The Absurdity of Some Recent Audio Reviews in Stereophile.

marty

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
3,025
4,167
2,520
United States
I should begin by saying that I like Stereophile Magazine. In fact, I adore it. If I were asked to name something else that comes to my mailbox every month that I look forward to with equal enthusiasm, I would be hard pressed to provide another answer, with the possible exception of TAS and Gramophone. I should also mention that I appreciate just how hard it is to review audio gear for a living. Although to many of us it sounds like a dream job which allows the opportunity to hear the very best and latest gear, I’m sure that in reality, with limited time to complete thorough evaluations and publication deadlines constantly at hand, the actual job is harder than we might have guessed. I also like Stereophile’s commitment to providing technical measurements that gives the reader additional information that might be important or useful in trying to assess the full measure of a piece of gear under discussion.

But enough accolades. Despite these strengths, there are some obvious and tragic examples of audio reviewing that really leave me shaking my head at the stupidity of remarks that are made by people who should know better. One wonders- why is it we never, ever see a bad review in Stereophile? (I thought the days of “everything is great” were over when Julian Hirsch left the field? Apparently, not.)

Two fine examples can be found in September's Stereophile. In discussing a Cary CD player, Mike Fremer comments that “the sound….was never less than complimentary to every disc played, even those that were warm and mid-bass heavy, or slightly rolled off on top- another indicator of the skill with which the player has been voiced”. Mikey; two things. First: “the sound….was never less than complimentary to every disc played”. What the hell does this even mean? “Second, “….the skill with which the player has been voiced.”? Are you kidding me? Look at the damn frequency response Mikey. It’s ruler flat from 10Hz to 20KHz. Do you even know what the word “voiced” means? You generally need some deviation in frequency response to have any sort of genuine voicing options at all. Seems like a ridiculous comment to me. But as enjoyable as that gobblygook was to read, it was not quite the equal of John Atkinson’s review of the Violoncello II speakers.

Get this. Here is a speaker that shows a frequency response characterized by a rising top end over 6K that is up 5 dB between 10KHz and 20KHz! It’s so insufferable that Atkinson had to insert a 600-ohm series resistor in the tweeter feeds just to reduce the level above 10KHz to acceptability. In fact, he said the ionic tweeter sensitivity is “too high for a completely neutral on-axis response” so he had to resort to “toe-in” just to listen to the damn thing without frying his ears. Atkinson says “this won’t be an issue in a well-damped large room”, but meanwhile the top end is so hot in his room you can fry an egg on it. Add to the fact that the impulse response is a total train wreck with out of phase driver responses and level mismatches that are a sonic embarrassment, and you simply have to shudder when you read his final conclusion that the speaker is “highly recommended”!!! John, what the hell are you thinking?

Wouldn’t it be really nice for a change if a reviewer wrote something honest that was totally believable in an audio review? How about “although the dynamics were impressive, the basic flaws for a speaker of this price ($80K) leads me to conclude that you can do a lot better for far less money elsewhere. In fact, based on the fundamental anomalies of frequency response and impulse response, the speaker essentially sucks and you’d have to be nuts to even think about owning these”. I know that many folks including me have beat up Valin for saying that everything he seems to test recently is “the best”. But its not just the occassional review in TAS that lacks credibility. Stereophile has done a great job of displaying their own lack of credibility in the two examples I cited. Please don’t get me wrong. I don’t want to discourage them from reviewing the latest gear. But what I’d like to see is more reviews that reflect the reviewer’s honest opinions. And not a review that is couched in language so as to meet the following standard: “ Jeez, these guys spent a lot of money to advertise with us so I have to figure how to say something nice about the product even though it really isn’t very good. I just have to figure a way to say it so our average reader can’t figure that out yet the manufacturer will continue to advertise with us!"

Do you have your own tale of dumb audio equipment reviews? Please share them. We all need a good laugh now and then and I’m sure there are plenty of equipment reviews out there to laugh about.
 
