Recommended Components

Recommended Components Fall 2023 Edition Tonearms

Tonearms:

A+:

SAT CF1-09Ti: €88,000
SAT CF1-12Ti: €92,000
These two cost-no-object tonearms appear outwardly identical to the Swedish manufacturer's original CF1 arm. However, there is now a titanium tube running through the carbon-fiber armtube and the CF1's removable carbon-fiber headshell has been stiffened with a frame made from titanium. The 9" arm was auditioned, but the 12" arm should be just as good (but longer). Prices are when purchased separately; when the arms are purchased with the SAT XD-1 turntable (see "Turntables" ), the prices are €50,000 ('9Ti) and €60,000 ('12Ti). (Vol.43 No.12 WWW)

A:

Acoustic Signature TA-7000 12" NEO: $17,995, 9" $15,995
The TA-7000 uses a gimbaled ball/race bearing system and a damped carbon-fiber armtube. It is available with either an SME or Rega-type mount and in 9" and 12" versions. The model reviewed was the 9", which conforms to the standard Rega geometry. It pays to be cautious when adjusting arm height, advised MF, as the pillar goes, in a hair-turn of the grub screw, "from rock-solid secure to dropping like a pound and a half rock." Repeatable azimuth adjustment is also tricky as there are no reference marks. Included with the arm are a rigid, precise alignment jig set to Löfgren A geometry and AudioQuest's entry-level "Wildcat" DIN-to-RCA cable. With an Ortofon A95 phono cartridge, the lateral and vertical resonant frequencies both measured ideally, at approximately 10Hz. (Vol.45 No.1 WWW)

Acoustical Systems AXIOM Reference: $25,995 in LEICA finish
The gimbal bearing AXIOM is available in 10" or 12" versions and comes with various precision-machined-and-finished spacers of various heights. MF described the designer's goal as being to produce an infinitely adjustable "universal" tonearm "capable of precisely adjusting every setup parameter you can think of and maybe a few you haven't thought of and to place the settings where they are most effectively implemented." Setup was straightforward, a precisely machined, smoothly operating VTA tower mechanism raising or lowering the arm 1mm with each full knob turn. Mounted on the AXIOM, the X-quisite cartridge delivered clean sibilants and the expected smooth, transparent, direct (if somewhat forward, but not bright) timbral balance. MF found that the AXIOM arm delivered microdynamic shifts that helped produce the appropriate, rolling, flowing feel of the classic Cowboy Junkies album. "If it doesn't quite have the slam and excitement of the far-more-costly SAT CF1-09," concluded MF, "it makes up for that with its smooth, refined, erudite, almost academic presentation." (Vol.45 No.9 WWW)

AMG 12JT: $9000
This tonearm features a unique, dual-pivot horizontal bearing system (for vertical movement) and a vertical bearing (for horizontal movement) that uses a hardened tool-steel axle with top and bottom micro ball bearings. The antiskating mechanism uses a pair of adjustable magnets that can be moved closer to or farther away from an opposing ring magnet, and azimuth is adjusted with a knurled knob. See MF's review of the AMG Viella Forte Engraved turntable ("Turntables" ). (Vol.43 No.9 WWW)

AMG 9W2: $3800 ★
The German-made 9W2 tonearm from turntable specialists AMG combines a traditional horizontal bearing with a vertical bearing that is, according to AD, unique in its field: "an upright pair of 0.4mm spring-steel wires that are perfectly straight when the tonearm tube is balanced, yet flex in tandem and yield to the armtube's mass when the counterweight is moved closer to the twin fulcrums." The result, he reports, is a near-ideal combination of zero play and absence of friction. VTA and azimuth are easily adjusted, and a magnetic antiskating mechanism is included. AD found the 9W2, when used on his Linn LP12—for which it was apparently designed—to be "the first Linn-friendly arm I've heard that has made me stop sobbing about the demise of the Naim Aro: a considerable feat." Also with reference to his past favorite tonearms, AD added: "None surpasses the 9W2 in sheer build quality." HR enjoyed the 9W2 as part of AMG's Giro G9 record player, and said of the arm's vertical bearing, "to my reckoning, this is a simple and supremely effective innovation." The 9W2 was supplied with the MK II version of AMG's Giro turntable, which MT reviewed in December 2022. See Turntables. (Vol.37 No.10, Vol.40 No.10, Vol.45 No.12 WWW)

