Vote

...but you should balance it with reviews of more affordable equipments too, for us mere mortals....

I'm having a very hard time finding quality reviews of stereo pre-amps in the $1000-and-under range. There must be some "value" models out there. Home theater is nice, I have one myself, but most of my listening is two channel. I do love the high end reviews, but really need someone to review some entry level pre-amps. Thanks for a wonderful magazine!

Personally, I enjoy reading about such equipment. It's far more stimulating to be swept away with the Boulder 2050's than to putt around with, say, a Denon mini-system -- man, what a tragic review that was! Along with the extreme components though, I would like to see some amps/preamps in the $2,000-$5,000 range . . . just to give us an idea of how the performance of something we might actually buy stacks up to the state of the art. Sometimes reviews about a piece within reach of the average audiophile are the most tantalizing -- it offers us a glimmer of hope!

I have to agree with the complainers, you do over do it. A few would be ok if the units are of supremely exceptional interest. But it seems at times, thats all you review. I can put maybe $2000 or so into a piece of equipment once a year, but these $38,000 speakers and $20,000 CD players etc.,are way over the top. I really don't know of a soul that could afford that stuff. I'm sure there must be people out there somewhere who can, but they have to be such a very small percent of the audio buying puplic that you would do much better to review more affordable pieces. I'm not saying to ignore the high and mighty who can pay for the top pieces but I think you definitly need to rebalance the equipment you pick to review. I for one would rather read about something I can hope to afford, without taking out a second mortgage on my home!

Ideally, cost no object equipment should only be reviewed when it's performance makes a substantial breakthrough in the state-of-the-art. If a component is only slightly better than it's real world competition, a very brief "capsule" review may suffice.

I prefer when you "find" outstanding values, component wise. I wish you would develop below $10K systems that you, and others, find exceptionally well-matched and musical, exciting those audiophiles who won't exceed $10k. The exercise probably would become unmanageable for sub-$5k systems that bring music to life with a special sort of magic.

Yes. Sure. Absolutely. Certainly. Without a doubt. No question. Affirmative. With appreciation. Love 'em. Don't stop now. But make it interesting equipment. It is assumed that Krell, boring as it is, will be quality, as will Levinson. Is there much point in reviewing products by, say, Krell, which always get a conclusion along the lines of "it is their best yet" and is the new class-leader. What else is expected of Krell, et al? Please consider a wider range of brands. But, don't stop reviewing less expensive stuff. Perhaps even consider some higher-quality products by mainstream companies -- like the top Sony and Marantz amplifiers. And do NOT stop Sam Tellig from doing what he does so well.

Moderation please, with a few each issue and the rest stuff for us common folk!

Why are you asking us, don't you know your target audience?

We all know why we read stereophile,let's not hide behind our fingers! I mean this magazine's name is not "What HiFi",or is it?

Love those expensive components because eventually they show up on the used market at 50% discount, or more.

Reading technical info about what makes the rich-boy toys so good adds to my over-all knowledge of audio. Occasionally, a review of highbrow equipment and the conditions in which it was reviewed gives me an idea for a corresponding low-rent tweak I can accomplish with my system. And once in a very long while, I wander into the audio shop on a lucky day and get to listen to a fine gadget about which I've previously read a review. Great fun!

I prefer somewhere between, "a few..." and "once in a while". It's obviously important to cover the cutting edge equipment ("really expensive stuff") to see where the industry is and all of us are headed. However, most important to me is the 1K-4k price range! Thanks for asking.

Sam Tellig's articles are very interesting. It is the most interesting part in your magazine for me. Always enjoy reading it.

Although few can afford the equipment, the technology and approach to product design developed at the extreme high end does migrate down to more affordable gear. What you read about today may be in your home in three or four years. If you can't take the anguish, just turn the page!

My MAN!

I cancelled my subscription long ago due to the high percentage of expensive, bleeding-edge equipment reviews. The most interesting stuff to me in your magazine were the reviews of affordable stuff that you deemed performance bargains. My current system (which I acquired due in part to your recommended components list) consists of the Hsu Research HRSW12 sub, NHT SuperZero's, a Rotel 120 WPC amp, and a Sony ES Single Disc player. All inexpensive items purchased in the mid-90's that you had recommended. For those recommendations, I am thankful.

