Quote:
However, would a book reviewer ever say that he only gets excited by reading expensive books?

Would a literary reviewer only 'get excited' over books bound in the finest Corinthain leather and with museum quality paper?

If an audio reviwer falls back on, "I only get excited enough to do a good job if I'm given the most expensive gear," then that reviewers has a Hi Fi festish, maybe, but doesn't strike me as an audiophile.

I just can't see "I need to review only the finest to be at my best" as a valid reviewer position.

Point taken. The parallels only run so far, because in audio, equipment is so cost-dependent whereas in literature, the best of literature can be bought in a used bookstore for 50 cents. Still, my point was to emphasize that if a literary critic is keen on Russian lit, for example, he will be given those assignments & he will excel at it b/c he operates best based on his passion & expertise. This would apply to audio reviewing to a large extent, I think. Of course one may review the PS1 and Shindo amp despite the disparity in cost, as AD has done. I LOVE that a lot of Sterephile writers choose out of their own volition to review budget items that they're drawn to. But I think it's important to remember that the reviewer was drawn to do so, and such an assignment - if imposed on by a heavy-handed editor against the writer's instincts and wishes - will most likely result in a lackluster review.

But a review that would not exist otherwise...

Quote:

A reviewer saying, "I can only show enthusiasm while being paid to do my job if the procuct is sufficiently exciting," is a bit too too.

If a reviewer is set so delicately that he can only review products that "excite" him in advance, then perhaps some people are too jaded.

What you fail to realize is that very few 'professional' reviewers make a living from it. Most of us have real jobs or professions and we review audio because we love it, not for the money. That said, my interests are pretty wide but they are not totally encompassing and there are lots of products that I would not want to spend any time with. If you want me to review a 15w mono SE triode amp, I'd need combat pay and you could expect a very cynical bias.

Quote:
As a "stand in" for audiophiles, reviewers may also want to review against type and check out what the readers they 'stand in' for get excited over and are clamoring for.

Most do. I am on the Web groups all over the place seeing what interests others and learning their perspectives. If you want me to review (against type) a 10w mono SE triode amp, I'd need combat pay and you could expect a very cynical, possibly dismissive, bias.

Quote:
I'm actually fine with what Stereophile chooses to review, if not some of the rationalizations behind those choices.

It is not a rationalization. Each reviewer has a unique set of interests and JA does a great job in balancing the staff and the content.

Kal

Kal

Man, all the more reason for JA to have you review a 10W SE Triode!

If all we get is Sam and Art's point of view, have we really looked at SET Triodes from both sides now?

How about, just one time, we get Kal's take on a product like that? Perhaps a tour of the medium's shortcomings would be fascinating reading, especially for someone who might otherwise be seduced by Art's honey-voiced purple Pollyanna paean prose to SE's perfect pulchritude?

Or, how about Kal and Art review the same amp!

I'd let you go second, and I'll even write your intro:

"Art, you ignorant slut..."

Quote:
If you want me to review (against type) a 10w mono SE triode amp, I'd need combat pay and you could expect a very cynical, possibly dismissive, bias.

This kinda blows me away. I'm one of the few on this forum who is deeply committed to multi-channel and have been for 8 years- so I jump right to your excellent column firstly every month. But my fondest audio memories and the purest iteration of vocal, acoustic and chamber music I ever heard was on vinyl through a pair of QUAD 57's hooked up to a homemade 13 watt SET. And it even rocked Trower's Bridge Of Sighs.

Kal, I defer to your rights as a reviewer and your superior expertise, but IMO good audio is good in all formats.

Quote:

Quote:
If you want me to review (against type) a 10w mono SE triode amp, I'd need combat pay and you could expect a very cynical, possibly dismissive, bias.

This kinda blows me away. I'm one of the few on this forum who is deeply committed to multi-channel and have been for 8 years- so I jump right to your excellent column firstly every month. But my fondest audio memories and the purest iteration of vocal, acoustic and chamber music I ever heard was on vinyl through a pair of QUAD 57's hooked up to a homemade 13 watt SET. And it even rocked Trower's Bridge Of Sighs.

