|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.45.230.234
I recently sent a letter to the editor of TAS expressing my dissatisfaction with the letters to the editor column. The magazine has undoubtedly changed since its early years, and not to the better.Since this letter may never see the light of day, I thought I'd post it here. What are your thoughts?
LIGHT MY FIRE, PLEASE!Editor:
Fifteen years after the CD revolutionized the audioworld, I rediscovered vinyl.After years of obsessive CD collecting and weekly peregrinations to Tower records, I grew weary of the medium and struck out on a “new” path. As an iconoclast, I was always out of sync with the prevailing winds, so this was no surprise. After acquiring a good turntable, tube amps and pramps, I was ready to wend my way through the world of vinyl. Searching old audio magazines for vinyl reviews was a start and when I had the chance to buy the entire set of TAS from the first issue for $250, I jumped at it.
Reading these old issues provided endless hours of enjoyment, but not in the way that I had envisioned. Sure, the record and equipment reviews were helpful and informative. But none of this captured my attention, wakened my senses, like the letters to the editor. Now here was real theatre. Light sparring, good-natured kidding, stinging invectives, incisive recriminations, unadulterated sarcasm- it was all here and wildly entertaining at that. Manufacturers pelted reviewers for an unfavorable rating, reviewers lashed back in kind. Readers insulted other readers for their dearth of audio knowledge; readers sparred with reviewers. Even reviewers lashed out at one another on occasion. I remember Harry Pearson once explaining Sid Marks’ lack of enthusiasm for reissues by seemingly implying that he and his friends had a stake in the originals. Marks was livid and replied with a few zingers of his own. And when Classic Records began reissuing the Living Stereo series and some reviewers felt that the reissues didn’t sound like the original lps, Hobson wrote an extended diatribe defending his use of solid state mastering equipment, saying he was not trying to mimic the originals but to get as close to the master tapes as possible. That jousting between Jonathan Valin and Hobson really stirred the blood. I could well imagine readers waiting anxiously for the next issue of TAS just to see who would get the best of whom.
Lest one think that this was just a forum for lashing out, an arena of wild insults, let me correct that notion. These were, by in large, literate, cogent, well-thought-out missives. The fact that they happened to be, at times, angry and caustic, just heightened the drama and enlivened the debate.
Alas, things have changed at TAS. . For the most part, I now find the letters to the editor section an eviscerated version of it’s past self, bleached out and desiccated, lacking drama, lacking humor, in short- DULL! Where is the old vitality, the verve, the conflict, the angst? This is the kind of reading material one might peruse at a lady’s tea party. The reasons for this I leave to you. I only know that TAS has lost it’s way; the pilot light has burnt out leaving only the faint sound of hissing gas. PLEASE, before we all fall asleep, let’s revisit the old ways, let’s hurl a few insults, toss a few invectives, indulge in occasional sarcasm. At least, then, we’ll know we’re alive.
Eric
Follow Ups:
I remember one letter in which the owner of a tube preamp described the whole agony of attempting to get it repaired (3 times no less) in the funniest way. The letter ended with him describing how if he wants to relive that episode "he goes to the wall socket for that little extra".
That's why I've kept my TAS back issues, the letters to the Editor make for great reading. And they published a lot of those submitted letters too!
Hi...
I hope that my bad English allows me to express clearly my opinion.
The actual TAS is boring, a magazine for the X-generation.
The old magazine had, HP's presumed intemperances and "arrogance" apart, a strong personality, that also reflected in the articles of the other reviewers (wich, even if against their will, had somehow to stick to the rigid canons imposed by the editor).
The old team of reviewrs (that included John Nork, Pat Donleycott, Mike Kuller, etc.) was, in my opinion to me, very more interesting than the actual.
The old magazine has disclosed an "aesthetics/mistique" of the audio universe that, however particular, has attracted the attention of a lot of readers towards dimensions before unknowns.
The old "letters to the editor" reflected clearly this fervor of ideas, also at the cost to flow into fiery disputes.
As I have already said, the TAS's (and HP's) early work was enormous; now (except particular cases) the general leveling reigns sovereign.
