Do you look for the same or different types of reviews in our print and web products? Can you give some examples?

Do you look for the same or different types of reviews in our print and web products? Can you give some examples?
I read both print and web and like the same reviews in both mediums
45% (33 votes)
I read them both and prefer different reviews for each medium
26% (19 votes)
I only read print
12% (9 votes)
I only read online
16% (12 votes)
Total votes: 73

According to our year-end web metrics, it would appear that the magazine's online readers are interested in a different mix of products than its print readers. Do you look for the same or different types of reviews in our print and web products?

Share | |
COMMENTS
Todd Barber's picture

I'm considering the print version of the product. I have never subscribed before, but now I now have a renewed interest in both two-channel audio and home theater. I don't mind reading the web but there are also times when it's nice to hold a magazine and unplug a bit. Something that I look for on the web is a community. I like to hear personal feedback from other people that share the same interests. This is something you can't get in a magazine. Of course you can have letters to the editor but you don't get many opinions in that format and it has been at least 30 days before you can read them.

Brankin's picture

My strong preference is for the lower cost "gem" products you mention. I only skim the intro and conclusion for products I have no real chance of purchasing. Use $4000 and up as my cost cut off, which means I would consider that product at $2000-$2500 used.

J Green's picture

I enjoy the vintage reviews as well as the current ones. The web gives us the advantage to revisit the past with new perspective. Keep up the good work!

audio-sleuth@comcast.net's picture

How do you know what the print readers want? Maybe it's the same, but you never ask. It seems you get a lot of flak for those high price reveiws. Also, you didn't ask, but how about less reviews and more about how to put a system together and what works with what and why. I know that's not what your customers, the advertisers, want, but it would sure be a service to your readers.

Steven's picture

For print, I like to know what is new or what is happening in the world of hi-fi right now. For the on-line version, I like to think of it as my own personal reference library that I can use to do product comparison analysis.

Al Marcy's picture

I like reading about audio junk. I like listening to audio junk. Not much connection. You are chasing rainbows.

Dirk De Taey's picture

I definitely read both the web and the print version, the web because its delivery is faster (overseas subscriber) and because I can find older articles without stacking piles of magazines. I prefer the paper magazines for more in-depth reading when it fits in my "free-time" schedule. However, I would like to see much more articles on the web, such a product information, test reports, intermediate impressions on products in test, participation of owners of products in tests, etc. The web is and needs to be an interactive medium, and Forums are only partly responding to this. A more guided, organised structure where readers and music lovers can participate in is wahat really would make the difference.

gp's picture

i read home theater, depend on ultimate a/v add web: subwoofers

Bert's picture

The print review should be available online (for reference). The online portion should enhance the print review and should have links to other reviews of comparable equipment.

Nick's picture

Read the print issue to keep up on what's new. I mostly use the website to research potential purchases.

David L.  Wyatt jr.'s picture

Has the product changed between the time it went in print and goes online? Now, if you wanted to add second or dissenting opinions online where paper costs are nil, by all means do so. But if not, I want the straight dope.

Andrew M.  Lewis's picture

I like the reviews in electronic format, though the magazine is easier with my two-year-old around. In either case, I'm mostly amused by the reviews—the signal to noise ratio in this publication is exceedingly low. I basically got the subscription for the recommended component issues (for speakers). The blather over $5k amps and $90k turntables is crap. I basically only see a small number of reviews that are worth reading, and they are inevitably for devices using modern technology (read: no analog) in a more affordable range. I am insulted by the mention of cables costing more than tens of dollars per foot. My system, most of which I've purchased in the last 12 months, includes Outlaw components, PSB speakers, an Oppo DVD player, and a Pioneer HDTV. These complement an old Marantz CD63SE that was favorably reviewed by your magazine over a decade ago. Back then too, it was a a bargain, and back then too, I ignored or laughed off the lunacy that passes for journalism. The result is a musical system that is fantastic sounding and wasn't excessively expensive. That's my 2¢.

nc's picture

Another look at the top 10 web links, is how many of them are (nominally) US products, vs say, okay it's true, (nominally) UK products.

Terry M's picture

Actually I enjoy both the overlaps and the differences, but often get the impression that because such a large percentage of pubished articles end up online, and therefore free, is it actually worth spending the money (exceptional value though it is) to buy the magazine? Are you shooting yourselves in the foot? More than once, being a subscriber in the UK, I have read an article online before the magazine arrived carrying the printed version. At the very least, I would suggest that online publishing is delayed so that the printed version is always delivered first. Just a thought from someone who puts his hand in his pocket in order to read the mag!

Johannes Turunen, Sweden's picture

I often prefer the pictures/graphs published on the web. It seems to be more of them also. But a magizine is more portable and convenient.

Jim Merrill's picture

I read print reviews. It's a lot more convenient to have a magazine in hand anywhere I want. I use the online reviews as a search resource, mainly to pull up old reviews. For this, being online is more convenient than flipping through a pile of old issues.

Chris S.'s picture

What I look for may change over time, but I still look for the same types of things in both sources. Right now I'm mostly into source components and DACs, but years ago I was obsessed with speakers and amplifiers. Fortunately, I can find info on all of it from either the web or the print magazine.

Chris McGrath's picture

Print is easier on the eyes and more relaxing. I still have the same interests regardless of delivery medium. I am more impatient and less likely to re-read when online.

Pete Rogers's picture

I am actually not sure what this question means. The new reviews are in the print mag and the past reviews are on the web page. So the reviews are ,per se, identical in nature. Only the timing of availability is different. No doubt many people looking at archive reviews are in the process of comparing and deciding what to actually purchase. So lots of people looking at the squeezebox review on line rather than at, say, the Caliburn turntable is not surprising. The magazine provides not just a buying guide but news and entertainment as well and I am happy then to read and dream about the unobtainable.

Noel's picture

Do not rush to keep up with fads and not too snuffy to disregard changing medium. Uphold standards in reviews that link to what people understand about musical differences. Old goat Sam Tellig understands this.

J.  R.  Lovern's picture

I let my print subscription lapse when I realized I could only afford to keep my low-fi equipment I already own from the '80s and wait to re-up when I could afford to step up to purchase recomended components. I am still waiting.

Tod McQuillin's picture

Thanks for making your reviews available online!

Hugh Phillips's picture

I'd prefer cheaper, trendier and newer products to appear online as fast as you can review them. Leave the print mag for the pricey old-school stuff.

Gary Bergstrom's picture

I'll be honest: I don't subscribe, but I do read the printed copy when I'm at the library (my tax dollars at work!). I definitely have an interest in reading about the "bleeding edge" technologies—seeing what aspects of audio reproduction equipment designers try to address with advances in the state of the art gear (distortion, linearity, resolution, etc) even though I'm not likely to soon afford such kit. I enjoy it from a "what do the people at the forefront of the industry think about" perspective. As far as web vs hard copy, I would suspect that people researching potential purchases choose the web over the hardcopy simply because of the way your site is laid out: a prospective audio equipment buyer can go straight dozens of reviews about a particular kind of component with just a few clicks, and then shoot straight to a manufacturer's or vendor's website for more info.

Tom Warren's picture

I generally don't read much on the web. I only read the print reviews.

Michael Chernay's picture

I enjoy reading print articles. However, I find myself drawn to articles on the web, because at that point it becomes effortless to transition between multiple articles, whether they were referenced in the article, or different reviews of the same product.

X
Enter your Stereophile.com username.
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
Loading