Graham Engineering Phantom Elite: $15,800—$16,850 depending on length. ★
Outwardly similar to the standard Graham Phantom tonearm, the Phantom Elite is said to be made from more costly materials and incorporates new Litz wiring, a refined alignment gauge, and a thicker, more rigid version of the Phantom's removable, damped titanium armtube. (The latter is available in three sizes, for effective lengths of 9", 10", and 12".) Retained from the original Phantom is Graham's patented Magneglide system, in which magnets are used to stabilize the arm's inverted-unipivot bearing. MF observed that, when used with the TechDAS Air Force Two turntable, the Phantom Elite had good texture but not the same degree of weight as the more expensive Swedish Audio Technologies arm. Like Graham's standard Phantom, the Phantom Elite is available with a circular or an SME-style arm mount; MF suggests that the latter makes it easier to adjust spindle-to-pivot distance. (Vol.38 No.11 Vol.44 No.9 WWW)

J.Sikora KV12 VTA: $8995
The oil-damped, unipivot KV12 VTA is the first tonearm to use an armtube made of Kevlar—"KV" stands for Kevlar—and features precision, on-the-fly VTA adjustment. MF noted that while the KV12's bass reproduction was clean and tight, it couldn't match the "prodigious-yet-honest bass" of the much-more-expensive SAT arm. MF concluded that while the KV12 hasn't got the Kuzma 4 Point's bottom-end "womp" and authority, its timbral balance and everything else about it produced nothing but sonic pleasure. (Vol.45 No.7 WWW)

Kuzma 4Point: $10,000 and up
Kuzma 4Point 9: $6152 and up
Designed by Franc Kuzma and available in 9", 11", and 14" versions, this tonearm takes its name from its four-point bearing system: Four carefully arranged points contact four cups, permitting the arm to move in both the vertical and lateral planes while avoiding the chatter of gimbaled bearings and the instability of unipivot designs. A removable headshell makes swapping cartridges painless, while adjustment of VTF, VTA, antiskating, and azimuth are relatively simple. With its outstanding immediacy, transparency, and overall coherence, the 4Point consistently exceeded Mikey's expectations. Compared to the combo of Continuum Cobra arm and Ortofon A90 cartridge, the 4Point with Lyra Titan i offered greater timbral, textural, and image solidity, said MF. Compared with the Cobra, the Kuzma sounded more natural and energetic. "The Kuzma 4Point may be the finest tonearm out there, period," said MF. The Kuzma matched the Graham Phantom II Supreme's detail retrieval and neutrality but offered greater speed and coherence, said MF. As reported in the July 2019 Stereophile, KM's review sample of the Kuzma Stabi R turntable came with a 4Point 11" ($6675 as supplied), which proved "eminently and easily adjustable." Also offered with regular phono cables/no RCA box for $6375. (Vol.34 Nos.9 & 10, Vol.35 No.7, Vol.39 Nos.3 & 11, Vol.41 No.6, Vol.42 No.7 WWW)

Linn Ekos SE: $5855 ★
Outwardly identical to the original Ekos in all but color, the Ekos SE is machined from a titanium tube in an effort to smooth out resonant peaks, while its stainless steel main pillar and bearing cradle work to maintain perfect bearing adjustment in the face of temperature extremes and user abuse. The "beautifully finished" SE comes packaged with a selection of tools, a Linn T-Kable interconnect, and a new iteration of Linns cable clamp. With its strong, tight bass and solid aural images, the Ekos SE produced a "cleaner, more dramatic, and more enjoyable" listening experience, said AD. "Other, more exotic arms may give better results in some settings, but I cant think of a more consistent—and consistently recommendable—tonearm. Its a Martin D-28, a BMW 3-series, a bottle of Bombay Sapphire: It will please any sane, reasonable person," he summed up. (Vol.30 No.10 WWW; also see HR's Linn Klimax LP12 review in Vol.45 No.6 WWW)