Last edited:

Ron Party

WBF Founding Member
Apr 30, 2010
2,457
13
0
Oakland, CA
In discussing a Cary CD player, Mike Fremer comments that “the sound….was never less than complimentary to every disc played, even those that were warm and mid-bass heavy, or slightly rolled off on top- another indicator of the skill with which the player has been voiced”. Mikey; two things. First: “the sound….was never less than complimentary to every disc played”. What the hell does this even mean? “Second, “….the skill with which the player has been voiced.”? Are you kidding me? Look at the damn frequency response Mikey. It’s ruler flat from 10Hz to 20KHz. Do you even know what the word “voiced” means? You generally need some deviation in frequency response to have any sort of genuine voicing options at all.

<snip>

Do you have your own tale of dumb audio equipment reviews? Please share them. We all need a good laugh now and then and I’m sure there are plenty of equipment reviews out there to laugh about.
That IS funny!
 

Johnny Vinyl

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 16, 2010
8,570
51
38
Calgary, AB
But what I’d like to see is more reviews that reflect the reviewer’s honest opinions. And not a review that is couched in language so as to meet the following standard: “ Jeez, these guys spent a lot of money to advertise with us so I have to figure how to say something nice about the product even though it really isn’t very good. I just have to figure a way to say it so our average reader can’t figure that out yet the manufacturer will continue to advertise with us!.

Welcome to the real world! And frankly, I don't think it'll ever change. To expect complete 100% impartiality from any reviewer associated with any publication is a pipedream. Would be nice though!

John
 

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
12,467
11,363
4,410
Look at the damn frequency response Mikey. It’s ruler flat from 10Hz to 20KHz

i'm not saying the review was correct; in fact i rarely read reviews of digital products since i'm typically not that interested in them. however; Mikey never sees the measurement data until after he writes his reviews. it's possible you were inferring that all digital players have a flat response from 10hz to 20khz; but you did not say that.
 

DWR

New Member
Jul 26, 2010
262
10
0
Western burbs of Detroit
This is why I never use stereophile or tas equipment reviews when considering the purchase of gear. I like and subscribe to both magazines, I totally agree with Steves point about selling advertising, a lot of the equipment that I have would never be reviewed (good or bad) in either magazine because they are small companies offering hand built equipment. I use the music reviews more than anything in both magazines to find new music like this months tas I just ordered Standing Next to a Mountain a Jimi Hendrix tribute album by Steinar Gregertsen a Norwegian slide guitarist. This is why I find both mags are still worth subscribing to.
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
This is why I never use stereophile or tas equipment reviews when considering the purchase of gear. I like and subscribe to both magazines, I totally agree with Steves point about selling advertising, a lot of the equipment that I have would never be reviewed (good or bad) in either magazine because they are small companies offering hand built equipment. I use the music reviews more than anything in both magazines to find new music like this months tas I just ordered Standing Next to a Mountain a Jimi Hendrix tribute album by Steinar Gregertsen a Norwegian slide guitarist. This is why I find both mags are still worth subscribing to.

Personally, I think the absurdity is people continually making baseless accusations of Stereophile of linking advertising with reviews. John Atkinson has provided the statistics to refute these allegations and yet people still accuse them of unethical practices. Not only that, I think at the least, it's defaming SP unless anyone can present any corrobable evidence to back up their allegations (yeah so far lot's of rumors and inuendos from disgruntled manufacturers). So far, no one has ever come forward and until then, it's just another baseless accusation by conspiracists IMHO.

If audiophiles think that print magazines survive on subscriptions, then they clearly don't understand the publishing industry. They are a for profit business. Sit down and calculate the costs involved in a print magazine: paying the staff, writers, editors, graphic artists, etc (note that SP pays their writers the best in the industry); paying for the printing costs which ain't cheap (esp. with the price of paper going up all the time); shipping costs that aren't cheap either; rent; travel; phone bills; shipping bills; mass mailings that cost 100-200K; hopefully you get the idea that running a print mag isn't cheap. In fact, the statistics show that it actually costs a magazine $80 or more/subscription. But all magazines try and make back that investment by building their subscriber base and distribution (subscriber being more important since SP is one of the only magazines whose subscription numbers are audited unlike TAS) so they can charge more for their advertising. That's how it works gentlemen. Manufacturers want maximum exposure.

