OT: Ultimate A/V (formerly SGHT) goes T.U. (1 Viewer)

[Brian L]

Just opened my mailbox to find an issue of Home Theater Magazine, with an insert advising that UAV has ceased publication, and the rest of my subscription would be fulfilled with issues of HT.

While UAV had its good points, I though SGHT went steadily downhill ever since they went to a large, glossy format, even moreso when they relaunched as UAV.

I have most of their original issues which I read when I first got into this stuff in the early 90's, and enjoyed their style, which read more like a journal than anything else.

But when they got bought up by the same company that owned HT, it seemed kind of obvious that someone had to go. They have been sharing some of their better writers (Peter Putman, for example), so hopefully the good guys will not disappear from the AV scene.

Oh well...I occasionally buy HT on the news stand when I get itchy for something to read...guess I won't have to do that for a few months.

BGL

 

[Paul.S]

Say it isn't so! I've been a subscriber since "Vol. 2 No. 2" (Summer 1996) back in the quarterly day and got back issues of the previous editions I'd missed. Have been a subscriber since basically the beginning.

Interesting, the cyclical nature of the mag biz. Started a Digital Audio & Compact Disc Review sub in '86 shortly after getting a CD player and saw that mag become just CD Review and then CD Review, Music & the Arts (!) at which point I cancelled because they were only going to review classical and jazz.

Which basically segued into the start of SGHT about a year-and-a-half before I had a DVD player. My only frustration was the lack of music reviews--thus entered my S & V sub. Feel like I've barely had time to grip the new incarnation of UAV before it's being put to bed.

That's gotta bite for a lotta staffers who fairly recently left the mag's former home city of Santa Fe, NM to move to much-more-expensive Los Angeles, set up (HT) digs . . . only to have the mag close down not too long after their arrival here. I remember a piece by then-tech editor and now editor Tom Norton about house-hunting and HT set up in his new home here.

Speaking of TJN, I agree BGL WRT hoping TJN and some of those many other talented cats at UAV find homes at HT or elsewhere in the press. I think I've learned more about HDTV from Peter Brinkley than anyone out there. And Michael Fremer can't just disappear!?

Seems like such bad timing: I was looking forward to their reviews and early coverage of high def DVD . . .

-p

 

[Brian L]

Well, you can of course still get your monthly dose of MF in Stereophile, which after reading it off and on for years, I finally subscribed to.

I did it because of their coverage of iPod and digital music in general (obviously I don't mean just CD!), and 5.1 with Kal Rubinson. I see that the folks at Absolute Sound are doing the same, although they trashed iPod in a recent issue. Oh well, their loss.

Yup, a few of those SGHT guys were just up the road from me before heading out to LA (SGHT) or NYC (Stereophile). I thought it was cool having not one but two buff books based in my adopted home state....and then they were gone!

I think Robert Harley is still on the other side of the mountains from me, but I have not come around to his editorial style over at TAS or TPV.

Back to the glory days of SGHT...I still pull them out for a read every now and then. Their special issue on DVD (January of '98) was the first to accurately explain that all DVD's were really framed 4:3, and that anamorphic discs were still 4:3 framed, but with the content squeezed into the frame....just like with film. WSR continued to insist that WS Enhanced DVD's were encoded on a 16:9 frame, and did not get it right until years later with a piece by Jim Taylor (author of DVD demystified, IIRC).

BGL

 

[Paul.S]

Yeah, yeah--Vol. 3, No. 4; Winter 1997. I underlined stuff in TJN's "Anamorphics and Aspect Ratios" piece. Am I a geek or what?

I liked that piece and his "Software: DVD Report Card." Trippy, looking at that review of the 186 lb., $45,000 Vidikron Vision One . . .

-p

 

[Kevin C Brown]

This is kind of strange. You'd think with all the coverage of "Home Theater" and "DVD" and "HDTV" that it would be SGHT (or SUAV) that would survive and that Stereophile would bite the dust. I get (have gotten) both, but I much preferred SGHT/SUAV. I don't think I ever saw a $30,000 set of speakers reviewed in SGHT/SUAV but stupidly (IMO) priced gear like that is routinely reviewed in Stereophile.

And out of all the Home Theater Mags, SGHT was one of my faves. I do think they did the best grear reviews. (I prefer WSR for their DVD reviews.)

A shame I tell ya! :frowning:

 

[Lewis Besze]

Yeah why they didn't boot HT instead? That magazine was in trouble ever since Petersen pub. bought it.['99 I think it was]

 

[Kevin C Brown]

I put this blurb in another thread, but HT Mag did a sub comparison a few months back. I was surprised that they gave the PSB sub they reviewed a less than stellar review. The problem? That it didn't *stand out* among the others. (I.e., S&V comparison reviews by Tom Nousaine have twice picked PSB subs on top because of their flat freq response.) I.e., what the HT Mag reviewers wanted was a peaky sub with emphasis in between 35 - 55 Hz.

 

[Brian L]

I think I know the article you are referencing KCB, and have also mentioned it. It was a shoot out of a 1/2 dozen moderately priced 5.1 systems.

The part that killed me was that, if you looked at their measurements, the only system in the group that actually had a true sub with the PSB....all the others barley extended the range of the main L/R pair. The PSB, on the other hand, was flat down to 25 Hz or so...none of the others broke 35 Hz.

In their summation, one of the writers commented that it was likely that the PSB would measure well, but they didn't like the sound. Guess they need to educate themselves on what a true sub is supposed to sound like. All I could conclude was that they had romm issues, the test software was not well choosen to evaluate a sub, or that their reviewers were not aware of what a sub should sound like.

Oh well....I am going to be reading them until June, then its likely bye-bye.

BGL

 

[Robert A. Willis Jr.]

Isn't UAV a e-magazine now? They went out of the paper business. Visit the website, since I may be mistaken.

 

[John Kotches]

Robert:

You aren't mistaken, Ultimate AV is indeed now an e-zine or web-zine or whatever the current term is

Cheers,

 

[Brian L]

Hummm....this information is conspicuously absent from the flyer included with my copy of HT....I just dug it out of the trash, and no mention of the e-zine any where.

Seems like this would have been useful information for their print subscribers to have. Shame on them for not mentioning it.

BGL

 

[KevinJ]

UAV and Connected are both E-zines[i was a subscriber to both]

 

[Rich Malloy]

I totally agree and allowed my subscription to lapse about a year ago. I wish there was a home theater magazine as good as "Stereophile", one that has in-depth reviews and reporting, rather than a couple of pages of text and a bazillion photographs. As soon as SGTHT started looking more like the bloated, photo-heavy, text-lite fashion magazines that my wife buys, I totally lost interest.

On the other hand, it seems they couldn't make a go of it as a "serious" buff-rag, and so the move to capture the mainstream reader with the gloss and picture-book layout.

 

[Brian L]

How timely is all this....just arriving in my Inbox are the UAV and Stereophile e-zines, or newsletters, or whatever you want to call them.

BGL

 

[Paul.S]

LOL.

-p

 

[John Kotches]

Rich,

Pardon me for this one....

[commercial mode on]
It sounds like you're looking for what WSR provides.

Our goal isn't to see how many products we can stick into each issue, but rather to give a thorough writeup for the products we work with.

Typical review length is 5-6 pages.
[/commerical mode off]

Cheers,

 

[Brian L]

[Paying subscriber mode on]

If you keep publishing Peter Moncrief (sorry about the spelling), make it 20 pages!

I am a paid subscriber, and without trying to brown nose, I enjoy most of the writing (your work and Stacey Spears in particular, John) but I just can not choke down a typical Peter Moncrief review.

Half the stuff he writes just seems nuts to me, and his reviews are like the energizer bunny....they go on, and on, and on and on.........

I don't have the issue at hand, but the review he just did of the NHT speakers explored every possible way to set them up, most of which go against what NHT recommends. But what disappointed me was that unlike the Fosgate review he did a while back, he did not try a different power cord! Perhaps another 20 pages in a "Take Two" is coming?

Sorry...had to do that.....the man's reviews just make me crazy.

[Paying subscriber mode off]

Cheers...

BGL

 

[John Kotches]

Brian,

That's something to take up with the Editor-in-chief.

I'm glad you like the work that Stacey and I do, I enjoy reading Greg's work as I feel like I learn something with each of his reviews.

Cheers,

 

[Rich Malloy]

WSR = "Widescreen Review", right? I'll definitely have to look into that, as I've been missing a good home theater magazine (and unfortunately, Stereophile's never really did it for me).

 

[John Kotches]

Rich:

Yes, WSR is the typical shorthand for WideScreen Review.

Cheers,