Reed 5T: $21,150
This pivoted tonearm has a unique design that uses a servo-controlled, battery-powered motor and a laser to enable it to track tangentially and also to address antiskating. Compared to pivoted tonearms, the 5T's smaller moment of inertia allows for better tracking. Care must be taken when cueing cartridges with the Reed arm, as moving too fast will disable the servo mechanism. The 5T, mounted on the Reed Muse 1c turntable and fitted with an Ortofon MC Century cartridge, sounded "wonderful," said MF, and "excelled in soundstage stability and expansiveness, all across the record surface." (Vol.43 No.6)

Schick 12" Tonearm: $1995 ★
Schick 10.5" Tonearm: $1995
Made in Germany and now distributed in the United States by Mofi Distribution, the Thomas Schick 12" tonearm is intended to combine the greater-than-average length and mass of certain vintage models with the high-quality bearings of modern arms. It offers superb fit and finish, with a clean, spare bearing cradle and a smoothly solid pickup-head socket. Though lacking the spring-loaded downforce and other refinements of the EMT 997—and, thus, some measure of the more expensive arm's performance—the Schick is characterized by a big, clean, substantial sound, with an especially colorful bottom end: "a superb performer," per AD, who also verified the correctness of the Schick's geometry with Keith Howard's ArmGeometer freeware. According to Art, "The Schick tonearm is an outstanding value and easily the most accessible transcription-length arm on the market." Thomas Schick has now added to his line a proprietary headshell ($295) machined from resin-soaked "technical" graphite, with a mass (15.2gm) that makes it more suitable than most for use with cartridges of low to moderate compliance. AD bought the new headshell for himself and reported that, compared to his wooden Yamamoto headshell, the Schick offered "far tighter, cleaner bass." He was also impressed with how "cartridges mounted in the Schick suffer less breakup during heavily modulated passages." Now with balanced cable. Reporting on the 10.5" arm, HR wrote that after hearing Schick's arms in a variety of systems, he suspected that the medium-length version "might strike a good balance between the liveliness of the 9" and the greater mass and tracing accuracy of the 12" version." He found it to be a good partner for his Dr. Feickert Blackbird turntable. (Vol.33 Nos.3 & 6, Vol.34 No.10, Vol.37 No.11, 12"; Vol.44 No.1, 10.5" WWW)

Schröder Captive Bearing (CB) tonearm: $5750 (9" version)
See MF's reviews of the Döhmann Helix One Mk2 turntable, which uses this arm with the carbon fiber armtube. The 11" version costs $6000. (Vol.40 No.3 WWW & Vol.43 No.4 WWW)

Sorane SA-1.2: $1900 $$$ ★
The Japan-made Sorane (originally called Abis) SA-1.2 is a high-mass 9" tonearm that began life as the Abis SA-1, famous for impressing AD and for having been withdrawn from an earlier edition of "Recommended Components," by its importer, while undergoing revision. The new SA-1.2 reflects a number of refinements: improved bearings, greater effective length (9.4" vs 9"), and slightly higher offset angle. The arm's basics remain: a precision-milled armtube of rectangular cross section, static downforce, and a removable headshell for easy cartridge changes. When he used the revised SA-1.2—also an HR favorite—with the perennially recommendable Denon DL-103 cartridge, the low compliance of which is well suited to such a high-mass arm, AD found it capable of pulling from his records "tremendous amounts of touch and force and impact." The SA-1.2 was so good, he declared, that it made his Thorens TD 124 sound more like his Garrard 301. (This, he suggests, is good.) Speaking of which, AD cautions that, to make the Abis more compatible with the unusually low-slung platter of the TD 124, the user must make one or two adjustments. His conclusion: "I'd put the combination of Abis SA-1.2 and Denon DL-103 up against all but their priciest competitors." In his June 2023 Gramophone Dreams HR commented that he used the arm's rear counterweight to set tracking force and the sliding midarm weight to adjust the SA-1.2's effective mass. "This nifty trick, in concert with the use of lighter or heavier headshells," he wrote, allows the SA-1.2 to adapt to a wide range of cartridge weights and compliances. "This adaptability, plus the satiny feel of its dual radial bearings, made the SA-1.2 my top choice for long-haul, daily driver use." (Vol.37 No.3, Vol.38 No.11, Vol.39 No.4, Vol.46 No.6 WWW)

