at.
Product A is heard by 5 Stereophile reviewers - all 5 reviewers give product A first place votes worth 3 points for a total score of 15 points.
Product B is heard by 12 Stereophile reviewers. No one gives it a first place vote. 4 give it second place for 8 points and the other 8 give it third place votes for8 points.
Product B gets 16 points and wins product of the year - without (possibly) anyone choosing it as the best actual product.
But at LEAST they tell you how the come up with it and LEAST they have a voting process of some kind - even if it is based on "Oh I heard it at a show for 3 minutes" which is longer than I've seen some of the Stereophile and TAS reviewers in a room for. Or I had heard at my friend's house - chortle. All of this supposed scrutiny is NO BETTER than forum advice and Billy Bob going to Jeb's house to listen to the banjo on his hi-fi. I find it humorous that I've seen some of these reviewers from BOTH magazines spend about one album track in a room and that leads to decisions of product of the year. The reader is owed better than that - and so is the manufacturer and their dealers.
But the issue sales are probably the biggest for them in a year - so it isn't going away.
I prefer what Hi-Fi Choice does with the group tests (albeit too short like What Hi Fi) but they give out 5 star ratings (though I believe they changed to a score out of 100) and one group test winner. What I would like to see is them pitting the best 5 star award winners against each other to choose the best of the best. They kind of do with editor's choice gold award. But then that is the "editor's choice" - one editor one vote. bah.
Because it doesn't work that way. Because working with reviewers to form a pecking order is like herding cats.
Give a reviewer a list of 10 things and ask them to choose three, and they will send you back a list of 25 other products that should have been included.
Give a a reviewer a list of 10 things and ask them to choose three, and they will send you one product back in return, because it was the only one they reviewed.
Give a reviewer a list of 10 things and ask them to choose three, and they won't send you anything until after the magazine is published, then send you their list of 25 different things you should have considered and the one that should have won everything.
Ask them to limit their responses to products that have been reviewed in the magazine, and they will send you a list of products they would like to review in the magazine.
I know this from bitter experience. Twice over. From the position of sending a list out to reviewers (and being frustrated by the results) and from the position of a reviewer and being frustrated by the list and having to vote on it.
A better way of running this IMO is to have the reviewers duke it out, and have the publishers bet some Quatloos on the results. OK, it would be more like Ultimate Gasping For Air than Ultimate Fighting, but at least it would get the job done in time. And it gives me a chance to brush up on my sumo.
-
Editor, Hi-Fi Plus magazine, Lun-duhnn, Ingerland, innit
I totally understand the problem you have. You send the tube guy a list of 8 SS amps where to him they all suck and he wants to rant at you that the 1.5 watt amp should be there - and you trying to say but 99.9999% of readers don't have the speakers for such an amp. He probably closes his eyes and stick his finger on the page "fine I choose this P.O.S. - there is my vote."
I was thinking today about how could dagogo come up with a best of the year list or product of the year and I don't see how it could be done. First our reviewers are spread across the U.S. and in other countries. There is every chance gear that I like and would put up for nomination isn't available in the U.S. and possibly the other way around (though less likely).
Each reviewer has quite different systems and different tastes in audio. The best choice that we could hope to come up with would be products that each of us find least offensive. It is very doubtful that all of us would concur on a given product as being best of the year or just best period. Thus, it is far more likely that if we worked on a point system - it would have to be a BIG mainstream product that all of us have heard and it would have to be something that all of us thought was at least "pretty good." Jack and I might love some 5-10 watt amps that we would rave about but Ray and Lawrence wouldn't be able to get their speakers to utter a peep with such amps.
So perhaps we give in and choose a modestly powered amp of 80 watts while the reviewer who wants 1000 watt amps also caves and grudgingly chooses the 80 watt amp. We all come up with an acceptable amp that none of us love but all of us think is "pretty good." Mediocrity rises to the top.
The best approach is not to have a list or product of the year at all because the consumer is led to believe there is consensus among the writing staff that product A was THE BEST product when none of the reviewers felt that way or certainly not all of them.
And thus the consumer is IMO duped. Who gains from the award? Only the manufacturer gains and the magazine who can link the article back to the magazine to get more hits (thus more money). And of course the issue sales are likely the highest of the year so the magazines make more money from the lists. Meanwhile the consumer gets what? An okay speaker that some reviewers liked enough to say it was ok - or great but no one knows for sure.
If it were about the consumer - each reviewer would have a list of their 5 or 10 best amps, speakers, sources, and most cherished ancillaries (cables, power conditioners, stands, green pens, shakti stones or whatever). The list can change each year.
The list does not have to include current models - or any current models if this happens to be the case. Each reviewer can list their own "special find" of the year or best of show or show etc.
Also each reviewer could list his 10 favorite budget components. A guy like MF who may own a $10k phono stage would be able to list his favorite budget phono stage in his ten budget pieces (say budget under $2k which is still high but Stereophile readers tend to put more money into audio than the average). This way reviewers who constantly review $10k+ pieces can show a list of ten of their favorite affordable pieces. Older reviewers could even list their 5-10 favorite vintage pieces.
I mean reading a list of MF's top ten favorite loudspeakers versus JA or JM or WP, or AD would interest people I should think more than some vacuous "product of the year." Further it will allow products to stand the test of time.
And they could still have their big selling issue. December 2014 JA lists his definitive list - bada bing bada boom. 2015, ARt Dudley puts out his list - 2016 MF, etc etc. You have a lot of years to generate excitement. Then after X number of years when all the reviewers have their lists it goes back to JA and he gets to make a "that was then this is now" so you can see which product lasted the 12 years (if any) and which did not.
This at least has a shot to be more relevant and even more exciting!
Why are there many complaints, in audio, that have to do with price? All one has to do is some research and one would find alternatives in many price ranges for just about anything of interest. That goes for everything from cleaning supplies to caskets. Why do audiophiles expect the very lowest prices? Many come across as the price police. You would be surprised of the size of markups of the non audio related everyday items we all use, furniture, car parts, food, clothes, hotels, airline tickets, restaurant food, etc.
My question is: Do audiophiles complain about audio pricing only, or do they complain about prices on everything?
Example of another level
For many of those people, complaining is just the way to spend time, and even get through life in general. Access to a computer made it easier than ever.
I'm wondering where on the scale of overpriced-ness the services of an average (read: not very good one) lawyer reside...
.
"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"
You miss the overarching goal.
I would rather be recognized for the money I save than the money I spend.
You buy quality, but have to realize where the deal breaker is in life.
As P.T. Barnum never said: "There's a sucker born every minute"".
Life to most in N.A. is now nothing but a pissing contest, pity...
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
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 © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