Kal, I defer to your rights as a reviewer and your superior expertise, but IMO good audio is good in all formats.

I have had many such experiences (including a lovely demo of a pair of 3Ms with some surprisingly capable SETs) and I once ran Stax ELS-F81s with a Marantz 8, so I do appreciate the delicacy and transparency of such systems. The problem for me is that they do this with selected repertoire and the stuff I really like (Mahler, Shostakovich, late Verdi, late 20th Century orchestral, etc.) simply requires more. This limitation was/is always on my mind.

Kal

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
If you want me to review (against type) a 10w mono SE triode amp, I'd need combat pay and you could expect a very cynical, possibly dismissive, bias.

This kinda blows me away. I'm one of the few on this forum who is deeply committed to multi-channel and have been for 8 years- so I jump right to your excellent column firstly every month. But my fondest audio memories and the purest iteration of vocal, acoustic and chamber music I ever heard was on vinyl through a pair of QUAD 57's hooked up to a homemade 13 watt SET. And it even rocked Trower's Bridge Of Sighs.

Kal, I defer to your rights as a reviewer and your superior expertise, but IMO good audio is good in all formats.

I have had many such experiences (including a lovely demo of a pair of 3Ms with some surprisingly capable SETs) and I once ran Stax ELS-F81s with a Marantz 8, so I do appreciate the delicacy and transparency of such systems. The problem for me is that they do this with selected repertoire and the stuff I really like (Mahler, Shostakovich, late Verdi, late 20th Century orchestral, etc.) simply requires more. This limitation was/is always on my mind.

Kal

Point well taken. I get ya.

There are scores of other push pull amps not to mention hundreds of $1-3K solid state machines that are never reviewed b companies about unknown to the big magazines.

Quote:
There are scores of other push pull amps not to mention hundreds of $1-3K solid state machines that are never reviewed by companies about unknown to the big magazines.

This is because the majority of such companies who make tube amps at least are one-man labors of love and do not meet our minimum requirements for availability to justify a review: see www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/307awsi. This doesn't mean that there can't be some superb-sounding products out there from such manufacturers.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

JIMV, I would love to learn about hi-fi companies I have never heard of. Would you care to provide a short list? Thanks!

Still, companies that advertise in the trade magazines but are never reviewed by those magazines could serve as a base for gear to review. Imagine the fun of the quest for good sounding under $3K gear. The magazine does so much right. All I ask is more emphasis on gear we readers actually own and find in shops outside of the very biggest cities.

Quote:

Quote:
There are scores of other push pull amps not to mention hundreds of $1-3K solid state machines that are never reviewed by companies about unknown to the big magazines.

This is because the majority of such companies who make tube amps at least are one-man labors of love and do not meet our minimum requirements for availability to justify a review: see www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/307awsi. This doesn't mean that there can't be some superb-sounding products out there from such manufacturers.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

And, as we know, those rules are set in stone.

Inviolable.

Resolute.

Without exception.

You miss my point, or I did not phrase it well. It is not that readers of the magazine have not heard of these companies but that the magazine itself never (or very seldom) reviews them. Companies like Atoll, Antique Sound Labs, Jolida, or Mystere.

Really? Here are some reviews:
1. http://www.stereophile.com/musicintheround/1107mitr/index.html
2. Atoll Electronique IN 100 integrated amplifier ($1075; reviewed by Sam Tellig, Vol.26 No.4, April 2003)
3. http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/304antique/index.html

Kal

Quote:
You miss my point, or I did not phrase it well.

You were very clear, and I understood what you wrote. Since Stereophile is my main window on the hi-fi world, I thought you might be aware of brands unknown to me. Thank you for indulging my curiosity.

Quote:
Atoll Electronique IN 100 integrated amplifier ($1075; reviewed by Sam Tellig, Vol.26 No.4, April 2003)

Along with the matching CD 100 CD player, and a $19.95 interconnect from Acoustic Research.

Sam happens to be a fan of Atoll. In our September 2006 issue (Vol.29 No.9), he also reviewed the CD 200 CD player, PR 300 preamp, and AM 200 power amp.

