Yeah, I really wish National Review would review more stereo equipment and High Times would feature more articles on small engine repair.

Hustler magazine has lotsa politics, they mix one asshole with another. Playboy does audio reviews and car reviews. "Tools of teh trade" magazine has jobsite radio reviews, they do comment on it's sound quality. Life is about intermingled subjects, if ya can't be ambidexterious, you may as well be Japanese, Look at only one thing, and nothing else, how boring, to be living with blinders, and focused on just one narrow issue. Has anyone read the Porsche review in The New England Journal of Medicine. Dr. Hamabibibi took a 911 for a test drive. After doing 3 brain surgureys he says there is nothing like a 911 to get you back to life, after seeing brain mush all day. He gave it 5 Scalpels out of 5 rating.

Quote:
Dear JA

...and personal issues such as whether Marina will allow Sam to have those in her living room...

I think you're making a tremendous leap of faith by suggesting that Sam has had THOSE in the first place. I submit that perhaps he never did, hence the issue of whether or not Marina will allow Sam to even indulge in the fantasy of having said THOSE is completely academic.

Quote:
Yeah, I really wish National Review would review more stereo equipment and High Times would feature more articles on small engine repair.

Yes, my feelings exactly. If the writers are not good enough to get a full-time job at a political rag, then keep quiet about it and stick to reviewing equipment and music in Stereophile. Yes, the politics of the music business is of interest to us, but that's all we want from this source.

I'm not considering cancelling, but I am tired of out-of-place pontificating in the middle of otherwise useful opinions.

Dave

Great topic!

It seems this site would be the perfect place for someone like Art Dudley (does he walk the walk, or just type the talk?) or JA to chat about how Stereophile views itself in the greater consumer/political world. I bet Stephen would care if his gear came from a factory that is environmentally hazardous, etc...

Does a Chinese tube amp with good sound and build quality get marked down for using underage or underpaid workers? Does it get a demerit for not providing an OSHA approved factory?

Do audiophiles take these things into consideration, anyway?

Some consumers are starting to see the irony of buying a cheaper Easter basket that was made in China by Christians kept in work prisons...maybe the outsourcing of Hi Fi manufacture to China deserves a few electronic column inches.

I admit to trying to avoid those products, but I also am not entirely sure I have been successful...exactly where were all the parts and labor sourced for my Marantz integrated or my Infinity Intermezzos?

Dave Wislon has, I think, made some very effective ads pointing out that he pays his workers better wages and uses more American product sources...it doesn't seem xenophobic so much as socially conscious.

So, I don't know. It seems like it would be fun to hear Stereophile talk about whether anything like that matters, but I don't think they need to use up paper and ink over it. Just chatting here over some organic, domestic, fair trade, emmission free, non-polluting beverages would be fine.

Quote:
Great topic!

Agreed!

Quote:
It seems this site would be the perfect place for someone like Art Dudley (does he walk the walk, or just type the talk?) or JA to chat about how Stereophile views itself in the greater consumer/political world. I bet Stephen would care if his gear came from a factory that is environmentally hazardous, etc...

What I find rather amusing is that the introduction of Chinese products into our little audio world seems to have brought the issue of cheap labor in counties with lax (or absent) worker rights and environmental standards into focus for some.

For example I find the reference to Stephen highly ironic since long before he was or wasn't a twinkle in his father

This is an easy one, guys!

Political commentary added to Stereophile, in a formal fashion, vs the already (and common everywhere) minimal bits of 'humans relating', via minimalist bits that are obstinately 'harmless'.

Result:
Added commentary-
A general uproar in a level that constitutes about 35% to about 50% of the subscribers.
Also: spillover into Peterson's OTHER brands, ie other magazines. This, via reflection from the commentary in Stereophile. BIG PROBLEMS..overall.

Then, no commentary whatsoever, just what exists now-

No issues whatsoever, except the odd person noting the minimalist contributions of Stereophile, in terms of political contemplation.

Which is the more tenable business proposition?

It should not be tough to figure out. In a magazine that has existed without political commentary through it's entire lifespan..if it adds commentary, it LOSES subscribers, always, every time. It NEVER gains subscriber base. It ALWAYS loses.

It would seem to me that if one of your objectives as a writer was to be considered a trustworthy and objective source for opinion on audio, you might not want to demonstrate that you aren't objective...even if it's related to things other than audio. I think it's just bad business to annoy a substantial portion of your target audience unnecessarily.

On the other hand, it does produce some great letters to the editor. Next to equipment reviews, my favorite part of the magazine is the " cancel my subscription letters. A good rant is an inspiring thing.

So true. In the several other Mags I read someone will make some political joke and in short order folks are wounded beyond repair and cancelling right and left. One recently wrote in and threatened to "come down there and kick your butt!" I guess some folks take themselves pretty seriously. I enjoy political humor at the expense of any party or stripe because I don't have much confidence in any of them.