Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Stereophile vs. The Absolute Sound

Last response: in Home Audio
Share
August 5, 2004 3:53:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately reviewing equipment?
Anonymous
August 5, 2004 7:31:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 8/4/04 7:53 PM, in article cerstc01jul@news2.newsguy.com, "Bob"
<asdf27203@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately reviewing
> equipment?

Ummmm..... Neither? :-)
Anonymous
August 5, 2004 7:34:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

asdf27203@yahoo.com (Bob) wrote:

>Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately reviewing
>equipment?

Of course, you may know my position in the industry but as far as I can tell
Sound & Vision gives the most professional evaluation of audio equipment.

What we lack is a more extensive graphical display of loudspeakers. I have to
admit that Stereophile magazine devotes the most print space to same of any
regular (not counting The Audio Critic because its NOT regular) current
publication.

But, IMO, Sound & Vision gives the most effective evaluation about the sound of
any given class of product.
Related resources
Anonymous
August 6, 2004 3:00:38 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Bob" <asdf27203@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cerstc01jul@news2.newsguy.com...
> Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately reviewing
equipment?


Sound&Vision does better reviews and makes less mistakes.

If only the Audio Critic were a regular publication.
Anonymous
August 6, 2004 3:05:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Nousaine" <nousaine@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ces9rj010il@news3.newsguy.com...
> asdf27203@yahoo.com (Bob) wrote:
>
> >Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately reviewing
> >equipment?
>
> Of course, you may know my position in the industry but as far as I can
tell
> Sound & Vision gives the most professional evaluation of audio equipment.
>
> What we lack is a more extensive graphical display of loudspeakers. I have
to
> admit that Stereophile magazine devotes the most print space to same of
any
> regular (not counting The Audio Critic because its NOT regular) current
> publication.
>
> But, IMO, Sound & Vision gives the most effective evaluation about the
sound of
> any given class of product.

Are you kidding? I subscribe to S&V among others...and in particular am
interested in DVD-Audio and SACD player evaluations. The typical reveiew
(and this is a pattern, so it is no accident) describes a single disk that
the reviewer used for each format (often something new that he hasn't heard
before). He describes the disk's music and makes some generic comment about
the sound of the format. That's it.

I've noticed the same approach to DVD-video. One test video, one generic
comment...that's it.

The rest of the article goes on to describe features.

I almost responded to another of you posts extolling the virtues of the
magazine's professional staff by asking you "so why are the articles so
uniformly boring and uninformative". If I really want to get a clue as to
how something sounds, I have to read TAS, Stereophile, a few of the online
mags, and go to the forums. And ultimately to a dealer. S&V includes
practically nothing informative to this process.

That said, your subwoofer comparisons and the video and component
"shootouts" do sometimes add value. But the individual component reviews
are real losers. My opinion.
August 6, 2004 3:18:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

nousaine@aol.com (Nousaine) wrote in message news:<ces9rj010il@news3.newsguy.com>...
> asdf27203@yahoo.com (Bob) wrote:
>
> >Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately reviewing
> >equipment?
>
> Of course, you may know my position in the industry but as far as I can tell
> Sound & Vision gives the most professional evaluation of audio equipment.
>
> What we lack is a more extensive graphical display of loudspeakers. I have to
> admit that Stereophile magazine devotes the most print space to same of any
> regular (not counting The Audio Critic because its NOT regular) current
> publication.
>
> But, IMO, Sound & Vision gives the most effective evaluation about the sound of
> any given class of product.

I have a definite opinion about Stereophile,but I have not read TAS or
S&V enough to have an opinion on them. I will read what others think
about TAS and S&V because I have grown slightly disenchanted with
Stereophile in recent years. I have read stereophile for at least 15
years,It seems to me that years ago they would have ripped products
that did not perform up to expectations (with stratispheric pricing
comes stratispheric expectations)I would expect that the worlds most
expensive amp to have performance and specs that would be state of the
art,be it tube,SS or something else! All we seem to get is wow sounds
great but measures poorly! Stereophile should
entertain,teach,enlighten and help guide us to audio nirvana. No
matter how rich or poor a reader is reviews should guide and help us
determine the best system at any level, cost no object through budget.
If you were to compair the most expensive amp and Mcintosh amp reveiew
this month, I do not think anyone no matter how well heeled would
purchase the worlds most expensive amp for sound quality or
engineering! bragging rights maybe.