There are, of course, components we haven't reviewed.

Quote:
Really? Here are some reviews:
1. http://www.stereophile.com/musicintheround/1107mitr/index.html
2. Atoll Electronique IN 100 integrated amplifier ($1075; reviewed by Sam Tellig, Vol.26 No.4, April 2003)
3. http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/304antique/index.html

Kal

2003, 2004 and 2007...lets calculate a bit. Figure 8 reviews per magazine, 12 a year, or 96, no. lets make that 100 for simplicity, a year...or of 800 reviews since 2003 we have seen 3 covering the 4 brands I mentioned...Ayre alone has received more reviews over the same period, and Ayre IS a great brand, just not the only one. Cary, Triange, Naim, Wilson, etc all have more reviews than the combined total of the companies I mentioned.

I am not saying stop reviewing expensive gear or those companies. I am saying that the universe of manufacturers extends beyond a few score of very pricy makers and most of us own gear made by those other folk. A few more reviews would not be out of order.

I'm going to put together an index of everything we've reviewed in the past year. I'll incorporate prices into the index, so we can take a look at just how it all breaks down.

Quote:
I am saying that the universe of manufacturers extends beyond a few score of very pricy makers and most of us own gear made by those other folk. A few more reviews would not be out of order.

My response was only to demonstrate that they have been recognized and reviewed and, if they are not chosen more often for review, it not because we are ignoring them.

You may notice that I never mentioned price (except to say how much we all would love to discover an over-performing inexpensive product). Your presumption that "most of us own gear made by these other folk" may or may not be true (I do not know the statistics).

I have nothing more to say in this argument other than we disagree on what is interesting equipment.

Kal

Almost all the gear you folk review is interesting. I just wish more was really affordable. The magazine is very interesting and the writing very good. The issue is, as noted, simply the quantity of gear reviewed beyond the means of most compared to what can be attained. Nothing more. Thank you for the comments and you honest opinons.

Quote:
It is not that readers of the magazine have not heard of these companies but that the magazine itself never (or very seldom) reviews them. Companies like Atoll, Antique Sound Labs, Jolida, or Mystere.

The first three brands have been reviewed in Stereophile, just not very often. Which reflects the fact that they have a low profile in the US market.

A factor that contributes to our strategy for choosing products for review is that readers be able to find those products in dealers' sound rooms. A full review represents a significant investment of the magazines's resources and I do not want to waste (to some extent) those resources on a review of a product that not many readers will be able to audition for themselves.

In fact, it can and has been argued that Stereophile's choice of components for review is _already_ too slanted towards the rare and exotic.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

I would bet a good bit of money that Antique Sound Labs and Jolida are in far more dealers rooms than the maker of the $13K preamp with a hum. I have seen those companies in the hinterlad but never in my life seen even an Ayre, a Wilson speaker, or DNM. If one only hangs out in the top 20 high end audio stores in the country one forgets that 'Sound by Singer' (for example) is not to be found in Idaho or Maine even though it does stock a lot of the gear reviewed by the magazine.

A better review standard might be one that requires the product to be on dealers shelves in at least half the states. I had to order my last amp unauditioned from Upscale Audio located 800 miles from my home. I suspect most folk buying most of the gear mentioned in the magazine also must buy by phone or internet as the gear is simply not to be found in the real world of potato farms and Elk hunts that make up a good bit of the country once one gets more than 100 miles from city center in our very largest cities.

Again, please do not take me wrong. I have subscribed off and on for almost 2 decades. The problem IMHO is simply one of the review of gear that most folk never will see, hear or can buy as it is vastly beyond our means. I only ask that product from lesser demi-Gods than top dollar folk but far more available and affordable be reviewed more often.

Put another way...there is no such a thing as a 'budget' or 'reasonable' $5K item. In the real world that is called a used car, a quarters tuition for Junior, or half a years property tax bill in many locations.

Many of your readers are Champaign drinkers on a Beer budget. I buy Korbel, not Bollinger, Jeep and not Rolls, and Adcom not Cary, though I lust after better.