TW-Acustic 12" Raven: $6500
AH was impressed by the functionality of this German arm, when he used it with TW-Acustic's Raven GT turntable. VTA is fine-tuned by turning a ring at the arm's base. VTF is dialed in by rotating the ingenious counterweight, held in place by the friction of unevenly spaced threads. Antiskating is set with a magnetic screw. The integral headshell rotates to allow azimuth adjustments. And the housing of the four-point gimbal bearing has a dimple at its center, to anchor the point of a cartridge protractor and eliminate guesswork from finding the arm's pivot point. Using a Dynavector Te Kaitora Rua cartridge, AH found that the Raven easily outclassed his Schick tonearm, sounding smoother, more harmonically developed, and propelling the music with a more natural sense of flow. (Vol.46 No.7 WWW)

VPI 12" FatBoy gimbaled tonearm: $4500
First reviewed by MF fitted to VPI's 40th Anniversary turntable, the gimbaled FatBoy was fitted to VPI's Avenger Direct turntable for KM's review. (A unipivot version is also available.) The armwand is 3D-printed from liquid resin set into a UV- and heat-resistant stainless steel tube and is supplied with an adjustable, 5/8"-thick, aluminum armboard. Although VPI founder Harry Weisfeld believes the FatBoy arm sounds better with no antiskate, KM experienced skipping. He eliminated this by looping the plastic wire that extends from the tonearm base over a metal peg on the small, V-shaped antiskate mechanism attached to the back of the VTA tower. (Vol.43 No.1, Vol.46 No.6 WWW)

B:

Rega RB330: $675 $$$
Current version of Rega's classic tonearm. See the Rega Planar 3 entry in Turntables and Gramophone Dreams in Vol.40 No.2 WWW.

COMMENTS
creativepart's picture
Submitted by creativepart on September 15, 2023 - 10:12am

Does Stereophile ever question the validity of this twice a year list? Perhaps it really helps with newsstand sales, but I've come to dread it's release twice a year. First, there are the stupidly priced A+ turntables all reviewed by one staffer that's been gone for quite some time. The entire A+ section will go away with "not tested in a long time" and rightly so.

Some items are ranked by full reviews with testing and others are just columnists saying - highly recommended - at the end of their monthly column. And those items are many times totally out of the mainstream of the product marketplace.

And, while price doesn't indicate quality, it is so jarring to see $500 products achieve the exact same ranking (A or B usually) along side $15,000 products.

I'd love to see you folks test more of the items people are buying in fairly large numbers everyday... even though they don't have the same 5 popular distribution partners or those that advertise in the magazine. No, I'm not saying it's pay to play. But MoFi Distributing buys a lot of ads, it's friends with staffers and routinely gets their products reviewed. It's not payola, but it is a symbiotic relationship.

I'd recommend you scrap the listing and retool the whole thing - and put some thought into how and why you test the products you test.

tenorman's picture
Submitted by tenorman on September 16, 2023 - 10:54am

Very objective , well written and fair . You’ve made some great suggestions . Thank you

HeadScratcher's picture
Submitted by HeadScratcher on September 16, 2023 - 6:30pm

I too recommend scrapping the current format for a complete retooling of a listing that isn't so time lapse convoluted...

alh22's picture
Submitted by alh22 on December 1, 2024 - 6:22pm

have to agree: these listings are very spotty, and many are quite stale.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on September 15, 2023 - 8:33pm

Creativepart is mincing words to that they fail to commit to... They are saying it's pay to play in no uncertain terms and views their listings with mistrust. To imply MoFi has a friendly relationship is complete conjecture and Stereophile does not make nor position themselves as a symbiotic relationship with any manufacturer or distributor. If they get their product reviewed, it's because a reviewer saw or heard their product at a show, and anything else is implied BS. Rather, they hate MoFi for their lack of transparency about their debacle on digital masters, and want to see any association of Stereophile's behalf as condemnation of their own lack of transparency and veracity. That implication stinks like jaded political pundits grasping for correlated facts.

