I read a lot of the mags,TAS and Phile since the early 1980's and often found the diatribe between the two mags quite entertaining,this before info-tainment was a buzzword(buzzword wasn't around then either).
The components of interest to me were the ones that got raves from both mags and if Peter Aczel gave the gear his blessing, then it was a done deal.
Well the fact that there were a lot less components to review and compare back then also helped I guess.
So if you sprung for that NAD 3020, you were pretty sure your $198.00 was a good investment.And a lot of people did, and a lot of people today are paying more for a used 3020 than when it was new(that and the 15 ohm LS3/5a's but that's another issue).So if TAS doesn't think Mikey's turntable is the best is that reason enough to be concerned about either magazines viewpoints on other more affordable components?I don't think so.I don't think either magazine or any hifi reviewer really is the last bastian of all audio truths,and I think that this is something that both magazines have matured enough to know that such divisions are really detrimental to this hobby.I think that the calibre of reviewing equipment today,while not as in depth as in the past, is still relevant to peak our curiosity to go seek out the gear and make up our own minds.
Whether HP likes what Mikey likes means nothing to me, hell one worked for the other,and they probably had different views back then.Who is right, who is god? Who cares?
When they both agree that a VPI Scout is a good deal( like the 3020)then VPI,both mags and the consumer benefit.In my view we need more win win scenerios like this if we are to really keep this hobby alive.

I do not believe that price had much to do with MF liking the Continuum so much he laid down mucho green to join the club. Even at an industry acomodatin price of over $45K, I do not find MF laying this kind of money down if he did not HEAR the difference between his Simon Yorke and the Continuum.

The Rockport TT is in the same league quality and performance wise and it did not move MF to ownership. Nor did MF jump to a SME 30 which is more than his Yorke as well. I do not think the people at SME are fools or lack any scientific knowledge or training to not know how to make a superb TT. The evidence of their product line shows they know how to make world class TT prouducts.

This has more to do with magazine one-upsmanship than any other issue. I cannot think of anyone on this planet who knows more about TT/Cart/Phono Stage sound quality than MF.

What are the dissenter's credentials? What TT does he own? How much vinyl does he listen to daily? Does he have a personal investment into the format to really understand the minute differences between all the possible set up parameters for TT operation?

Most of us would think the Simon Yorke is over the top at over $15K anyway, and would be beyond totally satisfied to own MF's "old rig".! I do not think MF missed this one. When I do get to have my personal audition here in Atlanta I will let you know my thoughts, the thoughts of one who has no axe to grind or any possible chance of ownership.

Forgetting the tonearm for moment, the Continuum does all of the physical requirements that can make for a superb record spinning experience, mainly platter speed stability and a near total lack of any vibration/motion in the bearing/platter combination and the near total reduction of motor vibration reaching the platter. This to me is where the mass of both the Continuum and the Rockport shine and put them at the head of the class and make their silent "record spinning" abiltiy way above the rest.

For someone at this level to not take tweeking to a new artform in terms of cart/tonearm/wiring/phonostage combinations would be ludicrous. The massiveness of the two top contenders makes all of the arm fussing worth while and should make differences totally discernable. Once you achieve near totally black backgrounds other issues will surface as sonic artifacts masked my lesser platter/drive system. The two top contenders would leave all of the vinyl pressing problems come to the surface...if you will?

When you look at possibly all of the manufacturing tolerances that must (might) be below 1 one-thousandth of an inch that go into the manufacturing of the Continuum or the Rockport...this is where time is money...quality maching takes time. I will also bet that some parts made for some Continuums never make it out of the QC department and find a metal recycling bin on the property.

Just my take. As I have said many times...He who pays decides. I would find it so hard to believe Mikey missed this one. I would also doubt that the owners of the Wavac Amps MF reviewed, liked, and measured poorly are worried one bit about it or are awake at night worrying about what some writer at TAS thinks. If we have all learned anything about this hobby it is that measurements matter little in areas of music and emotional attachment. The joy is that we vinyl players know that even with our less than Continuum performance vinyl is still an excellent medium. I doubt there are many on this planet hearing more from vinyl than MF. I sense sour grapes, not a poor product.

This last statement is obsurd. The Guys that make LPs, make lps. I have so many bad sounding LPs that you do not need much audio or music training to understand some have no clue to proper RIAA curves or groove spacing. You don't even need a Continuum or a Rockport to hear it either. Fortunately most of these companies are out of the lp business and we are left with most who use virgin vinyl from 100 to 200 grams and understand who their market is.

