Typical "Widescreen Review" review - humor (1 Viewer)

[Jeff Ashforth]

I love WSR. If you feel that their writing style tends to be pedantic and redundant, just skip the narrative reviews and just check out the numerical ratings.

My biggest problem with WSR is that I feel most of the equipment they review is out of the price range of the vast majority of their readers. I appreciate the magazines commitment to explore the state of the art, but throw a bone to the rest of us who arent trust-fund-babies or multi-millionaires! I'd like to see some reviews of mid level gear once in a while. As it stands now, the only place I know to get reviews on this type of gear is AudioReview.com and sometimes those reviews can be suspect.

------------------
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~drashforth/_uimages/flaggif
"Historians of science have long said: A body of knowledge that does not fit in with prevailing ideas, will be ignored as if it does not exist, no matter how scientifically valid it is."
My Spare time larcenists
The worst HT in America.

 

[DeanMSmith]

I don't have a problem with "holosonic"; it's actually a clever twist on holographic; but jeez did they have to copywrite it? (uh oh, am I in trouble for using the term without permission?)
What I have learned from WSR:
If DD is a 5 then DTS automatically is a 5+
It is possible to build a reference system for under $300,000.00
The theatrical aspect ratio of my favorite movie is .003 different than the measured dvd aspect ratio.
Joe Kane is god.
In a few months I will be able to find out what the dvd releases for November are.
My home theater will not be complete until I remove my kitchen and install a food preparation area.

All in fun!!! Lighten up!!
[Edited last by DeanMSmith on November 03, 2001 at 09:15 AM]

 

[Jack Briggs]

For me, there are Widescreen Review, The Perfect Vision, and, on a good day, Stereophile Guide to Home Theater. After that, credibility runs thin in the home-theater press.
WSR's DVD reviews, by their very nature, mandate that stylistic variety is at a minimum; there are only so many ways to describe a disc's virtues in the magazine's format: overview graph, followed by a graph on video quality, and ending with the paragraph on sonics. These reviews accomplish what they set out to do: describe accurately what I want to know.
Given that no one on the staff is a bonafide film critic, WSR's DVD reviews are tops. The Perfect Vision is staffed by qualified film writers, and, thus, the magazine's reviews are valid as film criticism as well as assessments of the discs' technical virtues.
The only criticisms I would have of WSR are the need for a good copy editor and some art direction. But look at the magazine's budget and overworked staff; that the magazine is so good is amazing.
So, I am echoing the consensus that has been generated in this thread: HTF loves WSR. And so do I.
------------------

 

[Pieter_L]

quote: I'm sure a lot of work and thought went into the piece in question. However, if so many people who are obviously interested in the subject agree that it sounds like jibberish, it might not be a bad idea to reconsider that kind of hermetic "insider" language in WSR.
------------------
Gerardo[/quote]
you DO realize that the initial post was a joke, right?

------------------

 

[Anthony Thorne]

My favourite articles in WR are the ones where they have lengthy roundtables with Special Edition producers like Van Ling (and others), or print detailed coverage of restorations and other behind the scenes info. As a collector of various cult, horror and foreign titles I find some of their reviews less useful than I'd like. Image's BLACK SABBATH might be the best this movie has ever looked and sounded anywhere in the world, but (this is a guess, since I haven't seen their review of the disc, only others like it) it would be found lacking in comparison to recently produced titles because it is in mono. For folks approaching titles like this on their own merits, these comparisons are fairly pointless and at times actually a little unhelpful, but I understand the magazines intentions and don't intend to knock it.
I would be amused to see a thread like this one - just as lengthy - devoted to critiquing 'typical' posts here at HTF. I don't check the forum feedback section much so for all I know such threads have already come and gone, and were probably quite funny. (I appreciate that HTF is a varied gang and we all tolerate each other's quirks). It's hard not to notice though that it's always folks making jokes at someone else's expense who suggest that their targets need to lighten up and laugh at themselves.