What CP is also implying directly is that he or she would like validation of their mainstream products purchased to be favorably reviewed (so they can feel good about their purchases of gear). It's generally opposed to what Stereophile does and any long term reader or subscriber would know that as gospel and the very reason the magazine exists on one level- to provide a review of one person's experience with a hard to find or less-investigated piece of gear. It is easy to find, learn and buy any mainstream piece of gear. I do think that should change a bit.

What is important is for Stereophile to review these mainstream audio products and compare against their audiophile offerings and EXPLAIN why they are different and (if) superior. That would be bring in more readers if the descriptions of well known products (vs. audiophile products) could be compared and contrasted well enough. This acts to bring real-world reference points to levels of sound quality that more non-audio dudes would understand.

I do not think this magazine is as good at comparisons (though understandable) as they used to be in the 80's and 90's (less HR and JA). Manufacturers don't like comparisons to their products because often the context is misunderstood by readers. Yes, almost all products in any category are vastly improved and the 80's performance points were much more obvious to hear and report about as negative or positive. Technology marching forward has changed that and leveled the playing field drastically. The fundamental design approaches of audiophile companies still focus on sound rather than ergonomics or functionality.

What should happen is to NOT name the product under comparison in the review but only use price as an indicator of quality vs. price in any comparison. That way readers can understand the product from a price perspective and not feel they have a field day crapping on the product that they 'KNEW was audiophile garbage'.

Side note- Other than subscribers, no reader should be allowed to make comments on this or the other sister websites. By way of omission of the subscribed investment, we will be able to separate the dross from water. I'm pretty sure there are a lot of other websites that do this outright, but I get that Stereophile wants to increase it's readership. Perhaps, this is actually a better way to do it. Require subscriptions for posting comments here and there (AP).

Jazzlistener's picture
Submitted by Jazzlistener on September 15, 2023 - 7:19pm

high when you wrote this? Talk about verbal diarrhea. Creativepart made some good points. Although I do personally enjoy the Recommended Components feature, I too find it questionable (e.g. the Rega P3 makes it into Class C but none of their higher end tables can crack Class A? Pluh-ease. What I would really love to see is more system recommendations in Stereophile like in some of the British Hi-Fi mags, and at different price points.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on September 15, 2023 - 8:42pm

But I was pissed a bit. Implied collusion ruffles my s***.

Great recommend on the system point you bring up. That should be a regular feature if they can create very different systems for each 'type' of listener. From there they could build on hybrids of system types involving tubes and solid-state, etc.

These rankings are just one reviewer judging a component in relation to their system. The Benchmark reviews come to mind- Certain people loved them, others not. There's massive nuance there and goes to the heart of preference thing- accuracy to source vs. myfi, vs. 'the absolute sound'.

They all need to fit somewhere into the classes here. It may be a hodge-podge like it is, but whatever. It just is.

The Belles vs. McCormack amp comparison from Sam Tellig (2000) comes to mind as well. The pursuit of accuracy vs. warmth and obscuration of detail lent the McCormack the nod and the higher rating for ST in Class A and the Belles to Class B. Same realm of performance and price (in my listening as well) but they don't share a rating. In more ways and in my lighter balanced system (at the time), I preferred the Belles.

I think dollar amounts do have play a part here as sometimes there are positives that 'overweigh' the subtractions to placement a certain class and could serve one particular group of listeners as a justification for a higher cost or greater perceived value.

Expensive modern tube power amps are a great examples. To get to a greater level of measurement and subjective performance to that of solid state one has to spend sometimes thousands more. The classes do need adjustments for a positive listening value like 'superb depth', even though there may be subtractions for other weaknesses.

I look at the classes as just a rough guide. I doubt that the Project DAC reviewed as Class A a few years back could compete with the top dollar DAC's like dCS, but I haven't heard the Project. I would think there is enough areas of merit to make Class A, but probably not as many facets of performance as the dCS or other pricey DACs.

Anton's picture
Submitted by Anton on September 15, 2023 - 12:41pm

One of those turntable must surely be A++, no?

And some of that 'A' gear must really be 'A-.'