What I don't get is why you choose MF to bang on when TAS could, would be , and is probably wrong. There is an adgenda here. MF's Music Angle is doing nicely, I believe.

Haha, that would be hilarious. You should request that from him. : )

First of all, the recordings may not be bad, just a bad transfer to disc. This has nothing to do with the competence of the recording engineer. His job is to capture it to tape as in the olden days. Anyone who owns SACD versions of the recent RCA releases (I do) knows that many of the original 3 channel master tapes sounded wonderful

Jim, are you arguing with DUP?

You'd be better served trying to get a straight story from Phil Spector about Lana Clarkson.

Has he ventured into the realm of Zanden, Continuum, AVA, Lagacy, or Matt Oreo yet?

I know...a battle of wits between 2 unarmed opponents! LOL
Who needs The Three Faces Of Eve?

Quote:
Both being such pro ears, come up with exact opposite reactions to a piece of equipment that costs $100,000 !!!!!! How can something that sells for such a price give exact opposite reactions?

It should be noted that Jonathan Valin, who commented on the Continuum in TAS's report from the 2007 CES, has never auditioned the turntable and arm except at shows. His comments on its ultimate sound quality are, with all due respect, suspect. It is also possible, though I wouldn't go so far as to say probable, that his chagrin (and that of others at TAS) for Michael getting the first review sample of the Continuum, along with his misplaced blame on Michael Fremer for publicizing a possible ethical lapse on his part -- see Art Dudley's March column -- might have contributed to his discussion of this product.

Please note that regardless of whether or not this scenario is correct, such politicking has no place at Stereophile.

Regarding EMM Labs gear, John Marks had a transport and DAC on loan for possible coverage in his 5th Element column and has since shipped them to me for review.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

I have been overseas at the Top Audio Show in Rome and returned to find this thread. Jeez so much foolishness. I have played CD-Rs made from the Caliburn at shows in Denver, Milan, Rome and the UK and they are always met with astonishment even when the source was not divulged. That's just the way it is. Tom Biery, who is overseeing the excellent Warner Brothers vinyl issues heard REM's "Everybody Hurts" on one CD-R from the Continuum at CES2006 and said although he worked that song as a publicist and heard it a million times, he'd NEVER heard it sound that good. Now, as to why a CD-R sounds that good, well that's another discussion. As for Valin's comments. Let me just say two things: the sound in the rooms where the Caliburn has been on display where Valin has heard it, has never been all that good. At HE2005 it was good enough for another TAS reviewer to come running out to tell me it was about the best analog he'd ever heard. In fact, I believe he's buying one. Valin literally begged for the 'table for review but they refused to give it to him, so take that for what it's worth when you read his comments. I just sent Valin two CD-Rs from the turntable to hear on his own system. I know how good they sound. I played them in Rome and saw and heard the reaction. If he's a "mensch" he'll respond honestly and if he does, I believe he'll say they sounded amazing. I'll tell you another interesting thing: after seeing the Caliburn at HE2005 I didn't ask to review it because I didn't think they were going to offer it to anyone for review because of the expense and the hassle involved in shipping and setting up. They asked me at the end of the show if I'd like to review it. Every other reviewer asked for it but they wanted me to review it because they felt I'd give it a fair shake and they felt I'd give it an honest review. I think I did.

Listen: when Dick Vandersteen set up the Quattros, he brought along an LP he'd produced, recorded by Kavi Alexander and mastered by Tim DeParavicini that he uses as a reference when setting up speakers in systems with turntables. He's heard A LOT and heard that LP on many turntables. I wish I had a picture of his face when his record was playing on the Caliburn...

I have sent an MP3 of "Uncle John's Band" from the Caliburn to many readers who have contacted me via my website and even as an MP3 you can hear how great the 'table sounds (don't ask me why either).

As for some of the nasty crap posted here about me, and Tracking Angle and the rest, I don't have time for a-holes. I hardly have time to read delusions about my motives (etc.) The difference between a TNT and the Continuum is enormous. I didn't go into hock to "show off"

Michael,

Thank you for taking the time to post. The information you provide is both helpful and interesting.