Now that doesn't take into account maybe smaller, niche based, targeted publications who aim with a more limited distribution to get greater product sell through on their advertising.

Now that's not to say other audio magazines don't sell their covers for instance.
 
Last edited:

Phelonious Ponk

New Member
Jun 30, 2010
8,677
23
0
Personally, I think the absurdity is people continually accusing Stereophile of linking advertising with reviews. John Atkinson has provided the statistics to refute these allegations and yet people still accuse them of unethical practices. Not only that, I think at the least, it's defaming SP unless anyone can present any corrobable evidence to back up their allegations (yeah so far lot's of rumors and inuendos from disgruntled manufacturers). So far, no one has ever come forward and until then, it's just another baseless accusation by conspiracists IMHO.

Now that's not to say other audio magazines don't sell their covers for instance.

I agree, Myles. I don't think Stereo Review, or any other reputable publication is selling their reviews. I just think guys like Fremer and Atkinson write bad fiction. I've read the few copies of Stereo Review I've picked up in the last couple of years in the same spirit with which I read the summer reading edition of Esquire. Saves a lot of angst. :)

P
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,515
1,774
1,850
Metro DC
"...not corrupt. just incompetent."

Now that's not to say other audio magazines don't sell their covers for instance.

So Myles" inquiring minds want to know." Who is selling their cover?:)
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
"...not corrupt. just incompetent."

Now that's not to say other audio magazines don't sell their covers for instance.

So Myles" inquiring minds want to know." Who is selling their cover?:)

Incompetence is different than corrupt :)
 

Johnny Vinyl

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
May 16, 2010
8,570
51
38
Calgary, AB
"...not corrupt. just incompetent."

Now that's not to say other audio magazines don't sell their covers for instance.

So Myles" inquiring minds want to know." Who is selling their cover?:)

I need one of them "popcorn eating" smileys as I'd like to read about a little tell-all as well.
 

amirm

Banned
Apr 2, 2010
15,813
37
0
Seattle, WA
I think the biggest issue reviewers have is that they need to get equipment to review for free. If you write a lot of bad reviews, then the manufacturers avoid you if they have a choice. Unless they find a business model to adopt what Consumer Reports does with buying their own stuff to review, you will always have this ultimate conflict of interest. At least for high-end gear.

That said, a lot of other magazines get stuff for free while being at least somewhat critical.
 

FrantzM

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
6,455
29
405
Great Thread Marty , Kudos

It is difficult to paint SP and TAS as angels whose sole purpose is to serve the customers... I do understand the difficulty to make a business profitable but it seems to clash with stating the truth ... I believe too often some (all) these magazines resort to wordsmith ... many reviews conclusions...conclude absolutely nothing .. they leave it to the customers entirely .. negating the whole purpose of a review .. Marty's example of the Violoncello review is one case in point .. If one has to use a resistor to tame a tweeter the speaker is clearly incompetently built ... PERIOD .. and that is an issue in any commercial product let alone a $80 K one ... Oh!! There are more example like this .. so many more ..

I will not get into accusing any magazine of impropriety but more and more reviews from SP and TAS are absurd , utter nonsense ... I only cited these two .. there are others ...Oh yes ... read and be edified

P.S. Just read Amirm's last post : I agree with him

I think the biggest issue reviewers have is that they need to get equipment to review for free. If you write a lot of bad reviews, then the manufacturers avoid you if they have a choice. Unless they find a business model to adopt what Consumer Reports does with buying their own stuff to review, you will always have this ultimate conflict of interest. At least for high-end gear.

That said, a lot of other magazines get stuff for free while being at least somewhat critical.
 