I think we should switch to the Moody's rating system...

Or, perhaps the Robert Parker 100 point scale.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on September 15, 2023 - 8:44pm

lol.

RobertSlavin's picture
Submitted by RobertSlavin on September 15, 2023 - 2:00pm

First let me say I heard the Raidho D2-1 speakers several years ago and was very impressed.

However, given how uneven the measured frequency response of the Raidho TD3.8 was in the Stereophile measurements, I question whether it should have even qualified for Class E if it were sold for $700. Instead, we find it recommended at Class A+ for $117,000.

It is generally acknowledged that there is a strong correlation between even measured frequency response and generally perceived speaker quality.

I realize that to get in A+ just one reviewer has to think that way. But it does raise my eyebrow.

Robert

Scintilla's picture
Submitted by Scintilla on September 15, 2023 - 10:08pm

Despite my recent foaming-of-the-mouth and throwings-under-the-bus here, I do think there is value in the list each year. I have used Stereophile reviews and the list to both narrow my choices and to purchase goods based on a long-standing relationship with a reviewers words. Fremer might think me a random hater but I used his reviews to pick both a phono preamp, and a tonearm. I trusted my own ears to pick other parts of my system before glowing reviews appeared here. Assembling a modern, high-quality audio system is made much more difficult by the sheer number of products available, companies and general noise on the Internets. In the 80's we could go to a hifi salon and listen to products like the Robertson 4010 with some Soundlab A1's (made my neck hair stand up) and find Celestions with omni subs paired with Bedini or BEL amps. In this age, having a curated list to help people at least find products to seek is more valuable than ever. What it comes down to is whether you trust the ears that made the choices. And I do not trust all the new reviewers and neither should you. They haven't earned it yet.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on September 16, 2023 - 8:06pm

Haven't you given a reason why you can't trust them?

Specifically why.

Scintilla's picture
Submitted by Scintilla on September 16, 2023 - 9:53pm

Because they can't actually hear differences. I only trust Kal, JA1 and nobody else; maybe Herb; maybe but he's one of those I just write for pleasure guys. So why trust them? Because the rest of the new writers, including JA2 have not proved themselves over time. It's one thing to have a good review when many people agree. Why is JVS reveiwing the highest-end equipment like J10 did? WTAF does he really know about that gear other than his association with the magazine? Not much, actually. He's an amateur listener no more skilled than me. At least Fremer proved himself as a real arbiter of sound quality. I may not agree with his choices for equipment, but the man proved his prowess as a listener. Not so with the rest of these newbies. They can be indignant all they want to be but until they have a record of salient, quality reviews, they are nobodies... And this is Stereophile's big fail.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on September 17, 2023 - 2:07pm

I wasn't trolling you- You didn't give reasons until now.

I thought these reviewers had enough experience at shows, with their own multi-thousand dollar systems and constantly refining their own craft by interviewing and working with manufacturers.

It would seem strange that a manufacturer or distributor installed-system would be anything less than successful playback, as they don't leave until they are satisfied. They certainly have the respect of manufacturers, dealers and distributors when I see them talk together at shows. (And if collusion ruled those relationships, we would see a different dynamic here.)

MF's system is real close in many ways to JVS' so what is the culprit?

Is it your perception of measurements don't match JVS' experiences? Or is that HR has a more observable scientific method by way of comparisons of gear that seems more transparent? Or the way either communicates their observations?

It just may be about the type of subjective tests that reviewers are performing that fails to bring one type of measurement to be audible. Classical music omits a ton of performance areas for review parameters. The component review may be really for classical lovers. I certainly don't read anymore into it if he isn't remarking on other music.

Yet I do see JA defending JVS' experiences in his measurements section in last month's Infigo review. No one seems to ever acknowledge or comment on those reasonable defenses- ever.

Thank you for your explanation no matter what.

ChrisS's picture
Submitted by ChrisS on September 16, 2023 - 8:59am

...from mine?

No problem!

creativepart's picture
Submitted by creativepart on September 16, 2023 - 11:48am

I went to pains to explain I wasn't claiming payola. And, I'm still not. I'm saying that products with distributors are granted more reviews due to attendance at shows, relationships with editors, and just increased personal contact. Companies expect their distributors to represent their brand for them and to advertise their brand for them. And, that's what they do.