I, too, have made CD-R's of my analog setup using both an Alesis MasterLink and a Tascam DV-RA1000. The CD-R's sound great. I only have one recording where I own both the CD and LP. In this one circumstance, my CD-R of the LP unarguably sounds better than the CD. They have the same mastering credits, etc. I won't speculate as to why the CD-R sounds better.

I am of the camp that loves knowing that hand made assaults on the high end are out there. I also enjoy knowing that at least one is in the hands of someone who really appreciates the art, engineering and love that went into building it.

Many, many hours of happy listening!

Quote:
Michael,

Thank you for taking the time to post. The information you provide is both helpful and interesting..... I also enjoy knowing that at least one is in the hands of someone who really appreciates the art, engineering and love that went into building it.

Many, many hours of happy listening!

Thanks. You know, when I started reading TAS back in 1974 or so, I couldn't afford any of the gear being reviewed but instead of being bitter and jealous about it and attacking those who could afford it, I set about finding a way to own it for myself. Rather than tearing down, I chose to try and build up. Guys like DUP, who sounds so cynical, and jealous, have it all backwards... he's on my case for trying and failing with the print magazine. I have succeeded beyond my wildest expectations with the turntable set up DVD but he didn't mention that because it's more fun for him to make light of a failure. I wonder what he's tried?

Michael,

I completely agree with your attitude and approach.

By the way, I am not much of an analog guy even though I started in this hobby about the same time as you apprently did. Yet I seriously enjoy reading your columns; I learn, I am amused and they contain a certain joy. I also respect that you form opinions based upon actual personal expereince, not assumption or bias.

Don't bother wondering what DUP has tried, Michael. It ain't much and what there is of it ain't pretty. It's like the stuff he posts - well worth ignoring.

Glad to hear you sent some CD-R stuff to Valin and that you think he's man enough to admit how good they sound when he has heard them. I'd rather think that Harley wouldn't have a guy on his staff who'd carry on some petty jealosy game in print.

Your upgrade to the Continuum is, perhaps, the extreme case all of us get involved in as we try to upgrade our analog systems. After a point - and these days that point can come at a fairly modest price level - a significant improvement takes a really substantial price jump. Hey, it's worth saving for, right?

I don't mind so much the insanely priced stuff. It's entertainment more than anything else. What gets my goat is that all reviews are positive, so you can never tell what's good and what isn't. Nothing is reviewed against a reference, so it's impossible to compare how components stack up. Furthermore, if major component isn't reviewed, you never know if it's because it was because they didn't like it enough to review it or because the reviewers were too swamped to get to it.

I wrote this on another topic in this forum, but I think it's time that all you reviewers started being on OUR side. Stop being in bed with manufacturers and dealers. Stop pushing products and start reviewing them. Stop perpetuating urban legends, stop buying your components at discounted prices, stop fraternizing with manufacturers and dealers and stop luring these same manufacturers and dealers to advertise on your own web sites. Disclosure is not enough.

This guy DUP is clueless. He clearly can't write or spell and now it's obvious he can't read. I reviewed a NAIM CD player costing $28,000 and basically said there wasn't that much difference between it and the $6500 CD player I use. You'd think that at least would make him happy, but of course that's not good enough for DUP.

DUP is one of those guys who's consumed by jealousy. He can't afford something, so it must not be good or worthwhile. Guys like him don't hang around the car magazines complaining about Ferrari reviews and demanding KIA reviews so why is audio infected with such people? I don't understand it. Twenty years ago I couldn't afford more than Spica TC-50s and some Hafler gear. It was great stuff for the money and I had a swell time with it. But I read about the expensive stuff and enjoyed the reviews while dreaming of owning it. And now my dreams have come true. That's the difference between my experience and DUP's. Instead of striving for what he can't now have, he'd rather bitch and moan, and attack to try to bring everyone down to his level. That's the definition of a LOSER.

Unfortunately, in my experience with cars, clothing, wine, food, you name it, generally, when you pay more you get more. It's a sad fact of life. Which is not to say there aren't some great bargains to be had and some bad stuff that's overpriced. But generally, you don't last long making crap and selling it for too much.

As for missing the 21st century? Hardly. I have multiple iPods too. And CD players and SACD players. Why do you have a stick up your butt about vinyl? And why do you so foolishly think that everything that's new is better than anything that's old? That's imbecilic. Ooops. Just answered my own question.

Quote:
In April issue there are remarks from fellow writers over there at the magazine, how MF is basically touting and pushing OBSOLETE technology, as soemthing so great, I thinks in MF world, he may be missing the 21st century? They also implied in a subtle way the insantiry of MF's raves about $45K CD players!!! Since CD only is OBSOLETE, They brought up Zander, now what else will MF rave about in teh absurd pice levels? A feloow reviewer mentioned anything over $2500 teh improvements are probably minimal, basically inaudible, except for the ones who wanna be known as ...weird? I want MF to test his $45K distorion CD only player aginst a "rerasoanble" say $2K unit in SACD, and you tell me his CD only distortion machine will sound better than the cheaper SACD....fuzz from his CD only player is not music, it's DISTORTION effects on the reproduced recording. Me thinks StereoPhile should start reviewing stuff based on reality, and not it's odd ball usueless stuff, $45K Cd only players, $100K TT Pieces of wire with no merit for it's absurd prices....It's become fantasy land, decades ago, StereoPhile was useful Dynaco Fisher, AR, Advents, you know all teh CHEAP stuff for mortals, Audio Research even was in there as the ultimate.... A $5K Cd only player, is a useless product in teh 21st century, and it DISTORTS.

Quote:
I wrote this on another topic in this forum, but I think it's time that all you reviewers started being on OUR side. Stop being in bed with manufacturers and dealers. Stop pushing products and start reviewing them. Stop perpetuating urban legends, stop buying your components at discounted prices, stop fraternizing with manufacturers and dealers and stop luring these same manufacturers and dealers to advertise on your own web sites. Disclosure is not enough.

I really enjoyed this rant. You make so many outrageous charges with no examples. Most of the readers with whom I speak do feel reviewers are on their side and do feel they can rely upon our reviews for what a review can provide. Reviewers are not "in bed" with manufacturers. Speaking personally, I hardly know any dealers and rarely set foot in audio stores, though I think it would be better for reviewers to do so. "Stop pushing products?" I don't think I do, nor do most reviewers, though we usually prefer to bring to your attention products that we think are good so most reviews tend to be positive. We pass on bad ones. What "urban legends" are you referring to? "Stop buying components at discount prices?" That's funny! There are too many reviewers who don't pay anything. They have "long term permanent loans." And you're complaining about about reviewers getting a discount? Why shouldn't they get an accommodation price? Reviewers certainly don't get paid big bucks for the time and effort that goes into the job when it's done correctly. No matter what reviewers do there are complaints. I BUY the gear in my system (yes I get a discount). But that makes some people complain that because I own the gear I have a "vested interest" in it coming out on top when compared to other gear I'm reviewing. So I'm corrupt if I take "long term loans" and I'm corrupt if I buy the stuff. In the minds of some people I'm just plain corrupt no matter what I do. In fact, if I bought at retail, I'd be even MORE corrupt because then I'd have even a BIGGER vested interest in seeing that my investment came out on top compared to other gear.

"Stop fraternizing with manufacturers?" Are you insane? What does that mean? Don't talk to them at audio shows? Lock ourselves in our hotel rooms? Don't get to know them as people? There is no better way to understand a company's ethics and business practices than getting to know the people who own them. Your naivte is incredible. If you think a dinner is sufficient to sway a review, then stop reading reviews. How do you think products end up in stores? Manufacturers take retailers out to DINNER (heaven forbid). They TALK. They FRATERNIZE. The give retailers DISCOUNTS. Retailers choose products to carry and push because they believe in the products and they believe in the people behind those products. Business is conducted by PEOPLE. That does not mean they are CORRUPT. Don't "lure" manufacturers to your website? How do you propose I get PAID for MY WORK running a website, without advertising? Disclosure is not enough? What is enough? WORKING FOR FREE? LIVING IN POVERTY? GROW UP. No matter what many of us do or say, folks like you will think we're 'corrupt' so what you're saying is be called 'corrupt' and live in poverty, and do your work for free. People love my website. They find it entertaining and informative. I work hard running it and I expect to be paid for my work. I get paid through advertising. One of my advertisers is THE Music. They import Kuzma. Read the review I wrote in the April issue of the big Kuzma 'table. Does that read like a "corrupt" review? Your answer will probably be yes. It's a great product and it got a generally positive review, but it has a sound and I described that sound as accurately as I could and it's not a sound all will love. There's no way that review could be construed as being "corrupted" by advertising, unless you think I'm just plain corrupt. In that case there's no winning you over, so why should I even care what you think? In fact, I don't.