Robert
Anonymous
August 6, 2004 5:23:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 5 Aug 2004 23:00:38 GMT, "Michael McKelvy" <deskst49@peoplepc.com>
wrote:

>"Bob" <asdf27203@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:cerstc01jul@news2.newsguy.com...
>> Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately reviewing
>equipment?
>
>
>Sound&Vision does better reviews and makes less mistakes.

Fewer mistakes? ;-)

Kal
Anonymous
August 6, 2004 5:36:46 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

I don't find any article to be enough to help you evaluate a
component. You must see and hear it for yourself to get an idea of
it's build quality, functionality and sound quality. While it is fun
to read the rags, if you are really interested in buying a new piece
of equipment, your best resource is then your local dealer who can
provide some form of demonstration and detailed product information.
As far as the two mentioned go, I like Stereophile for it's, in many
cases, in-depth reviews and test results for a more thorough
investigation. That does not mean that I like everything that I read
or that TAS does not have it's good reviews also. I have to laugh with
Stereophile when I read the "cancel my subscription" letters! I have
read most of the mags and really enjoy the British stuff the best. A
couple of them have "listening panels" and refer to comments made
during blind listening tests as well as the primary author's point of
view. A few use a graph or two to illustrate performance achievements
also. Usually quite entertaining as well, but I have to again give
credit to Stereophile and TAS among others for using interesting
writers. Not everyone is going to like them or at least not everything
they say, but most people who read them find it worthwhile in some
sense as evidenced by the subscriptions. For entertainment, I give
them high marks, but for being a useful tool in making a purchase
decision, they are all best suited for introducing new products and
companies.
-Bill
www.uptownaudio.com
Roanoke VA
(540) 343-1250

"Bob" <asdf27203@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cerstc01jul@news2.newsguy.com...
> Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately
reviewing equipment?
Anonymous
August 6, 2004 5:37:53 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

The Absolute Sound.
Anonymous
August 7, 2004 8:09:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

None of the mags this side of The Audio Critic really embrace
empirical verification wholeheartedly enough for my tastes.
S&V has some stalwarts (e.g. David Ranada) but too many of
their reviewers still make dubious claims of difference about
amps and CD players, from sighted listening. Ditto
Sensible Sound. As for Sterophile and TAS, they are
so far off the scale of pseudoscientific ridiculousness,
it's either funny or infuriating -- or, in the case of their
letters to the editor, scary (some serious right-wing
fulminating goes on there). And they will remain so as long as
folks like Harley, Valin, and Fremer are given free passes to
spew half-baked 'technical' ideas they like.
I *have* noticed that very recent issues of Stereophile
seem to be including *some* nods to the idea that
what people *think* they hear may not be a reliable
indicator of reality -- IIRC Art Dudley occasionally broaches
the radical-only-to-audiophiles idea but then runs away from
it with the usual 'golden ear' hemming and hawing.

--

-S.
"We started to see evidence of the professional groupie in the early 80's.
Alarmingly, these girls bore a striking resemblance to Motley Crue." --
David Lee Roth
Anonymous
August 7, 2004 8:10:09 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Bob wrote:

> Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately reviewing equipment?

I hope you do not intend to defer to either magazines' reviews, rather
than your own evaluations for selection of equipment for purchase.

-GP
Anonymous
August 7, 2004 8:16:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Harry Lavo" <harry.lavo@rcn.com> wrote in message news:<ceueg805qg@news2.newsguy.com>...

