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:
Topic - Characteristics of consumer-oriented audio publications - Avocat 09:37:07 03/20/07 (139)
- Then Buy Hi-Fi Choice - RGA 02:40:53 04/21/07 (0)
- Well, your rambling troll post finally paid off... - SF tech 11:27:23 03/21/07 (12)
- Re: Well, your rambling troll post finally paid off... - Avocat 14:36:12 03/21/07 (11)
- You say, "But I enjoy reading Sterephile." - SF tech 14:50:43 03/21/07 (10)
- Re: You say, "But I enjoy reading Sterephile." - Avocat 13:45:43 03/22/07 (6)
- Here's the problem... - SF tech 16:26:41 03/22/07 (5)
- Re: Here's the problem... - Avocat 19:19:12 03/22/07 (3)
- Let's keep it civil, OK? - SF tech 20:05:01 03/22/07 (2)
- Re: Let's keep it civil, OK? Agreed. - Avocat 10:13:58 03/23/07 (1)
- "This is not questioning my integrity?" - SF tech 11:58:54 03/23/07 (0)
- Seconded. -t - Bruce Kendall 18:22:31 03/22/07 (0)
- I meant it as a joke - ray m 10:07:51 03/22/07 (2)
- Yeah, I hear you... - SF tech 12:20:28 03/22/07 (1)
- Re: Yeah, I hear you... - ray m 04:07:14 03/26/07 (0)
- Re: Characteristics of consumer-oriented audio publications - John Atkinson 04:23:25 03/21/07 (84)
- Your blind speaker tests were the best tests ever done in Stereophile including the JGH "golden era" - Richard BassNut Greene 09:17:29 03/23/07 (1)
- Based on that information it's hard to imagine we won't - bjh 17:41:57 03/23/07 (0)
- Re: "As an editor, I have no future if I publish material that people have little desire to read." - Ivan303 16:12:44 03/21/07 (3)
- Re: Re: "As an editor, I have no future if I publish material that people have little desire to read." - John Atkinson 04:11:40 03/22/07 (2)
- Editors generally understand this. Publishers generally don't NT - Jazz Inmate 15:05:23 04/05/07 (0)
- EXACTLY RIGHT!!! (nt) - fastjazz 06:04:44 03/24/07 (0)
- editors and reviewers should prove their listening skills - ray m 12:52:07 03/21/07 (14)
- Should readers be tested for comprehension and gullibility skills? - JTimothyA 20:24:00 03/21/07 (1)
- DBT reviewers. - ray m 12:33:52 03/22/07 (1)
- blind testing would destroy false gods...... - jdouglas51 15:09:58 03/21/07 (2)
- Sounds like you have discovered your niche then! - Bruce Kendall 18:40:25 03/21/07 (1)
- Re: Sounds like you have discovered your niche then! - ray m 21:39:50 03/21/07 (1)
- Let me ask you a question based on your system: - robert young 14:14:55 03/21/07 (2)
- Re: Perfectly stated. [nt] - alan m. kafton 12:48:08 03/25/07 (0)
- Eggs Ackley...(nt) - mkuller 14:20:14 03/21/07 (0)
- I have found just reading their descriptions of what they hear - Bruce Kendall 13:40:08 03/21/07 (0)
- Are you Bass Nut in disguise??? (nt) - mkuller 13:15:27 03/21/07 (4)
- Hey Mule I'm a subjective audiophile and think blind testing is a waste of time this year - Richard BassNut Greene 08:58:25 03/23/07 (3)
- FYI, I have done a test or two with wires - Bruce Kendall 18:53:08 03/23/07 (2)
- Regardless of what... - mkuller 10:38:54 03/24/07 (1)
- There is more than one coincidence in town, buddy. - Bruce Kendall 08:26:56 03/25/07 (0)
- Personally, I liked your group test. - Larry I 11:48:05 03/21/07 (0)
- "So far, all you have done is offer unsupported opinion." The trap closes! nt - clarkjohnsen 11:18:33 03/21/07 (0)
- Not surprising... - mkuller 10:32:08 03/21/07 (10)
- Re: Not surprising... - Avocat 11:05:57 03/21/07 (7)
- Maybe you'd prefer... - mkuller 11:15:09 03/21/07 (6)