Reviewed products end up on the Stereophile Recommended Products list because of this greater exposure to Stereophile writers and editors.

When someone from a small equipment company calls an editor their call will not be answered as readily as a call from that nice rep you met at the Munich show and shared a beer with last year. It's how the business works.

And, everyone should know when a product is getting a review in a future issue the Ad Dept is made aware and sales people call to suggest an ad be placed in that same issue. It's not pay to play because the ad sale has nothing to do with the product review being printed. But companies recognize synergy when they see it.

Add to this that most reviewers seem to be in Urban areas that have the traditional HiFi Shop. Where the rest of the country only has internet forums and online reviews to audition various products.

My entire point is... the list is tilted, skewed toward bigger budget, higher priced gear that is professionally represented and that is not necessarily representative of the broader equipment marketplace, and what mainstream audiophiles are buying.

Jazzlistener's picture
Submitted by Jazzlistener on September 16, 2023 - 4:36pm

“My entire point is... the list is tilted, skewed toward bigger budget, higher priced gear that is professionally represented and that is not necessarily representative of the broader equipment marketplace, and what mainstream audiophiles are buying.”

I do not begrudge any company that does a good job marketing itself, attending shows, building a presence in the industry, etc. That’s a lot of hard work and investment. There is a boutique speaker company in my home town that makes outstanding speakers, but the owner has steadfastly refused to show them off at shows, market them properly, or work with dealers. The result has been failure to grow his company or draw attention to his speakers. That’s on him. Stereophile is only one of myriad sources on the Internet where audio enthusiasts can find reviews on gear. Many other reviewers cover mainstream products. In fact, if you’re interested in a product you’d be hard pressed not to find a reasonably to excellent credible review on it.

ChrisS's picture
Submitted by ChrisS on September 16, 2023 - 10:40pm

...shopping.

Does no one know how to do that anymore?

Yeesh!

Jean-Benoit's picture
Submitted by Jean-Benoit on September 17, 2023 - 5:55pm

It seems like an obvious thing to include, or else the reader is left to "manually" go looking for reviews of every component that piques his/her curiosity. Seems like a wholly unnecessary hassle for what is otherwise a really useful list.

CG's picture
Submitted by CG on September 18, 2023 - 7:31am

Good suggestion!

I tried to search for the review of the Ayre VX-8. No luck, link or no.

John Atkinson's picture
Submitted by John Atkinson on September 18, 2023 - 10:01am
CG wrote:
I tried to search for the review of the Ayre VX-8. No luck, link or no.

This review will be posted to the website on Friday. The other reviews in the new (October) issue will be posted over the next 10 days. (Stereophile gives priority to print subscribers.)

John Atkinson
Technical Editor/part-time web monkey

CG's picture
Submitted by CG on September 19, 2023 - 6:02am

Ahh! Coming attractions, as they say. Fair enough, all around.

ChrisS's picture
Submitted by ChrisS on September 18, 2023 - 11:09am

The review for the EX is online...The new one should come up soon!

ednazarko's picture
Submitted by ednazarko on September 19, 2023 - 7:46am

Always stunned by how many people are compelled to tell the world at length how outraged they are about something online they don't like. Maybe insufficient joy in their lives? A lack of purpose? Afflicted with oppositional defiant disorder? I don't know. But if you think online comparison rankings of audio gear are a fruitless exercise, why read them? If you didn't read them, how can you have much of a useful opinion? Expressing outrage about something you refuse to read is mostly chest pounding and declaring superiority over the fools filling the world.

Don't like the comparison reviews? Really, just move on. Less rage hormones in your blood will extend your life span. Or raise money, buy the company, and show us your better ideas in action.

I enjoy reading through these comparison ratings. Don't agree with some, do agree with others. I've found over time that there are reviewers whose ears and preferences seem to match up with mine and others who don't. (In these twice yearly ratings, and in the ongoing reviews published.) These cyclical ratings and the ongoing reviews have been quite useful for me in trying and buying gear when living in a location that limits my ability to hear a lot of gear for myself.