>
> I almost responded to another of you posts extolling the virtues of the
> magazine's [S&V] professional staff by asking you "so why are the articles so
> uniformly boring and uninformative". If I really want to get a clue as to
> how something sounds, I have to read TAS, Stereophile,

If I really want to get a clue to whatever became of those folks who
majored in Poetry in college, I read TAS & Stereophile. But if I want
a clue as to how something sounds, those mags are the last place I'd
turn.
Anonymous
August 7, 2004 8:18:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Michael McKelvy" <deskst49@peoplepc.com> wrote in message
news:ceue6m05gs@news2.newsguy.com...
> "Bob" <asdf27203@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:cerstc01jul@news2.newsguy.com...
> > Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately
reviewing
> equipment?
>
> Sound&Vision does better reviews and makes less mistakes.

If I were looking for a specific category of component, such as
speakers or CD players, I would start with Consumer Reports. Next in
line would be Sound & Vision. The trouble with the latter is that
they don't review a large number of components at the same time, so
it's less useful as a reference source. If you simply want to know
about the latest--and you want a fairly complete review--S&V may be
appropriate. But you have to be lucky; there may not be very many
components of the desired kind given a timely review. In this
business, once a year has elapsed, reviews are pretty stale.

Norm Strong
Anonymous
August 7, 2004 8:20:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Kalman Rubinson" <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote in message
news:ceumj50frv@news2.newsguy.com...
> On 5 Aug 2004 23:00:38 GMT, "Michael McKelvy" <deskst49@peoplepc.com>
> wrote:
>
> >"Bob" <asdf27203@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:cerstc01jul@news2.newsguy.com...
> >> Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately reviewing
> >equipment?
> >
> >
> >Sound&Vision does better reviews and makes less mistakes.
>
> Fewer mistakes? ;-)
>
> Kal

Since the majority of people writing for Sound & Vision are EE's they know
what they are talking and don't make many mistakes in terminology, or spend
endless amounts of ink on non-issues like jitter, high priced cables. They
debunk pseudo science, they don't promote it.
Anonymous
August 8, 2004 7:17:36 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 7 Aug 2004 16:20:53 GMT, "Michael McKelvy" <deskst49@peoplepc.com>
wrote:

>"Kalman Rubinson" <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote in message
>news:ceumj50frv@news2.newsguy.com...
>> On 5 Aug 2004 23:00:38 GMT, "Michael McKelvy" <deskst49@peoplepc.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >"Bob" <asdf27203@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> >news:cerstc01jul@news2.newsguy.com...
>> >> Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately reviewing
>> >equipment?
>> >
>> >
>> >Sound&Vision does better reviews and makes less mistakes.
>>
>> Fewer mistakes? ;-)
>>
>> Kal
>
>Since the majority of people writing for Sound & Vision are EE's they know
>what they are talking and don't make many mistakes in terminology, or spend
>endless amounts of ink on non-issues like jitter, high priced cables. They
>debunk pseudo science, they don't promote it.

I was addressing your use of 'less' when you should have used 'fewer.'
Note the smiley.

Kal
Anonymous
August 10, 2004 7:31:40 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

"Kalman Rubinson" <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote in message
news:cf5g6g0kaf@news1.newsguy.com...
> On 7 Aug 2004 16:20:53 GMT, "Michael McKelvy" <deskst49@peoplepc.com>
> wrote:
>
> >"Kalman Rubinson" <kr4@nyu.edu> wrote in message
> >news:ceumj50frv@news2.newsguy.com...
> >> On 5 Aug 2004 23:00:38 GMT, "Michael McKelvy" <deskst49@peoplepc.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >"Bob" <asdf27203@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:cerstc01jul@news2.newsguy.com...
> >> >> Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately
reviewing
> >> >equipment?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Sound&Vision does better reviews and makes less mistakes.
> >>
> >> Fewer mistakes? ;-)
> >>
> >> Kal
> >
> >Since the majority of people writing for Sound & Vision are EE's they
know
> >what they are talking and don't make many mistakes in terminology, or
spend
> >endless amounts of ink on non-issues like jitter, high priced cables.
They
> >debunk pseudo science, they don't promote it.
>
> I was addressing your use of 'less' when you should have used 'fewer.'
> Note the smiley.
>
> Kal

Nit picker! :-)
Anonymous
August 11, 2004 5:21:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:53:16 +0000, Bob wrote:

> Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately reviewing
> equipment?

