|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
207.200.116.133
In Reply to: Do Aczel, Hardesty and Salvato criticize and accept advertising too? posted by Richard BassNut Greene on February 9, 2007 at 08:23:34:
>In this country audio magazines supported by advertising almost never criticize a component.>Show me a component review which is not critical of some or many aspects of its performance.
EVERY review I have read is critical.
Do you have reading issues or are you just Nuts with your own agenda?
>And even in the rare critical review, the conclusion usually waters down the details by saying something like: 'But on the other hand >some listeners will enjoy these speakers!'>
That sounds like something Julian Hirsch would have written. Besides, it's true - someone probably has purchased those speakers and is enjoying them, no matter what the reviewer's opinion was. Maybe you.
>I'm not familier with Aczel, Hardesty and Salvato.>
These are the guys YOU should be reading - right up your alley.
Try Googling them or doing a 'search' here.
>Do they criticize and accept advertising too?>They all loudly criticize the TAS and Stereophile - it's part of their schtick.
None are print rags now; all three are webzines. I don't know if any acccept advertising but - they're much cheaper to produce than the print mags they criticize (and have a tiny fraction of their readership) and it's not likely many advertisers would want to buy space with them.
Follow Ups:
In Britsh audio magazines you will often see products rated with stars, or letter grades -- it is very simple to determine which products are rated below average.Please identify one or two component "reviews" in American audio magazines where the reader is clearly told the product is average or below average.
Please identify one review where the reader is told to audition other (better) products, and not waste his time on the product reviewed.
Blathering about a product for three pages is not criticism unless the product is compared with other products at similar prices, and the reader is informed that the product being reviewed is merely average or below average versus its peers. That's real criticism.
Where dos one find definitive criticism (no "reading between the lines and trying to guess what the author really means" required) in American audio journals that are supported by advertising revenue?
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
Subjective Audiophile 2007
...since they fit in nicely with your system, I would imagine.
Or are you?
And to think that Julian Hirsch is accused of never trashing anything. Anyone notice how the same people who regularly trash him are the first to stand up for the everything sounds really great, some even more great than others, especially if 10 times the cost, audio rantings of today?Sheesh, very little equipment back when Julian Hirsch was reviewing would stand up to what we have today. And for less cost. Is it his fault that technology needed to catch up with present day audiophile egos?
After all he retired from Stereo Review in 1998 and died 4 years ago.
'cause that be the only reason for your not knowing this. People here regularly trash a man who has probably brought more people to audio than Stereophile and TAS combined.Before anybody flames that, Walmart sells a whole lot more clothes than Neiman Marcus. Many of us here may have started with Walmart (Stereo Review) only to have have graduated to Neiman's (the cool guy rags), but most of us more than likely are not trust fund babies or .com millionaires.
Stereophile's review of one of Richard Gray's power conditioners (in 2000, I think) and Listener magazine trashed the Brentworth Sound Labs Type III loudspeakers, can't recall when that was but Rob Doorack could point you to it.
I don't have quick access to my Listener issues but I think the Brentworth review was printed in 2001. The manufacturer was so pissed - off by Art's review that he set up an entire web site devoted to attacking the article.Listener published a number of negative reviews. As I recall Art's review of a WAVAC amp caused the annoyed distributor to cancel his ads in the magazine. I wrote a review of the Roksan Xerxes X turntable that pointed out that it arrived with a serious - arguably fatal - manufacturing defect, it broke while I was auditioning it, and that it was so boring that I fell asleep listening to a favorite LP on it. A few years before that I wrote a negative review of a Pro Ac speaker that more or less destroyed Art's long friendship with Pro Ac's US importer. There were other less than glowing Listener reviews; a few that I can think of were of an Audio Note CD player, the original Blue Point Special cartridge, and a Naim phono stage.
I recall most of those reviews and, like most readers, I was sorry to lose Listener Magazine.> it was so boring that I fell asleep listening to a favorite LP on it. <
Aside from causing a listener to run screaming from the room, is there anything worse?
Major Failing:Blathering endlessly the same tiring arguments, shows absolutely no indication of being capable of refining propositions despire years of critical feedback.
Recommedation:
Avoid if at all possible unless seeking a cheap laugh.
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
That would mean one of use discusses audio,
while the other behaves like a spoiled child
with nothing to add about audio.
.
.
.
Richard BassNut Greene
Subjective Audiophile 2007
.
No Guru, No Method, No Teacher
Lewis Lipnick's Stereophile review of the B&W 800: "Drawbacks? None."
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: