LATEST ADDITIONS

"The days grow short when you reach September," sang Frank Sinatra and Tony Bennett, but not so short that you won't have time to enjoy our September issue, which hits newsstands, mailboxes, and tablets this week. Technologies vintage and modern are featured, with Ken Micallef's review of the Music Hall MMF-7.3 turntable and Jim Austin's interview and MQA's Spencer Chrislu taking pride of place on the cover. And there is more on MQA inside, with John Atkinson writing about his listening comparisons between MQA-encoded files and the hi-rez PCM originals.

This is easily the best thing any of the three have done in many years.

Author's Note: We are grateful to Stereophile for the opportunity to address some frequently repeated technical questions appearing in comments to articles. Recently this has included misunderstandings about noise calculation, dynamic range, resolution, definition, music spectra, channel capacity, lossless processing and temporal aspects of digital channels.

To simplify this document we have grouped the topics and set them as questions and answers either as response, tutorial or axiom. Some months ago we published a comprehensive Q&A for an online forum and to avoid repetition we occasionally refer to topics already discussed there (see [37] in the "References" sidebar).—J. Robert Stuart

By the time you read this in late 1963 (probably a month after it is written, judging by the speed with which the US mails speed second-class matter on its appointed rounds), Capitol Records will have announced the first bit of really good news for the high-fidelity perfectionist in years: the release of imported disc pressings—taped, cut, and stamped in Europe. London has been importing for years—all the Londons you buy are pressed by Decca in England. But this will be the first opportunity we will have of sampling the products of some of London's overseas competitors.

The year was 2116, and the Earth was finally great again.

War, poverty, global warming, starvation, racial inequality—these, among many others, were all trivial, long overcome matters of the past.

Generation ZZZZers glided around in auto-piloted, eco-friendly, space/time ships. They communicated with each other via holographic telekinetic mind messages. (Though there was always the occasional hippie, of course, who'd pull out a vintage, non-functioning wePhone 2000 or whatever technological dinosaur was making a comeback these days. Lame, if you ask me.)

Boy, do we ever get letters. From readers angry that we review too many expensive products. From readers depressed that we review too many affordable products. From readers bemoaning our digital coverage. From readers asking when we're going to get with the 21st century and stop gushing over analog. From readers wanting more coverage of tube products. From readers wanting more coverage of MOSFET amplifiers designed for high voltage gain on the output stage.

Editor's Note: Approaching its ninth year of publication in 1970, the advertisement-free Stereophile was failing as a business. There was just one issue published between December 1968 and June 1970, the date when J. Gordon Holt published this plea in response to the reaction to the increased subscription price: first to $4 for four issues, equivalent to $25 in 2016, then to $5 ($31). The response from subscribers to his plea was not positive enough to enable the magazine to continue publishing—Gordon could publish just two more issues in the next two years before Stereophile had to accept advertising, first from dealers in October 1972 and from manufacturers in December 1977.—Ed.

Our recent price increase at the end of 1969 elicited numerous letters telling us the magazine was exhorbitant at $4 a subscription and is outrageous at $5, and supporting their contention with comparisons between the price per page of the Stereophile and one or another of the commercial hi-fi magazines. We will answer this once, here and now, and then let the matter drop.