Art's November "Listening" column was one of the most insightful, beautifully crafted pieces of writing I have had the pleasure to publish. And yes, Jeff Wong's illustrations added that something extra. Who even knew what E.M. Forster looked like!

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Yes, mainly the reason why I read "Listener" in the '90s... Art is a breath of fresh air, and pretty damned fearless. Tone is something I do listen for, and it is as valid as any tenet JGH has purported over the years. Tone does suck you in to the very fibre of the instrument, and massages you like a Swede. (j/k) And most importantly, perhaps audiophile terms have become trite and meaningless in light of its universal acceptance. Without a full explanation, where does the communication lie? Fortunately, every writer in this magazine does an exemplary job of explaining themselves.

The fact that Wine Spectator has 'sold' its awards is very enlightening. Perhaps the sickest (and utterly the strangest) thing about that fact is their readers don't care! And in comparison to the unbridled abuse by a good percentage of its letter writers of this magazine, it is utterly surreal.

I can see how readers of the magazine who write in disparaging letters (monthly) would almost immediately question the integrity of Stereophile, but man, are they off. Never have I read a magazine so fused with integrity and honesty (and so consistent for 20 years I've been reading), and yet so the target of every ill-informed hater on the planet.

I mean, just open the letters section every month- there are a lot spewing nothing but hatred for the reviewers and their 'bias', and 90% of them never listened to any of these components- and those are the ones that were fit for print! Old ladies acting like their souls were flayed by demons for the F-word used in quotes! And this is an adult publication- I mean it's a pretty heady magazine for a child under 10 to read... C'mon!

There is only one other magazine that gets this level of abuse... The Absolute Sound. Same deal, and I can only imagine Robert Harley's stress level fending off the accusations on a daily basis. But I am glad he calls the accusations 'repugnant' where needed- levity for those issues is not acceptable in a magazine that has proven themselves, this one included.

And for saying 'crap in his hat'.... You are soooo gonna get it from Helen Hepp next month!!!

AD's article is great. I do miss JMR.

And as for the Delbert McClinton piece, I guess the question is, is the record industry doomed to failure in my life time? Maybe it already has and is just in a coma on life support.

Does Mr. McClinton have no control over his own work? I'd be pissed. I guess as his name implies, Don Was is past tense.

Was talks about Delbert's vitality, and then takes all the life out of the disc. What ever he was paid he should give the money back. I have an idea that anyone who considers themselvesto be an audiophile could do a better job that this. Thanks to Phile for the insight.

At least we have the new Beatles boxed set. Some people do still care.

i guess one consideration that goes into how to make a CD has to do with who the target market is. with delbert, my answer would be "i don't know"? will college students like his music? hard to say, they embraced johnny cash before his death. if so, does that mean that you have to give them compressed sound because they are more likely to download anyway rather than buy a CD? people like us will embrace his music and those that buy will probably buy a CD version and some will wish for vinyl. but, how large a market segment are we? my guess is pretty small.
anyway, i wish that mr. was had talked a little more about the backstory of the policy as to how this decision is made. or, if, God help us, he just did it that way because he thought it sounded good. if so, he is ready for retirement. i don't think mr. was was asked point blank if he thought the finished product sounded good or was his best work. feel free to correct me if i am wrong.

Quote:
And for saying 'crap in his hat'.... You are soooo gonna get it from Helen Hepp next month!!!

You should have seen what Art originally wrote.

Quote:
At least we have the new Beatles boxed set. Some people do still care.

Yeah, they care so much they have caught up with 23 years ago.

I'm pissed at The Beatles remixes here.

We get the privilege of buying two CD's for the White Album that can fit on one.

One CD can hold both the mono and stereo mixes in their entirety, yet, again, we get the honor of buying each seperately.

In the era of high rez we get apologists saying we should just be grateful for what they toss off (not aimed at you.)

They talk about how they've had to make the discs 'louder' for modern sensibilities.

OY.

We should be angry at how shoddily we are being treated by The Beatles who are trying to get us to buy a fourth or fifth version of each damn album.

There is a good article on the remastering of the The Beatles remix in hi-finews 2009 Yearbook (this months publication), including interview/comments with the engineers involved.

Regarding the loudness, these are 4dB louder than the 87 CDs, and are re-mastered from the original EMI 811 tapes.
According to the engineers the limiting is sparingly used and does not affect dynamics greatly.
But, the mono discs are 100% purist (without the loudness, and I guess other subtle changes).

Still, what I get from reading the article, they really did not mess around with mixing/mastering to any great level.