I have never, ever, even after decades in this hobby, even heard or seen a $50K system either in someones home or in a dealers listening room. They do not seem to exist in much of fly over country (and won't if the wrong fellow wins on Tuesday). Heck, a $10K total system is rare. I have never heard a good vinyl based sstem, though I someday hope to, as what I have heard is certainly not to be compared with decent digital (despite the hype).

You have beat this horse to death. I say enough allready! There are alternatives. Seek them out. Just because you live in the sticks doesn't mean you need act like it!

Affordable Audio

RG

Quote:
Heck, a $10K total system is rare.

I have to disagree, I am afraid. Readership studies show that the typical Stereophile reader has around $15,000 invested in his system. John Marks wrote about this subject in the September issue, BTW: www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/908awsi. Worth a read.

Quote:
A better review standard might be one that requires the product to be on dealers shelves in at least half the states.

Sadly, this would rule out all almost all the brands we choose to review and _all_ of the ones you mentioned in this thread. All we could review would be Klipsch, Definitive Technology, JBL, B&W, and perhaps Paradigm, Onkyo and Denon.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

You are right. I am just echoing the letters of hundreds of other folk who have written to the magazine over the decades asking for a different ballance..I'll shut up and let the 'don't worry, be happy' folk who like all as it is carry the field. After all, in a forum dedicated to discussing rants and raves, a rant is so out of order

Quote:

Quote:
Heck, a $10K total system is rare.

I have to disagree, I am afraid. Readership studies show that the typical Stereophile reader has around $15,000 invested in his system. John Marks wrote about this subject in the September issue, BTW: www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/908awsi. Worth a read.

.............................

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

$15K!!! OK then... Since that is the case, then unless you want to expand readership, you might as well keep catering to the higher priced end of the market...

I think those of us spending less than $15K need to now just accept that Stereophile is not aimed at us....

Quote:

Affordable Audio

Holy crap!

I did not know that existed!

RG, thank you!

Man, how often do you come across a treasure trove of new stuff to read like that!

RG, I owe you TWO drinks!

I am so happy.

Quote:
You have beat this horse to death. I say enough allready! There are alternatives. Seek them out. Just because you live in the sticks doesn't mean you need act like it!

Affordable Audio

RG

Jesus, thank you, RG. I mentioned the affordableaudio site before but it seems that we actually need to provide the link itself because googling is just one step too much. Hopefully this monotony will stop. I think some of these people should really start up their own online mag or something. I mean that earnestly b/c I'd love to read it. But let's quit this one note complaint already...

Quote:
You are right. I am just echoing the letters of hundreds of other folk who have written to the magazine over the decades asking for a different ballance..I'll shut up and let the 'don't worry, be happy' folk who like all as it is carry the field. After all, in a forum dedicated to discussing rants and raves, a rant is so out of order

I LOVE rants & debates as much as anyone, but what I can't stand is just mentioning one thing over and over and over and over and over.

One note, one rant...I feel as though I have spoken Heresy, like questioning the inevitability of The Anointed One on a political forum or the pop religion of Global Warming.

If everyone is happy reading 5 to one reviews of gear costing more than most folks cars, fine. I'll read the rare nuggets that apply to me and look for real info on affordable gear elsewhere.

Well there is that, probably as much as I dislike reading reviews of too expensive and very rare gear to the exclusion of gear I actually see and can buy. Life is full of such dissappointments.

That said I'll leave the issue until someone else raises it, as they will.

for the folks that are complaining about the complainers... why waste your own time complaining in the thread?

the topic is a valid one for those folks who subscribe to stereophile. Maybe, just maybe the issue keeps resurfacing because it has not been addressed? Id bet my life that a lot of folks un-subbed over the voiced concerns in this thread. it may behoove JA and Company to listen up.

Quote:

Quote:
You are right. I am just echoing the letters of hundreds of other folk who have written to the magazine over the decades asking for a different ballance..I'll shut up and let the 'don't worry, be happy' folk who like all as it is carry the field. After all, in a forum dedicated to discussing rants and raves, a rant is so out of order

I LOVE rants & debates as much as anyone, but what I can't stand is just mentioning one thing over and over and over and over and over.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Heck, a $10K total system is rare.