While I can see the value of the cost no object equipment, the overwhelming majority of people that purchase audio equipment can't/don't purchase cost no object products. I would much rather see the focus on the equipment that is affordable and a real value. Perhaps it would reduce the snobery (SP?) associated with the high end audio world.

Absolutely important to know what the cutting edge is.

Like Ferraris and Porsches, the highest of the high end equipment serves the purpose of benchmarking the state of the art in performance. But unlike cars, where one can easily and palpably discerne differences in steering , braking, and overall "feel", in my experience the high end in audio is discernable only by increasingly minute differences of degree vs. differences in substance. Thus price increases by an order of magnitude for each vanishingly small increment of "improvement" in audible quality. As a result, Stereophile seems to be becoming more like your arch rival TAS was not too long ago, where only the most esoteric components were deemed worthy of notice. Fortunately you have had ST on board to maintain perspective re value received for dollar spent; getting the most audio bang for the buck. However, even he has moved up the ladder of the pricee/performance continuum. the expensive equipment should be respected for what it is; one designer (s)'s view of sonic perfection. As such that equipment should be used as a measure by which high quality, but more affordable equipment should measured. If $10K Speaker A is subjectively at 95% of sonic "perfection", how closely does $600 Speaker B match that level of performance. Except for "Sensible Sound", both Stereophile and TAS have lost that sense of perspective. however, as a hobbyist i will continue to read Stereophile and experience the state of the art whenever possible.

I love Sam, but seriously . . . Some reviews of very expensive equipment are important, because the technology therein often trickles down to other products in a brand's line. There's also an inherent fascination with the very high end that most of us can't deny. I think the real question is, how do you balance the need for affordable—and I understand that one man's affordable is another man's unattainable—equipment with the super high end stuff? You have a limited number of editorial pages, after all. Personally, I think you do a pretty good job at the balancing act. What I'd really like to see is more roundups of similar components in a system context, but I realize that's a pretty difficult task to coordinate.

Sure, we can't always buy all the exotic gear that our desires drive us towards. But as most dreamers are so acutely aware, dreams whether they come to fruition or merely co-exist with other visions of the heart, drive us and fuel our passions.

I have a good friend who measures his self worth by the Porshe he drives. He used to measure himself by his stereo, (it cost him a modest $30,000, 8 years ago) but he can't anymore because it never works. A panel is arcing, a tube burns out, and he can't afford to fix it because of his steep car payments. He is not a happy man. Most of us read a review of a turntable only Bill Gates can afford, and we find it informative, even instructive and amusing. But for some, perhaps, these reviews are not so harmless. They are taunts, carrots on a stick they can never catch -- a bit like waving a glass of Scotch under an alcoholic's nose. Bob Dylan once sang: "Anyone can fill their lives up with things they can see but they just cannot touch."

Sam is a God!

It's like reading a Ferrari road test in Road and Track. You know you'll never be able to afford it but it's nice to know it's out there.

As a starving college student, I enjoy reading the reviews of high end equipment merely to see how the other half lives. While I have a very good hi-fi system, I am nowhere near the level of the high-end products that are reviewed. Unfortunately, I must live vicariously through the fine review crew of Stereophile.

I'd rather see components reviewed that are in my price range—which is usually the best-bang-for-the-buck category. To me, that doesn't mean the cheapest, just the most value for the money. Even if the component is a few thousand dollars.

Review the super expensive components only as they relate to furthering the advancement of the audio arts. Revolutionary equipment, as opposed to evolutionary.

I enjoy reading about the equipment that is "making noise in the industry" however when it comes to equipment that I will never see or own, reviews of incredibly expensive equipment simply frustrate me.

I am not so enamored of super-expensive reviews anymore. I used to love to drool over a $10,000 speaker, but now it's $50,000. Reading about affordable gear is more fun.