I have great respect for those who are multi-lingual like yourself.I agree with your sentiments although I admit a fair amount of bias since I've known two of the original reviewers for quite some time.
By the way, "current" is probably a better word than "actual" in this case.
NT
rw
...to have a little of a split personality.On one hand he's like a kid in a candy store - full of wonder and amazement, witty and funny.
On the other, he doesn't suffer fools and can be very critical, tempermental and abrasive.
...in the old days.Funny, that you now find it charming.
One of the things missing today in the commercial audio publications, of which I include Stereophile and TAS, is the sense of the strong personality of its founder/editor.
You have to go to the still 'underground' publications found mainly on the web for that now (Bound for Sound is an exception).
If you liked HP's caustic remarks, you may really like Aczel in the Audio Critic.
NT
(nt)
ec1876 is absolutely right about the old TAS. I have every issue since the one with the subwoofer doggy cover, and it is amazing how entertaining they are. HP's vanity and just plain nastiness often annoyed me (I'll never forget his appalling letter to John Atkinson when he was refused permission to interview Gordon Holt for TAS), but without HP the magazine would never have been as informative or as much fun to read-- or for that matter, have exited at all! This is not to denigrate todays TAS; I still read every word (well, maybe not the rock reviews), but the letters are pretty mild stuff compared to the old days.
I remember one letter writer extolling the virtues of his JVC receiver, and HP's response telling him what he could do with it.
rw
Don't know which issue; sometime in the 80's.
HP's thinly veiled comment was apparently not appreciated by some readers, causing HP in a later issue to castigate those readers who could find HP possessed of "impure thoughts".
He said he still uses it as his reference to this day,c'mon what the hell do you really think he said?
Did he agree JVC was good or ....do you remember?
Thanks for reminding me of the old days.I started a subscription with issue 10 or so. I was living in Australia and could not afford TAS by myself, so an audio mate and I went in together (sorry, Harry) and geez, we loved those issues.
The letters section was pages and pages. I always started there and read them all - quite a few times. Since the issues took some time to come out, there was plenty of opportunity for rereading. And we did - and we waited, and waited ... for the next issue.
Now it all seems to happen so quickly.
I took the current issue down to the coffee shop yesterday morning. I hadn't glanced at it prior to that. I can't quite believe that I finished reading it over one latte. And the letters section! Sad.
Regards,
Geoff
Times have changed.Now one expensive latte, not cups of coffee at the counter of my favorite diner,the lady refilling the coffee cup.Hum..nostalgic!The old TAC had some very interesting letters too,with comments from THE Editor.
Coincidently, I started reading the very first issues of 'Stereophile' and in Vol. 1, Issue 4, I found an LTE that sounded amazingly like something presented here, except it was about 'Stereophobia'
"Sirs: I say that stereo is a first class fake and the biggest fraud ever put out by American Mfr. I have never found anyone who knows audio engineering or music that did not agree with this. All those who disagree just don't know enough to know the truth or they are liars engaged in selling stereo equipment. The only reason that most people have gone for stereo is that they have not had time, and will not take the time to get all the facts, so they are victims of advertising, the biggest con game in the world, and I am not so sure that they don't deserve what they get. ... " How about that folks? Sound familiar?
...more than 50 years.The ignorant and uninformed are claiming audio products are snake oil.
Based on their 'understanding' of engineering and science.
Not "more than 50 years." It only seems that long. IIRC, Stereophile started in the early 60s and TAS came along quite a bit later.
(nt)
Sounded like you were commenting on JC's post. In any event, we've beaten this one long enough.
45 years? Is that OK?
...is that over 45 years, or 50 years, or 450 years, the vast majority of what looks like snake oil has, in fact, proven to BE snake oil. Some folks only remember the rare exceptions. Those rare exceptions then serve as fodder to support people's belief in the latest snake-oil fad. And even many of those "exceptions" remain suspect.Since Jesus, how many people have claimed to be Jesus? How many of them actually WERE? How can you tell?
Who expects precision here anyway, although I'd personally hate to lose more than 5 years at this point. :-)
Indeed it does. The author is making a series of statements without putting forward any evidence, facts or reasoning to support his view apart from some dubious looking personal experience.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: