Magazine Review Objectivity (1 Viewer)

[Bhagi Katbamna]

Well, obviously you don't read them regularly as they regularly slam even the most pricey components when they find the sound lacking.

I do read it and I agree with the statement that they don't want to anger advertisers. I saw a review for a SET amplifier that had to have a "hum expert" rewire it and it still got Class A ranking. They rarely compare/contrast comprably priced equipment during a review.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

They rarely compare/contrast comprably priced equipment during a review.

Are you kidding me? This happens all the time. In fact, Absolute Sound has taken to printing regular recommended peer to peer component recommendations every issue. They list them From the best in Class 1 to Class 5. In their reviews they often have similarly priced components also compared and subjective characteristics, better or worse, between the two.
I do like you Voltaire quote, though.
As I recently said in the sources forum, the best advice I can give, besides audition it for yourself, is to use the better journals as a guideline (or at least to generate some good ideas) and then base your purchase decision on what works best in your own home. Most good high end dealers will loan you equipment for this very reason.

 

[RichardMA]

Show me someone who has a track record that shows them
having criticized a few pieces of equipment they themselves
have bought. I'll pretty much believe what they
say from then on, because they've more or less proven they are immune from that human characteristic that says "I
will never admit to having bought a flawed piece of
equipment because I can't bear the thought anyone thinks I'd make a mistake." Too many people refuse to admit
mistakes or fault, or they see a fault in a component they bought as a negative reflection of their ability to determine good from bad. So they keep quite about it.
The stupid ones claim their choices are peerless only
to look silly later on when the problems with the unit
come to light.
Companies do this for monetary reasons, people do it for
pride.
If I were to pick two magazines whose people I believe review "on the level" I'd pick the Audio Critic and Perfect
Vision/Absolute Sound. The latter only if Harry Pearson
still has some major input into what goes in those magazines.

 

[Terry U]

The magazines are useful in determining what equipment to look at. I like HP's reviews but I have read them for 20 plus years. I know his biases. I also like Robert Greene. I understand John Atkinson and a few others also. You have to actually listen to the reviewed components to see how they stack up against the reviews. In the final end let your own ears be the judge. I like them in this order by the way. Tas,Perfect Vision,What Hi-FI , Stereophile, Audio Critic, Stereophile HT and then some of the other Brit Mags. Martin Colloms and Ken Kessler are not to bad as long as you realize where they are coming from.

 

[DanielM]

They make money on subscriptions

please show me the business model where ANY magazine makes $$$ off subscriptions..subscriptions are loss leaders to boost numbers to charge more for adverts

 

[Lee Scoggins]

please show me the business model where ANY magazine makes $$$ off subscriptions

This is not to say they could survive without any advertising, but they can gather additional credibility with the end user and that's the most important thing.

In the long run, the subscriber base is the most important.

Daniel,

Show me one example where advertising has affected Stereophile's review opinion.

 

[DanielM]

Show me one example where advertising has affected Stereophile's review opinion

this would be the golden calf as if it could be proven then stereophile would lose all credibility ( not that I believe they have had any since JGH left)........
I seem to remember a controversy with Bob Carver several years back though..as well as a review of some kilo-buck equipment that had totally shoddy wiring and very faulty test results yet still got a glowing class A recommendation
( may have been a Y.B.A piece )
HOWEVER I will concede that stereophile used to be entertaining...not as much so recently though

 

[GordonL]

The subscriber base is important but not as a source of revenue. The demographics of the subscribers determine what kinds of ads are placed. Ever notice a lot of the ads in Stereophile are quite a bit different than say Sound & Vision? Different audience, different ads. Also, the number of readers determine the ad rates. Magazines can charge higher rates if they can prove they have X number of readers. This is why subscription rates for these rags have dropped to where they're almost free.

If Consumer Reports subsisted solely on subscriptions, they would have folded long ago. To avoid conflict of interest, they survive only on subscriptions, grants, and donations.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Daniel,
Thank you for proving my point that Stereophile does a good job by not finding a good example.
As a business strategist by training, I may not have the media sector knowledge to fully debate the business model of the modern American magazine. Suffice it to say that audiophiles are notoriously particular bunch of people and if the bullshit detector goes off, they walk. The continued loyalty to Absolute Sound (which is getting better every issue IMHO) an Stereophile attests to objective (and subjective by methodology ) reviewing.
One thing I will say is that this is logically a weak argument. In the short run, say Stereophile upsets 50% of 10 equipment reviews by just being critical. Their cost structure and that of their parent may allow them to still be profitable if these 5 companies pull advertising. Second, in the long run if they do a poor job, subscriptions will drop and this will have a huge effect on ad rates...

Magazines can charge higher rates if they can prove they have X number of readers. This is why subscription rates for these rags have dropped to where they're almost free.

What a poor shot at the hardworking, honest employee of audio journals - "rags" ? hardly.
The cost of these magazines is at the mid to upper end of the mainstream and has nothing to do with whether they give good advice or serve as a useful guideline.

 

[JoeyT]

Lee,

Magazines are kind of like an interview. If you agree great. If not no big deal eather. However, they can point you to potential red flags- something to watch out for during auditions.

Isnt it funny how we buy all the magazines that review our gear- like confirmation. Ironic really.

Cheers!

 

[Dave Moritz]

IMHO it seems like not very many reveiwers for large publications. Want to say much of anything negative about most products. Most products seem to get very good reviews. Although they may give a product or model breif negative feedback. Ultimately most products by the end of the review receive what is basically a good review. The only thing I look at in equipment reviews is for the following. I look to see if there are major flaws and I look for build quality. And I look to see what features the item might have. Ulitmatly I will decide for myself if it sounds great to me and that is when I will buy it or recomend it to friends and others. What may work for one person and sound good to one person may not to someone else?
Hope you all have a safe and fun labor day weekend!

 

[DanielM]

Suffice it to say that audiophiles are notoriously particular bunch of people and if the bullshit detector goes off, they walk.

notoriously particular undeniable however as for the rest
of the statement
audiophilia may have the most bullshi# since the days of the traveling salesman..
lets see we have magic bricks,wraps and dots..$10k power cords and interconnects..sprays, powders and wipes of all shapes and sizes and all manner of things that have no basis in reality
and unfortunately stereophile has promoted a lot of it

 

[Bhagi Katbamna]

Lee take a look at this site, it has detailed rebuttal of reviewers:
http://www.high-endaudio.com/index_ac.html
Specifically look at the corresponence with Michael Fremer.
I did not mean to include TAS since I don't read it.
The above website has a good section on audiophile cables as well.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Interesting site Bhagi, but one man's take on audio reviewers is not enough to persuade me that my conclusions of 20+ years of journal reading was not valuable.

It also seems odd to me that one can criticize reviewers with no digital front end or exposure to high resolution formats.

Why is that?

Why are Arthur's subjective view less important than Harry Pearson's or John Atkinson's?

The easiest thing in the world is to criticize one that has written so much about a subjective audio hobby.

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Bhagi,

Thanks for this link as it is new to me.

I have spent some time looking at the site and I disagree with a lot of his conclusions. Also, the logic in the arguments he makes against Fremer do not add up to me. His objections such as advertising dollars affecting reviews seem largely unsupported to me. There appears to be no real evidence on the issue of this thread. The critiques of the Watt/Puppy review also ring hollow.

The bottom line is that, on balance, the audio journals do a good job in my opinion.

He also writes about the good quality of certain components that I know suck. The Polk speaker cable, for instance, I used five years ago and it was horrible sounding. He seems to be using the site to drive people to his retail store. I think it would have been more effective if he had some background working on recordings.

 

[Larry B]

Lee:

While I generally agree with your point of view, I find Stereophile to be absurdly non-critical, almost to the point of being ridiculous.

Indeed, some of their reviews of $300 speakers are almost indistinguishable from those of $10,000 speakers.

Larry

 

[Mark Leitch]

Lee... I was a "casual" customer of Arthur's when he had his store here. I have the utmost respect for him as a dealer... though he is/was certainly opinionated. Frankly, I value strong opinions when they have merit... and his often did. I do not agree with your assessment that his site is there merely to generate customers... I think he is merely someone passionate about the high end who is disappointed with what has happened to it. The Fremer incident I will ignore though ;-)

As for Stereophile, I subscribed for many years and found it became less and less useful over time. I much preferred TAS, but when it became unreliable I cancelled that as well. I do find their reviews have become consistently meaningless, and provide little basis for forming a good system (I pick up the occasional issue, and they are largely ignoring what *is* right with the high end today).

As for the equipment reviews, many find the Watts/Puppys lacking. As for the polk cables, if they are indeed the same let me know what you want for them ;-)

m.

 

[Bhagi Katbamna]

Interesting site Bhagi, but one man's take on audio reviewers is not enough to persuade me that my conclusions of 20+ years of journal reading was not valuable.
Why are Arthur's subjective view less important than Harry Pearson's or John Atkinson's?
The easiest thing in the world is to criticize one that has written so much about a subjective audio hobby.

It is not that he is criticizing directly their subjective opinions, he is objecting to the general lack of ethics in the reviewers. For example in the Watt/Puppy review HP of TAS criticized the 5 version during the review of the 6 version(not when the 5 version was originally reviewed).

 

[Lee Scoggins]

Bhagi,
Well I have been reading HP for two decades and this is maybe one of a very few examples in a million or so pages where I think his ethics have been challenged. I'm not sure even Christ would want to be subjected to this type of critical process. This also occurred many moons ago. While Arthur may be a good guy, I defer to my experience reading reviews, buying equipment and testing my own views of the sound versus what was written.
Lately, my personal favorite has been with The Absolute Sound but I still find great value in Stereophile. Witness the details on semi-"home brew" recording of JA and the excellent article on Roy DuNann. I find the vinyl critiques of Mike Fremer to also be dead on as I spend more time with friends' turntables and preamps. Brian Damkroger reviews on Magneplanar speakers have been very accurate as well as I know this brand intimately. For budget gear, Tom Gillette (Sam Tellig) is usually digging up new and exciting gear. I would really hate to miss an issue of either audio journal.
And despite the accusations, I have yet to see one good example of blatant bias resulting from advertiser-based pressure.