- Re: Maybe you'd prefer... - Avocat 13:31:44 03/21/07 (5)
- Avocat, no magic here... - Ozzie 14:01:44 03/21/07 (3)
- Rolloff of what? - E-Stat 12:39:05 03/22/07 (0)
- You missed it... - mkuller 14:14:39 03/21/07 (1)
- Link to Atkinson-Krueger Debate.. - Pat D 22:52:32 04/04/07 (0)
- Avocat, no magic here... - Ozzie 14:00:51 03/21/07 (0)
- Yes, that and more. - Ozzie 11:00:02 03/21/07 (1)
- Yup...(nt) - mkuller 11:08:10 03/21/07 (0)
- The Stereophile reviewer panels from the early 90s - John N 08:17:48 03/21/07 (0)
- Re: Characteristics of consumer-oriented audio publications - Avocat 08:13:30 03/21/07 (48)
- This isn't only a dead horse, it is unidentifiable. - Bruce Kendall 11:07:04 03/21/07 (5)
- Ahh, that name... - robert young 14:05:41 03/21/07 (3)
- At least he helped us fine tune our drumming skills. - Bruce Kendall 14:17:26 03/21/07 (2)
- And a second battalion is in training over at PropHeads.... - robert young 15:32:07 03/21/07 (1)
- I used to think it was just a few loose screws, - Bruce Kendall 15:40:36 03/21/07 (0)
- Anyone want to take a walk down memory lane? - Bruce Kendall 12:13:05 03/21/07 (0)
- Another Inquisition begins :-( - John Atkinson 10:37:33 03/21/07 (40)
- Re:discussion continues : Good suggestions seconded - Avocat 10:21:29 03/24/07 (0)
- Re: Another Inquisition begins :-( - Avocat 09:27:45 03/24/07 (1)
- Why so much personal rancor, Avocat?? - robert young 10:09:11 03/25/07 (0)
- Thanks for responding John... - Arvind Kohli 09:42:12 03/22/07 (0)
- Re: Another Inquisition begins :-( - Avocat 12:33:46 03/21/07 (35)
- The Inquisition Continues - John Atkinson 08:03:58 03/22/07 (32)
- Re: The Inquisition Continues - imispgh@yahoo.com 11:06:26 03/22/07 (31)
- Re: The Inquisition Continues - John Atkinson 04:15:49 03/23/07 (30)
- Re: The Inquisition Continues - theaudiohobby 18:31:54 03/24/07 (29)
- Re: The Inquisition Continues - John Atkinson 04:31:07 03/25/07 (28)
- Re: The Inquisition Continues - theaudiohobby 10:43:35 03/25/07 (27)
- Re: The Inquisition Continues - John Atkinson 15:56:20 03/25/07 (26)
- Re: The Inquisition Continues - theaudiohobby 01:34:45 03/26/07 (25)
- So, what conclusion can you draw - E-Stat 05:07:26 03/26/07 (24)
- Re: That question has been answered. - theaudiohobby 05:28:15 03/26/07 (23)
- What makes you think that Mr. Atkinson's - E-Stat 05:41:22 03/26/07 (22)
- Re: What makes you think that Mr. Atkinson's - theaudiohobby 07:35:55 03/26/07 (21)
- Re: What makes you think that Mr. Atkinson's - John Atkinson 11:14:34 03/26/07 (13)
- Re: It does not work that way... - theaudiohobby 03:35:12 03/27/07 (12)
- Re: It does not work that way... - John Atkinson 03:55:56 03/27/07 (11)
- C'mon, John - E-Stat 07:16:27 03/27/07 (7)
- Re: C'mon, John - theaudiohobby 11:39:05 03/27/07 (5)
- I didn't have any questions for Mr. Atkinson - E-Stat 17:35:12 03/27/07 (4)
- Re: I didn't have any questions for Mr. Atkinson - theaudiohobby 18:59:11 03/27/07 (3)
- I would say facetious, not malicious. - robert young 15:51:36 03/29/07 (2)
- Thank you - E-Stat 16:21:49 03/29/07 (1)
- You're welcome. - robert young 18:54:40 03/29/07 (0)
- Re: C'mon, John - kerr 07:36:55 03/27/07 (0)
- Re: It does not work that way... - theaudiohobby 04:42:55 03/27/07 (2)
- Re: It does not work that way... - John Atkinson 13:14:34 03/27/07 (1)
- Re: It does not work that way... - Avocat 15:18:43 04/01/07 (0)
- The answer being - E-Stat 07:40:54 03/26/07 (6)