Right now massively enjoying listening to Kingfish Live in London on my Okto stereo DAC, which I'd never have heard of without the review here, and would have never bought other than the reviewers were ones who's opinions and ears have matched with mine in the past, along with the wildly excellent measured performance. Through an old Anthem integrated that was well reviewed way long ago... and through B&W 702 speakers that got mixed reviews, but in the mix there were specifics that told me that they'd work well with my other components and in the large studio listening space I had. (And that I definitely needed the smattering of sound panels on the walls behind and to the side.)

Just because something pleases you not, or strikes you as ignorant and wasteful consumption of bits on the internet, doesn't mean that others don't find value and useful insights. Save your time and your cortisol and ignore the stuff you think it dumb. Life is short. Spend it well.

Glotz's picture
Submitted by Glotz on September 19, 2023 - 12:19pm

N/T

creativepart's picture
Submitted by creativepart on September 19, 2023 - 3:11pm

No anger, no stress on this end. Simply making suggestions in hopes of improving this twice a year feature (of the printed magazine). If you read anger and vitriol in phrases in my post like "I'd love to see you folks..." then it's not me that's overreacting.

If you like the listings as they are, then great. No one is stopping you. Me, I think they could be more meaningful than they are currently. But that's just me.

pinkfloyd4ever's picture
Submitted by pinkfloyd4ever on September 28, 2023 - 8:24am

It would be really helpful if you posted a link to the full review of each of these products in this list

Jau's picture
Submitted by Jau on October 2, 2023 - 12:07am

Hi,
In delections from their latest Recommended Components they relate to the Devialet Expert 140 Pro and say that it has been replaced by a new model which has not been tested. However, the Expert 140 Pro continues to appear on the Devialet website and there is no new model to replace it. (?)

Firemike's picture
Submitted by Firemike on January 31, 2024 - 3:56pm

Maybe a quick visit to Funk & Wagnall's might be in order to refresh ourselves of what a review and recommendation is. If a consumer wants to spend $10 or $20,000 on a widget, consider a review as gospel, or only an opinion, isn't that their prerogative? If a person prefers the sound of pink colored audio equipment made from crystals and walnuts from "Big HI FI" that has no scientific or measurable reasoning behind it, who are we to judge? Akin to politics and religion, each person votes with their ears and ultimately, wallet. Not every opposing view is a conspiracy which require's a need to question other's intentions. A review is nothing more than one person's opinion. Aren't we in this hobby to listen and enjoy music - not hyper analyze equipment, materials, and the evil empires that provide it? Somehow fellow hobbyist's have survived all of these years in life - many of them very successfully - without our subjective criticism. Yes, I get it. As a subscriber you have input into how you would prefer to see things done. Maybe a letter to the editor could be a consideration.

moukie's picture
Submitted by moukie on February 13, 2024 - 8:16am

Really surprised NOT to see Bryston 4B3 14B3 or 28B3 in the recommended amps and that is like every year

Leah's picture
Submitted by Leah on March 15, 2024 - 5:10pm

This is Leah Gwinn who has been a victim of the BITCOIN AND CRYPTOCURRENCY Scam recently. I have been scammed $350,000 during this fake Chinese Bitcoin. I lost all my life savings. I have paid attention to the fraud website and noticed that the scam website was shut down on 12/07/2022. Just now, I read a news article regarding the Pig Butchering Scam in Delaware. The Delaware DOJ initiated a halt to the Pig Butchering Crypto Scams. The enforcement policemen issued a cease-and-desist order to wallets, accounts, and individuals. This encouraged me because the scam website which robbed me just stopped. It may not be too late to take action against the cybercriminals. As the scammers copied the real American Crypto Company, they are most likely in the States. I didn’t stop at that I had to also look for alternatives to get my money back, so I had to contact (BRIGADIATECHREMIKEABLE@PROTON. DOT ME) who helped me recover my money and my friend as well. I can't thank them enough so I had to make this 5-star review. BITCOIN, CRYPTO, WALLET RECOVERY, SCAM RECOVERY contact the Email: brigadiatechremikeable@proton.me Telegram +13239101605 and get help, Good luck.

X