Kevin C Brown
Senior HTF Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2000
- Messages
- 5,726
rant mode on:
Yeah, I just roll my eyes now when I see a review by Moncrief in WSR. Good suggestion to do a letter to the editor. He *always* has to point out how he got better sound out of a component by doing something that he/himself specifically thought up and experimented with outside of what the manufacturer recommends. He also writes for the Inner Ear Report too (I think), and he pointed this out for some Plinius amp he reviewed for them. I usually keep reviews of gear that I might be interested in someday. The Arcam pre/pro falls into that category. But his review in WSR was so bad I couldn't throw it away fast enough. All this verbage about how a new level of listening achievement had been obtained, blah blah blah, but he didn't talk jack squat about a lot of the technical attributes of the pre/pro that I'd be much more interested in. And I don't know if you noticed, but a lot of times, he keeps saying the same thing over and over and over again, just using different words.
rant mode off
I also have a subscription to the Perfect Vision's/The Absolute Sound's web only AVguide or something. $15/yr. I mainly got it to have access to their numerous product reviews. But other than that, I have to be honest and say that I much prefer a print publication. I personally spend way too much time on the computer , and reading a "magazine" online isn't something else I want to spend time on. I work in the semiconductor industry, and a lot of trade publications we get are trying to get us to move to the internet, and it's funny because you can tell they aren't being that successful, because they keep coming up with new marketing campaigns, ad slogans, specials, giveaways, etc to get us to move. But you can't bring a PC into the john to peruse while taking care of nature's business...
Yeah, I just roll my eyes now when I see a review by Moncrief in WSR. Good suggestion to do a letter to the editor. He *always* has to point out how he got better sound out of a component by doing something that he/himself specifically thought up and experimented with outside of what the manufacturer recommends. He also writes for the Inner Ear Report too (I think), and he pointed this out for some Plinius amp he reviewed for them. I usually keep reviews of gear that I might be interested in someday. The Arcam pre/pro falls into that category. But his review in WSR was so bad I couldn't throw it away fast enough. All this verbage about how a new level of listening achievement had been obtained, blah blah blah, but he didn't talk jack squat about a lot of the technical attributes of the pre/pro that I'd be much more interested in. And I don't know if you noticed, but a lot of times, he keeps saying the same thing over and over and over again, just using different words.
rant mode off
I also have a subscription to the Perfect Vision's/The Absolute Sound's web only AVguide or something. $15/yr. I mainly got it to have access to their numerous product reviews. But other than that, I have to be honest and say that I much prefer a print publication. I personally spend way too much time on the computer , and reading a "magazine" online isn't something else I want to spend time on. I work in the semiconductor industry, and a lot of trade publications we get are trying to get us to move to the internet, and it's funny because you can tell they aren't being that successful, because they keep coming up with new marketing campaigns, ad slogans, specials, giveaways, etc to get us to move. But you can't bring a PC into the john to peruse while taking care of nature's business...