I have to disagree, I am afraid. Readership studies show that the typical Stereophile reader has around $15,000 invested in his system.

$15K!!! OK then... Since that is the case, then unless you want to expand readership, you might as well keep catering to the higher priced end of the market...

My apologies, I don't see why you are so upset by what I said. If $15k is the average investment a Stereophile reader has in his system, it would be foolhardy of me to aim the contents of the magazine significantly far away from that "center of gravity." So yes, while I would welcome new readers, this cannot be achieved at the expense of the existing readership's needs.

Quote:
I think those of us spending less than $15K need to now just accept that Stereophile is not aimed at us...

Regarding readership, Stereophile currently has as many readers as all the other US audio magazines combined, plus HiFi+ and Hi-Fi News in the UK. And yes, while our November issue _was_ top-heavy with cost-no-object products being reviewed, with respect, we do include many budget-priced products in our overall review mix over the year. I am puzzled why we do not seem to get recognition of that fact.

Quote:
If everyone is happy reading 5 to one reviews of gear costing more than most folks cars, fine.

With respect, I really do think you are exaggerating for dramatic effect. Stephen Mejias has explained that he is compiling the index of components reviewed in 2008 and that he will include the price of each one.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Quote:
Stephen Mejias has explained that he is compiling the index of components reviewed in 2008 and that he will include the price of each one.

Get busy on that Excel, Stephen. What a lovely way to spend the weekend...

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Heck, a $10K total system is rare.

I have to disagree, I am afraid. Readership studies show that the typical Stereophile reader has around $15,000 invested in his system.

$15K!!! OK then... Since that is the case, then unless you want to expand readership, you might as well keep catering to the higher priced end of the market...

My apologies, I don't see why you are so upset by what I said. If $15k is the average investment a Stereophile reader has in his system, it would be foolhardy of me to aim the contents of the magazine significantly far away from that "center of gravity." So yes, while I would welcome new readers, this cannot be achieved at the expense of the existing readership's needs.

Quote:
I think those of us spending less than $15K need to now just accept that Stereophile is not aimed at us...

Regarding readership, Stereophile currently has as many readers as all the other US audio magazines combined, plus HiFi+ and Hi-Fi News in the UK. And yes, while our November issue _was_ top-heavy with cost-no-object products being reviewed, with respect, we do include many budget-priced products in our overall review mix over the year. I am puzzled why we do not seem to get recognition of that fact.

Quote:
If everyone is happy reading 5 to one reviews of gear costing more than most folks cars, fine.

With respect, I really do think you are exaggerating for dramatic effect. Stephen Mejias has explained that he is compiling the index of components reviewed in 2008 and that he will include the price of each one.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

My apologies if my post appears as if I'm upset... I actually agree with you... Since your average reader is spending $15K, then it really wouldn't make sense for you to change the direction of the mag... Readers with $15K investments in gear are unlikely to be interested in the sub $2K gear, many of us in this thread would like to see reviewed...

So I think that those of us who have been arguing for more affordable reviews just need to let it go... since it's like someone going into a Lexus dealer and complaining that they don't sell affordable cars... Stereophile is aimed at the high end of the market, we just need to accept that...

Quote:
With respect, I really do think you are exaggerating for dramatic effect. Stephen Mejias has explained that he is compiling the index of components reviewed in 2008 and that he will include the price of each one.

Hyperbole actualy...the list really needs to be same gear comparisons...ie; preamps at various price points reviewed, amps at various price points reviewed...not components v accessories.

Quote:
My apologies if my post appears as if I'm upset... I actually agree with you... Since your average reader is spending $15K, then it really wouldn't make sense for you to change the direction of the mag... Readers with $15K investments in gear are unlikely to be interested in the sub $2K gear, many of us in this thread would like to see reviewed...

A $15k 'system' consists of more than a $15K component. Lets play a bit. $15K...well maybe $7K speakers, a $4K amp, $3K source and $1K in cables and accessories...Seems that mix is a lot closer to my idea of affordable than $20K single components.