___________________________________________________________

All are interesting to read...however, do make your
final decision after listening to the devices in question in an
environment much like the one you will spend most of your listening
time! You decide! Yeh or Nay!!

Sound and Vison... has many pretty pictures, but as always, most
everything they make any comment on comes out with a favorable..a
"jello" like quality...perhaps "cotton candy". Let us not upset anyone!

Stereophile...definite opinions are held and clearly stated... however,
those with long held "agendas" tend to "foam" at the mouth when hearing
these opinions and state various "mantras" noted on these newsgroups for
years against these opinions. A decent magazine striving to remain in a
diminishing core of stereophiles. Many masses in this generation do not
really care about truly decent audio.. content with "cotton candy" pity!
Our value systems in this arena is notably changing.

The Absolute Sound...

Real opinions..stated as such...example:

The Magnapan speaker..well liked and stated as such. Clearly stated
opinons...no mush!
Not as inclusive as Stereophile...been around for a long
while..Special to those of us that remember the ragtag "pamplet"
quality of the ole days.

The Audio Critic...

Bitter opinions...for years the editor viewed himself as the "Critic
of the critics"...devoted to slashing other reviewers. Substance? Not
here! Pitiful publication. Always intermittant!

Leonard...
Anonymous
August 12, 2004 3:07:42 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

lcw999 <lcw999@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 23:53:16 +0000, Bob wrote:

> > Which magazine do you think does the best job in accurately reviewing
> > equipment?

> ___________________________________________________________

> All are interesting to read...however, do make your
> final decision after listening to the devices in question in an
> environment much like the one you will spend most of your listening
> time! You decide! Yeh or Nay!!

> Sound and Vison... has many pretty pictures, but as always, most
> everything they make any comment on comes out with a favorable..a
> "jello" like quality...perhaps "cotton candy". Let us not upset anyone!


IME as regards *sound*, that's true of their reviews of solid state
stuff...not true of loudspeakers...and there's a good technical reasons why
one shouldn't expect otherwise. In other words, that's a reason to trust them.

As regards features/user-friendliness, they're as critical as any.

> Bitter opinions...for years the editor viewed himself as the "Critic
> of the critics"...devoted to slashing other reviewers. Substance? Not
> here!

Nonsense. Plenty of substance...moreso than the other mags you
mentioned, on a page for page basis. Alas, just not published often enough.



--

-S.
"We started to see evidence of the professional groupie in the early 80's.
Alarmingly, these girls bore a striking resemblance to Motley Crue." --
David Lee Roth
August 27, 2004 4:09:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 11 Aug 2004 01:21:30 GMT, lcw999 <lcw999@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>Many masses in this generation do not
> really care about truly decent audio.. content with "cotton candy" pity!
> Our value systems in this arena is notably changing.


The vast majority have never cared about "truly decent
audio." A heck of a lot of them have always cared about
music, tho.
Anonymous
August 27, 2004 11:11:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

On 8/26/04 8:09 PM, in article cglu3t017lc@news1.newsguy.com, "GregP"
<gregpusenet@fastmail.fm> wrote:

> On 11 Aug 2004 01:21:30 GMT, lcw999 <lcw999@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> Many masses in this generation do not
>> really care about truly decent audio.. content with "cotton candy" pity!
>> Our value systems in this arena is notably changing.
>
>
> The vast majority have never cared about "truly decent
> audio." A heck of a lot of them have always cared about
> music, tho.

And a lot of them haven't heard decent music, too. Many concerts use
distorting amplification, and playbacks have similar distortion. Few have
heard unamplified music - or a decent stereo system playing well recorded
music - so don't know what they are missing!
!