Hi Mike,

Allow me to retort:

To start with, I don't think you're corrupt. In fact, I don't think any of the Stereophile writers and editors are corrupt. I think you guys try to do well and are full of good intentions. I really mean that.

To address some of the other points:

You said: "...though we usually prefer to bring to your attention products that we think are good so most reviews tend to be positive. We pass on bad ones."

If you pass on reviewing bad products, that becomes problematic because then readers have no idea if a particular product wasn't reviewed because it was bad or because you didn't get a chance to review it. Furthermore, it gives the impression that you like everything you hear and that "it's all good".

You said: ""Stop buying components at discount prices?" That's funny! There are too many reviewers who don't pay anything. They have "long term permanent loans." And you're complaining about about reviewers getting a discount? Why shouldn't they get an accommodation price?"

You should not get long term loans AND discounted pricing because at best it gives the impression that you're in bed with the manufacturer, at worst, you're in bed with the manufacturer. Getting a discount on the gear you purchase puts you in a position of "owing" something to that manufacturer. It may not be an explicit thing, but it is certainly implicit and it certainly smells bad. It's a conflict of interest - plain and simple. You can't write an unbiased review on one hand, be on the side of the reader and get a discount from the manufacturer on the other. In order to be on our side, you have to be one of us and that means no special privileges.

You said: ""Stop fraternizing with manufacturers?" Are you insane? What does that mean? ...Don't get to know them as people? There is no better way to understand a company's ethics and business practices than getting to know the people who own them. Your naivte is incredible. If you think a dinner is sufficient to sway a review, then stop reading reviews. How do you think products end up in stores? Manufacturers take retailers out to DINNER (heaven forbid). They TALK. They FRATERNIZE. The give retailers DISCOUNTS. "

Yes, I do mean "don't get to know them as people". Do not form relationships with manufacturers. Do not make friends with them. Why? Conflict of interest again. You can't write an unbiased review of a product produced by your friend. No matter how well intentioned, how hard you may try, your loyalties will lie with your friend. Be one of us and that means don't have split loyalties. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Manufacturers do fraternize with dealers and they do give them discounts and that's how business is done. Well, guess what? You're not a dealer. You don't do business with the manufacturers. Your role is quite different and that means no fraternizing. It's that damn conflict of interest again.

You said: "Don't "lure" manufacturers to your website? How do you propose I get PAID for MY WORK running a website, without advertising? Disclosure is not enough? What is enough? WORKING FOR FREE? LIVING IN POVERTY? GROW UP."

I propose you get paid for your web site through advertising by people whose products you do not review. Try getting advertisement from a different industry. I don't propose you work for free or live in poverty. Alas, you have that pesky conflict of interest again. You can't rely on a manufacturer's advertising dollar for your own personal web site and write an unbiased review. Secondly, what smells even more is that you're using your position as a stereophile editor and a reviewer to forge personal relationships with manufacturers and solicit advertising on your personal web site. That's pretty bad. It really is. That's being "in bed" with someone.

You said: "No matter what many of us do or say, folks like you will think we're 'corrupt' so what you're saying is be called 'corrupt' and live in poverty, and do your work for free. People love my website. They find it entertaining and informative. I work hard running it and I expect to be paid for my work."

I don't think you're corrupt. I think that you're a decent person and that you have the best intentions at heart. However, I do see conflicts of interest and quite a few of them. These conflicts of interest make me feel that you're not on my side. By MY side, I mean the consumer side. Hence, your reviews are to a certain extent suspect. Combine that with the fact that you only produce positive reviews, hobnob with manufacturers, go on tours, raid their wine cellars and so forth and the whole thing starts to smell. Do I think that you're being deceitful or dishonest? No. But I do think that your reviews are colored, no matter how hard you try to ensure they're not, I don't think that anyone can be objective or at least unbiased under these circumstances. You're not a robot, you're not a machine. Hence, you can never separate your personal feelings and interests from your work.

Ay carumba!

I'm not interested in the fight, but it brings up a question:

Where in the industry does the reviewer fit?

Is the reviewer a consumer or an industry insider?

What is an analogous form of criticism?

Is it like some stock market "reviewers" who must keep their investments "blind" in order to avoid being charged with conflict of interest?