- Re: The answer being - theaudiohobby 09:07:46 03/26/07 (5)
- So which is it - answer the question... - mkuller 14:14:02 03/26/07 (4)
- On a related topic... - E-Stat 16:12:37 03/26/07 (3)
- Re: On a related topic... - kerr 04:52:15 03/27/07 (2)
- Yes, Ms. Loken is a fine example - E-Stat 06:04:57 03/27/07 (1)
- A. Slim and None - kerr 06:35:17 03/27/07 (0)
- Inquisin me this - JTimothyA 19:47:59 03/21/07 (0)
- And it continues.... - robert young 14:04:01 03/21/07 (0)
- John, I second 'Avocat's followup questions [nt] - Arvind Kohli 09:48:03 03/21/07 (0)
- Re: Characteristics of consumer-oriented audio publications - Avocat 15:49:31 03/20/07 (1)
- We'll do our best without you!! ;) - robert young 16:34:33 03/20/07 (0)
- Consumer-oriented... - mkuller 14:10:22 03/20/07 (8)
- We are doing that Mr. Kuller - jdarby 10:13:12 03/21/07 (6)
- Forget 4 reviewers... - Ozzie 13:31:28 03/21/07 (3)
- Ozzie..the problem with that is... - jdarby 16:10:31 03/23/07 (0)
- Re: Forget 4 reviewers... - andy19191 06:20:49 03/22/07 (1)
- Andy... - jdarby 16:30:56 03/23/07 (0)
- Self-promotion? (nt) - mkuller 10:15:16 03/21/07 (1)
- Re: Self-promotion? (nt) - jdarby 12:50:45 03/21/07 (1)
- Re: Consumer-oriented... - Avocat 15:12:24 03/20/07 (1)
- Interesting POV... - robert young 14:07:15 03/20/07 (11)
- That may be your take, and your reasons for reading audio mags, but..... - Rick W 10:54:56 03/21/07 (8)
- We may be neighbors, but we're miles apart... - robert young 13:56:50 03/21/07 (7)
- Rick, why did you delete your reply? - robert young 10:06:54 03/22/07 (6)
- Robert, I just wanted to refine it. Here it is. - Rick W 10:43:54 03/22/07 (5)
- We're getting closer to discovering the critical points... - robert young 10:24:20 03/24/07 (4)
- Guess we still disagree. - Rick W 23:49:02 03/24/07 (3)
- Yes, that we do. - robert young 08:01:41 03/25/07 (2)
- Maybe not all that far apart. - Rick W 09:54:31 03/25/07 (1)
- Not far at all...How'd that happen??? ;) - robert young 10:19:13 03/25/07 (0)
- Re: Interesting POV... - Avocat 15:40:35 03/20/07 (1)
- your reply didn't seem to work.... - robert young 16:36:02 03/20/07 (0)
- Re: Characteristics of consumer-oriented audio publications - TomLarson 12:27:47 03/20/07 (0)
- One or two things. - Kal Rubinson 12:06:54 03/20/07 (7)
- Re: One or two things. - Avocat 12:57:46 03/20/07 (5)
- Re: One or two things. - Kal Rubinson 13:19:35 03/20/07 (2)
- Re: One or two things. - Avocat 13:56:30 03/20/07 (1)
- Re: One or two things. - ray m 06:30:02 03/21/07 (0)
- "The excellent review of the Wagner Ring recording." That was the ever-dependable Richard Lehnert. - clarkjohnsen 13:18:39 03/20/07 (0)
- Re: One or two things. - TomLarson 13:05:43 03/20/07 (0)
- Re: One or two things. - TomLarson 12:19:07 03/20/07 (0)
- Understanding the reviewer - AmanteDiMusica 10:46:25 03/20/07 (7)
- Re: Understanding the reviewer - Avocat 11:24:20 03/20/07 (6)
- Sorry, you can't force that square peg into the round hole - Sordidman 13:40:07 03/20/07 (3)
- Re: Sorry, you can't force that square peg into the round hole - Avocat 15:03:01 03/20/07 (2)
- "Market-driven" vs "consumer-oriented" - not necessarily the same (nt) - mkuller 14:04:08 03/21/07 (0)
- Well, they're NOT consumer oriented... - SF tech 19:27:05 03/20/07 (0)
- Re: Understanding the reviewer - bjh 11:48:35 03/20/07 (1)
- Re: Understanding the reviewer - TomLarson 12:21:31 03/20/07 (0)