Blast, I said I was not going to keep kicking this dead horse...still, the point remains.

Quote:

Quote:
Stephen Mejias has explained that he is compiling the index of components reviewed in 2008 and that he will include the price of each one.

Get busy on that Excel, Stephen. What a lovely way to spend the weekend...

Stephen can get Excel to sit up and beg and play all sorts of tricks! But in this case, his data will be definitive.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Quote:

Quote:
My apologies if my post appears as if I'm upset... I actually agree with you... Since your average reader is spending $15K, then it really wouldn't make sense for you to change the direction of the mag... Readers with $15K investments in gear are unlikely to be interested in the sub $2K gear, many of us in this thread would like to see reviewed...

A $15k 'system' consists of more than a $15K component. Lets play a bit. $15K...well maybe $7K speakers, a $4K amp, $3K source and $1K in cables and accessories...Seems that mix is a lot closer to my idea of affordable than $20K single components.

Blast, I said I was not going to keep kicking this dead horse...still, the point remains.

Yep... though keep in mind that $3K CD Players and $1K cables are not "affordable", especially when a Class A source can be obtained for approx $1K (Benchmark DAC 1 or Marantz SA8001 - Those are the kind of reviews I love to read in Stereophile - I also clearly need to stop kicking that dead horse)...

Audiophiles (I prefer the term: Hi-Fi Connoisseurs) are usually looking to go up the price ladder, not down... so someone with a $3K source and $4K amp is not likely to be considering $2K gear as their next upgrade...

Quote:
Yep... though keep in mind that $3K CD Players and $1K cables are not "affordable", especially when a Class A source can be obtained for approx $1K (Benchmark DAC 1 or Marantz SA8001 - Those are the kind of reviews I love to read in Stereophile - I also clearly need to stop kicking that dead horse)...

Audiophiles (I prefer the term: Hi-Fi Connoisseurs) are usually looking to go up the price ladder, not down... so someone with a $3K source and $4K amp is not likely to be considering $2K gear as their next upgrade...

I think in general, you're right, Ajani. I can't see most people going downward in the spending path. There's probably a lot of truth in that too many people buy more expensive gear for some psychological reassurance.

That said, I'm at least one reader who enjoys budget reviews on Stereophile, just as you do. I don't think I'm the only one either. I think a lot of audiophiles out there are matching quality gears that are low-priced with higher priced stuff, because they firmly believe that fantastic sound can be had for cheap. I do have an upscale analog set-up, and had a chance to go up for digital source, too, but I am entirely happy with the Sony PS1 and Squeezebox/Paradisea DAC. I've heard mega expensive components, like Sooloo server, Zanden CDP + DAC, dCS, stuff like that, but I don't know, in my real system, what I have sounds satisfying and pleasurable to me, because what I hear out of what I have is music that is believable and moving. And that's what matters in the end.

I'm very much looking forward to seeing Stephen's breakdown on reviewed items!

Should be interesting. I look forward to his study

Quote:
Should be interesting. I look forward to his study

You can find Web reprints of the reviews we have published on affordable components at www.stereophile.com/budgetcomponents, though this list doesn't generally include reviews by Sam Tellig and Michael Fremer in their columns. Stephen Mejias has also covered many affordable components in his blog: see http://blog.stereophile.com/stephenmejias , but these aren't indexed, unfortunately. Perhaps Stephen can be persuaded to post a list of individual URLs.

And if you want to prove to yourself that Stereophile focuses on stupid-expensive products, visit www.stereophile.com/audaciousaudio.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

Quote:
However that being said I listened to a set of $40,000 speakers yesterday at my hi-fi dealer and although they were excellent speakers I could not say that they were 93% better sounding than my Paradigms which the cost difference.

Yikes!

93% more than the Paradigms?

I did not know Paradigm made speakers above the 20,000 dollar point!

I gotta keep up better.

That IS a lot of gear, but, few received full reviews with measurements and about 1/2 were speakers. Still, more than I thought so peraps this months issue was atypical.

Far better than my perception so perhaps I was only partly right (on this months issue but not the total years product)or wrong.