The project leader for the remastering (Allan Rouse) in the past had worked with the Beatles 1st recording engineer and also was responsible for copying the master tapes to digital for backup purposes.
If really interested might be able to purchase online that issue; Vol 54 No 12

Cheers
Orb

Quote:

Quote:
And for saying 'crap in his hat'.... You are soooo gonna get it from Helen Hepp next month!!!

You should have seen what Art originally wrote.

Isn't there any way where we could see what he wrote? I mean, these are the forums and not in print... Pleeeeease? I would be such a rippin' hoot!

More swearing please.

Quote:

Quote:
At least we have the new Beatles boxed set. Some people do still care.

Yeah, they care so much they have caught up with 23 years ago.

I'm pissed at The Beatles remixes here.

We get the privilege of buying two CD's for the white album that can fit on one.

A CD can hold both the mono and stereo mixes in their entirety, yet, again, we get the honor of buying each seperately.

In the era of high rez we get apologists saying we should just be grateful for what they toss off (not aimed at you.)

They talk about how they;'ve had to make the discs 'louder' for modern sensibilities.

OY.

We should be angry at how shoddily we are being treated by The Beatles who are trying to gte us to buy a fourth or fifth version of each damn album.

But, still we can buy them if we want them. I would rather have them available than not, corporate greed or not. Many probably should buy a Beatle's remaster than some other offering that deserves to be nothing more than an ITunes MP3 download. Anyway, fans of DM may still buy it anyway and find some way to enjoy the performance.

I would love to have Phile in every issue do an interview with a prominent recording or mastering engineer and talk about the audio quality of their last projects and where they stand on "audiophile quality", if they do. This is an intersting topic that affects all of us who love music and the gear on which to play it.

If I have any angst it is toward Mr. Was for taking a good payday for sorry work. In this economy most of us cannot do the same.

Quote:

We get the privilege of buying two CD's for the white album that can fit on one.

While I agree with you about the other stuff, there's no way the White Album could fit on a single CD or even hi-res DVD-A. From long teenage experience, spent splicing cassette tapes for Walkman use, I can state to within a minute that the White Album is 94 minutes long. Wouldn't even fit on a C-90. Those are pretty densely packed grooves on the vinyl...

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
And for saying 'crap in his hat'.... You are soooo gonna get it from Helen Hepp next month!!!

You should have seen what Art originally wrote.

Isn't there any way where we could see what he wrote? I mean, these are the forums and not in print... Pleeeeease? I would be such a rippin' hoot!

More swearing please.

I only aim to tease.

I would continue to read Art's column with pleasure even if I never again agreed with any of his ideas. But just a thought on his comparison of the circulation of oenophile mags versus Stereophile: their readership consumes, and therefore continually buys, the products reviewed. Not many of us Stereophile readers buy equipment at that pace. Back in Ye Good Olde Days, music listeners, audiophiles or not, bought music all the time -- do they still? -- and the audio magazines reviewed it. I wonder whether the circulation of such magazines was more comparable to oenophile mags in those times.

Regarding Wine Spectator...

Stereophile publishes its recommended components list twice per year. Wine Spectator does it every issue.

Plus, Wine Spectator grades on a 100 point scale...so the ratings are very accurate!

Stereophile only has letter grades and the new A+; and don't laugh. Adding A+ was a 20% increase in the number of grades possible!

Maybe there's a lesson there.

The wine forums are full of audiophile equivalents who says things like, "I only drink 95 point and above wines..."

However, the wine ratings are often/primarily done via blind tastings, so there's that.

Maybe a Hi FI mag that used a 100 point scale, listened blind, and had a recommended components issue every month would be the key!

For a wine critic to write to our level, he would have to say things like, "Just so long as I know I'm drinking Vieille Vignes Fran

I thought that Art's point was that for $175 "anyone" can get a certificate since they really don't check out "who" they are rating. It is no different than reviews who get banished for having their hands in the cookie jar. We know of those. How loosely can we define bribe.

What I find funny is that the subscribers who might take said advice find no fault with the magazine's methodology, or lack of reviewing acumen or honesty. It seems only audio magazines and audiophiles draw the ire of many.

The real issue is that with the declining overall quality of music software or physical medium is there any real need for truly high end audio equipment?

I was just thinking yesterday that if I went through my music collection and kept only the best sounding performances I'll bet that over half would be shipped off to Goodwill.

I was listening to one such piece of music by a very successful male vocalist and thought something was wrong with my system. I then played a Cantus and a Silverman disc and realised all was well with my gear. How I ever thought that 1st disc was good sounding was beyond me, but the music and performance were excellent. I am sure that is what captivated me early on. Now, sonically, it must stand on it's own.