Are audio reviewers like food reviewers, who often try to remain anonymous so they can have an honest consumer experience?

Are reviewers industry insiders who hang with manufacturers and talk about consumers as "them?"

I asked my wife about audio reviewing, and where she'd place reviewers. She said that she would consider them "consumer advocates."

Given her definition, then readers should bring things up if they think something strays outside their definition of the role of a reviewer in the their hobby. There's no concensus on the topic, so, of course, it can turn heated!

Isn't it simpler than that, Buddha? Doesn't it boil down to if you don't find a reviewer capable, or interesting or you don't trust his objectiveness you don't read his stuff? I don't care for mangos, so I don't eat them - but I don't mind if you do.

Quote:
Isn't it simpler than that, Buddha? Doesn't it boil down to if you don't find a reviewer capable, or interesting or you don't trust his objectiveness you don't read his stuff? I don't care for mangos, so I don't eat them - but I don't mind if you do.

No, there's more to it than that. I agree with Buddha's wife in that the reviewer is the consumer advocate. As such, we expect him to act like one. It's not enough to simply ignore the column. As long as the reviewer continues in his capacity as a reviewer, I don't think we can simply close our eyes and maintain the status quo.

You know, I have another question:

Are reviewers "journalists?"

Well if there's one thing MF is sorely missing it's knowledge of the "Ignore DUP" function! Talk about slow!

Journalist? Yes

Clay can appreciate this analogy. I grew up a Cubs fan and have followed them since 1952 at the age of 5. Jack Brickhouse was the long-time voice of the Cubs and took them through all the awful years (which continue by the way) from Black and white TV. You either loved or hated Jack Brickhouse as he was all sunshine and positive comments about the Cubs, an avid cheerleader if you will.

I do not recall one disparaging word from him in all the years he called Cub games. With many 90+ loss seasons this was probably a good thing...seeing the glass half full rather than half empty all the time. Everyone knew there was much to criticize, but Jack always took the high road. The Cubs weren't terrible on purpose, they just were not a very good collection of baseball players until the likes of Santo, Kessinger, Beckert, Mr. Cub-Ernie Banks, Billy Williams and Ferguson Jenkins came together. Then the '69 Mets happened, but I digress.

Many viewers would just turn off the TV sound or listen to Lou Boudreau and Jack Quinlan, and later Vince Lloyd call the games on WGN Radio 720. Viewers had a choice. Pick your poison.

I do not read TAS as I do not care for their writing and lack of testing components. It to me is just a literary audio magazine full of opinions. Stereophile has that as well, but I truly respect the testing JA does as providing somewhat of a moral compass in which to expose design flaws...if accuracy is what you seek. Just because an amplifier's frequency response measures more like a loudspeaker does not freak me out. Since even the best loudspeakers are so much more flawed than even less expensive amplifiers are we just to fold up the tents and give it all up? No.

We all do not look for just that "total accuracy" character in our equipment. Just because it does not measure well does not mean it does not sound great or that it is not worth owning. Review the freq response graph of DUP's speakers in his home that JA did. They are far from accurate. Does he like them that way? Evidently he does.

The writers are human beings, fallible, and not subject to catering to my every whim about who, what, when, where, why, and how to interview someone or something.

This level of angst against MF by DUP is beyond rediculous and only further seperates him from the rest of us, which is probably fine with him and all of us. It is just so counter-productive, and as such, I will never read another DUP post as long as I am alive and kicking. He has now placed himself in the level of insignificant forum participant that has spoiled what once was a great form of joy, entertainment, and information sharing. I most regret that MF had to come here to defend himself which was most unnecessary and certainly of no interest to DUP who is never wrong.

If his goal in life is to be nothing but self-righteous all the time and alone...he has probably succeeded. It is a sad day when this forum has come to this.

There is an old military saying that goes, "Show me a Commanding Officer and I will tell you what his troops are like. Show me his troops and I will tell you what their Commanding Officer is like."

These sort of constant dust-ups never fail to leave me shaking my head at how dense and instinctively mistrusting people can be. People that live with that kind of delusional paranoia about conspiracies have to have a certain amount of deficiencies in that respect within their own character.

It's one thing to have a healthy skepticism within you and quite another to toss reason and rationality out the window at the drop of a hat and always assume the worst in people who have otherwise demonstrated a respectable track record.