 

[Perry Sun]

Hello Everyone,
I must say that this has been an interesting thread. And for me, the humor is well-taken! I've been wanting to jump in several times this week but have been busy attending a film exhibition conference in Orlando (with HTF's Chris Dugger in attendance as well).
We love HTF too! I think the HTF is great, because it's a novel resource for sharing information and helping fellow fans of home theatre. We also like to read feedback regarding our publication.
I'm glad to have seen many of you address the points raised in the thread, which were certainly understandable to be brought up. It's often a challenge to come up with reviews that are worded distinctly from each other, especially when, for example, you're doing Dolby Digital 2.0 reviews, one after another, and they just seem to have the same sonic characteristics. We don't cut and paste reviews, except for the passages containing "big fat mono" and "properly placed in the center channel," and when a new version of a previously released DVD has the same or similar soundtrack.
I had a conversation recently with a former, respected reviewer of one of the big DVD Web sites, and we both concurred that writing DVD reviews without becoming too repetitious with wording is challenging.
Another point raised is our review of equipment that is too expensive for many of you. There is certainly audio/video gear with potentially exceptional performance and value, and we are cognizant of the need to serve our readers with reviews of equipment with a range of price points. You can look for reviews of satellite/sub systems, as well as more A/V receivers in the future. For example, I'll be reviewing the new Denon AVR-4802 in an upcoming issue.
Perry

 

[Hubert]

I've seen bad reviews on Home Theater. But that publication went downhill when Brent Butterworth left.

 

[Elbert Lee]

WSR is my favorite HT mag out there. Not to say that it's perfect, but certainly has less faults than the other publications. SGTH is secone. Home Theater Mag is definitely one of the worst out there. I agree that they don't give any criticism and focus entirely too much of an artical on features, look of buttons, and ridiculous intros.
The one thing that irks me the most about these magazines is that they don't perform much, if any, comprehensive reviews about products. They have reviewers in completely different locations in the US and they often end up reviewing completely different products so that they invariably can't compare a current product that they are reviewing. Example, one reviewer may have auditioned the Flagship Yamaha RXV-1 receiver 2 months ago, but it seems very suspicious that the same reviewer will not get the flagship from Denon or Onkyo. What a cop out. There are many numerous cases where that have been opportunities for these mags to help a consumer with spending their hard earned money, but refuse to do so at the expense of losing some advertising revenue. At the very least WSR and SGHT has left hints of what their opinions are and, if you read between the lines, you can get a sense of which equipment they preferred. For Home Theater Magazine, ALL PRODUCTS end with the following conclusion: "IF YOU ARE LOOKING FOR A COMPONENT THAT HAS XXX, YYY, AND IF YOU DON'T MIND SPENDING $$$$$, AND IF YELLOW LIGHTS LOOK ATTRACTIVE ON YOUR COMPONENT RACK, WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE FACE PLATES, AND IF YOU LIKE SMALL LCD DISPLAYS, AND WOULD LIKE TO AVOID MACHINES MADE IN XXX COUNTRY, BUT DON'T WANT TO REACH INTO YOUR CHILDRENS' COLLEGE FUND, AND ARE ATTRACTED TO THIS MANUFACTURERS' STANDARD 2 YEAR WARRANTY, YOU SHOULD DEFINITELY MAKE THIS ON YOUR LIST OF COMPONENTS TO CONSIDER"
Elbert

 

[Rob Tomlin]

So, I am echoing the consensus that has been generated in this thread: HTF loves WSR. And so do I.

Absolutely!
My dad was over last weekend. I had a copy of WSR on the coffee table. He was hooked immediately! He took the subscription card out of the magazine so he could subscribe.
If WSR did not exist, I would not be a subscriber to any "Home Theater" magazine!
Glad to see that Perry took the original post as harmless humor, while still noting some of the friendly criticism as well! WSR is the best HT mag out there, but there is always room for improvement!
Keep up the good work WSR!

 

[Carlo_M]

To bring it back on topic with the video/audio ratings of DVDs by WSR. Yes this humor is right on track.
But have any of you tried reviewing A TON of DVDs? You soon run out of adjectives and adverbs pretty darned quickly. I have over 350 DVDs. Once, I was going to put up a web site that had DVD reviews. After writing my 10th review, I was like SCREW THIS! I am an amateur writer so I kept trying to come up with new descriptors and vocabulary to keep from sounding redundant. Guess what? It ain't gonna happen.
Want to prove us wrong? Then write 200+ DVD reviews and lets see how creative you get.
Me, I chose to use that web space initially tabbed for DVD reviews for porn.

(just kidding)