Vote

I'll get to read what I want when I want and pay only for what I've read. I guess that's fair.

But pay by the amont of articles want to read. Subscribers shout have a free accesscode.

If I can have access to a more complete Archives!!

Because, for example, someone like me, in Iran, as a hi-fi and pro audio distributer, needs to have access to all of your magazine, which would be very easy and cheaper from your website. Besides, fewer trees would be cut and we would all have a greener environment. But please don't make it expensive!

I enjoy both the magazine and the online content. I would not read the entire magazine online. I enjoy my Sunday mornings with a cigar, a cup of coffee, the stereo with some quiet background music, and a variety of my favorite magazines, of which list Stereophile is always at the top. Others include Cigar Aficionado and the MIT Technology Review. Change is good, but change for change's sake . . . well, you know the rest.

I think if you are a current subscriber, access should be provided free of charge, to a point—let's say 10 article retrievals a month. I think non-subscribers should pay a fee. This allows both mediums to coexist profitably.

I do not want to pay the high overseas delivery charges.

Not living in the US, I would get to pay the same as my North American friends and get the next issue on time (!) and at the same time as they do. Also, a Web subscription could easily make both back issues and new issues available online. This makes an online subscription a much better deal than the paper magazine (and it takes much less space in my bookshelves). I pay the same, I get more, and it takes less space. The other benefits from having it available online include easier processing of the information using a computer, and local companies in ALL parts of the world can advertise with a better hit in the local market.

No!

All archived content should be free.

Living in Europe, where the access to your magazine is quite difficult, I'm definitely in favor of "Bob's" idea.

Use both and give subscribers to your magazine a benefit. Don't charge for online content. Put more on.

I subscribe to Stereophile, but would not be willing to pay for info on the web for a couple of reasons. Primarally, I use the web to research manufacturers & their products...Also, it is so unfriendly to the eyes to read stuff off the screen...I print it out & savor the info later.

NO

May be Stereophile should also consider the review of audio equipments as an advertisement of the equipment manufacturer and reach much more customer.

I use the paper mag as a reference, online magazine will is limited to a read at home only. I travel and enjoy a good read on a plane/train. Online content has just enough detail.

I doubt that I would pay extra for web access. There are times I would like back info but to pay a fee for those few occassions, I doubt it. My subscription to the monthly magazine gives me 99% of the info I need.

Pay for a HTML or PDF version of each issue is fine, but still offer a public free site. Although web publishing is the future, don't trash the slick paper version just yet. I would make your semi-annual ratings available publically. You would attract more audiophiles and would lose nothing by doing so (publish it a month after the issue that contains the listing).

If the Stereophile magazine is sealed in plastic in newsagents, you could have a code inside the magazine which lets readers also view the content on the web.

Subscription to the paper version should give one access to such a web site. That way when issues go missing and one is told by subscription services that no more copies are available, we could get what we're paying for.

I am a subscriber. I like the paper magazine. What I want and don't want to pay for is access to complete archives. Keyword cross referenced too if you please. I know I'm not going to get it but you asked.

Let free enterprise rule. Charge 'em!

Don't charge. I buy your magazine regularly, but I like to be able to access your web site for information. I'm unwilling to pay for both, and I prefer the reading paper than a screen. Besides, I think most internet viewers understand that you site should pay for itself (many times over) with click throughs and banners. So, don't get greedy. It's ugly.

I just had to pay to get a copy of an article from TAS...I did not much care for that. I would not be willing to pay for web-based content. It would be another "nail in the coffin", to coin a phrase.

Aren't you gouging us enough charging us the price of a professional journal for an overrated consumer electronics rag?