The way I see it, I don't have to concern myself with the character of the Stereophile contributors because I trust JA to do that.

"These sort of constant dust-ups never fail to leave me shaking my head at how dense and instinctively mistrusting people can be. People that live with that kind of delusional paranoia about conspiracies have to have a certain amount of deficiencies in that respect within their own character."

Couldn't agree with you more.

The other day I switched off the ignore to read a response DUP had made to something I'd posted. There was absolutely no relationship to anything I had said in his alleged response. It was the written equivalent of those ravings one hears occasionally from demented street people. There was no way to continue any kind of rational discussion.

As to the question someone raised whether reviewers are "journalists". Not by the classical definition, they aren't. Journalists ought to be reporters of facts. Reviewers provide qualified opinions - which is what they are hired to do. They succeed, as Michael Fremer has, based on ability and integrity.

I know it has got confusing in recent years, but that's not the reviewers fault, it's because nearly all of those folks currently masquerading as journalists deal in opinion. Create "news" if it suits your purpose. Spin, spin, spin. They're not out to inform, but to pursuade - integrity would just get in the way of achieving their goals. To label a person "Journalist" these days is a slur.

Quote:
You know, I have another question:

Are reviewers "journalists?"

I'm not sure they're journalists per se. Rather, I think they're more like opinion writers of a paper's editorial page. We just have to make sure they don't turn into an Anne Landers type of a column.

Quote:
Isn't it simpler than that, Buddha? Doesn't it boil down to if you don't find a reviewer capable, or interesting or you don't trust his objectiveness you don't read his stuff? I don't care for mangos, so I don't eat them - but I don't mind if you do.

Hi, Cheapskate!

I'm sorry, I missed your post.

I must preface this with a disclaimer: I don't care about Mr. Fremer's bennies. I agree with you wholeheartedly about how to go about choosing reading material, but I can see other people's points on this. For them, it seems that a reviewer's

The bottom line is, what does it take to get really excellent, truly realistic sound?

My Ayre C5XE is a really excellent-sounding SACD/CD player, and it costs 6 grand; I think it is worth it because nothing cheaper sounds nearly as good to me, and the really really expensive stuff is only marginally better, if at all.
The AYRE sounds A LOT BETTER to me than the units that cost between one and five grand, and the units that cost 10 or 30 grand sound only marginally better, so why go there?

For LP playback, I am using a Music Hall MMF-7 with a Benz Micro Ace cartridge ($1500 total), and it is good enough that good-quality LPs definitely sound better than the same material on CD or SACD.

In cases where I have the exact same recording on CD, SACD, and LP, there is no doubt which sounds more dynamic and realistic and has better-defined bass; the LP! The SACD is a close second, and the CD is a definite 3rd. Examples I have compared closely are Brubeck's take 5, Tomas Ornberg's Blue 5, Modern Jazz Quartet's Blues on Bach, Cantate Domino, various orchestral recordings, and the original OPUS 3 TEST RECORD, just to name a few.

If I can get playback that is incredibly realistic and dynamic using a $1500 turntable/cartridge, and the sound bests the top SACD/CD player, who really gives a damn about a unit that costs over 10 grand? Again, to me the point of diminishing returns sets in when you go much above this level.

They can talk about exotic turntables until hell freezes over and it signifies nothing to me. Mine sounds too good to bother with anything more expensive.

Or to put it another way, the secret of our hobby is knowing when to quit.

Quit spending money, that is...lol; well put!

Quote:
Or to put it another way, the secret of our hobby is knowing when to quit.

Quit?

Never!

Brief periods of bliss, relaxation, and complacency?

Yes.

But you can never really quit.

Hi Fi is like Michael Corleone...every time you try to quit, it drags you back in.

I think I have really just about reached audio nirvana at this point...but on the other hand, if I quit trying to improve the sound, I then have one less hobby, right?...lol. What fun is that?

You know, there is one thing I have to give TAS credit for. A few years ago, there seemed to be little or no attempt to mention or review anything "affordable" for the people starting out in audio. They have made a concerted effort to mention affordable components recently, and also did an article naming recommended systems for various price points.

I think that kind of thing should be a regular feature in Stereophile and TAS. If I was in charge, the way I would do it is to have one reviewer name his choice for some affordable systems every month; a regular feature. I'll bet it would improve circulation too..."Affordable systems of the month".