Alan Sircom

[Industry Expert]/Member Sponsor
Aug 11, 2010
302
17
363
"...not corrupt. just incompetent."

Now that's not to say other audio magazines don't sell their covers for instance.

So Myles" inquiring minds want to know." Who is selling their cover?:)

That's simple. Go find a market where there is only one magazine, with no online rivals, forums or blogs. Preferably find it in a language that few people outside of that country understand. That magazine is the one title that could make money from selling its cover. The rest of us have to put up with pesky rivals who would at one point discover and make sure to expose that fact. The only upside to this is we are their pesky rival, too.

Besides, selling the cover would be a very bad idea. For newsstand trade, the cover is the magazine's main selling tool. We use it to sell people the idea of the magazine, rather than use it as an advertising page. And in some countries (like the UK) newsstand accounts for anywhere between 50-90% of your total sales, so it's no trivial thing.
 

Gregadd

WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
10,515
1,774
1,850
Metro DC
Alan-Did I say how much I enjoyed Hi- Fi +. I first encountered it on a newsstand at Borders Books. I understand you are now part of a group that includes the absolute sound among others. I did subscribe at one time. Eventually it would arrive. I am not sure what your magazines current presence is here in the USA. You don't want to compete against tas. Perhaps you can inform us.
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
That's simple. Go find a market where there is only one magazine, with no online rivals, forums or blogs. Preferably find it in a language that few people outside of that country understand. That magazine is the one title that could make money from selling its cover. The rest of us have to put up with pesky rivals who would at one point discover and make sure to expose that fact. The only upside to this is we are their pesky rival, too.

Besides, selling the cover would be a very bad idea. For newsstand trade, the cover is the magazine's main selling tool. We use it to sell people the idea of the magazine, rather than use it as an advertising page. And in some countries (like the UK) newsstand accounts for anywhere between 50-90% of your total sales, so it's no trivial thing.

Well Alan, might I add that the three audio magazines that did it are no longer in business.

And in their case, the cover was sold to a company with a product being reviewed in that issue.

Not to mention, getting a bigger premium for the front as compared to the back cover :) Don't we wish we could have a couple of back covers to pay for advertising ;)
 

kach22i

WBF Founding Member
Apr 21, 2010
1,591
210
1,635
Ann Arbor, Michigan
www.kachadoorian.com
If you write a lot of bad reviews, then the manufacturers avoid you if they have a choice.
I think the above is the most important factor, not to chase them away.

A few weeks ago I mailed a check to Sterophile, hope to get a free tee shirt too. It has been almost ten years since I've had a subscription, but ended up buying a issue every couple of years on impulse.

I like reading before I go to bed, can't really do that with a laptop. I do miss the small format Sterophile had 20 years ago and Listener Magazine used to have, they were the right size for bedtime.
 

Alan Sircom

[Industry Expert]/Member Sponsor
Aug 11, 2010
302
17
363
Alan-Did I say how much I enjoyed Hi- Fi +. I first encountered it on a newsstand at Borders Books. I understand you are now part of a group that includes the absolute sound among others. I did subscribe at one time. Eventually it would arrive. I am not sure what your magazines current presence is here in the USA. You don't want to compete against tas. Perhaps you can inform us.

Glad you like the magazine. HF+ became a part of the NextScreen group (which includes TAS) a few years ago. Our international subscriptions system is slowly becoming joined up in its thinking, as we are currently down to just three different ways that end up with subscriptions going to two different subscription providers, depending on which route you choose to take. That can cause 'issues' with the issues (like you might get three copies of the same issue, then none the next). Because of the transatlantic nature of the whole venture (parts of the magazine are based in London, UK, other parts 100 miles away in Hampshire, UK and still more are 4,907 miles away in Austin, TX), every time you iron out a bug in this process, the law of unexpected consequences kicks in. Last time, we managed to mail out on time and to everyone in the USA, but accidentally unleashed several hungry Bengal tigers on the streets of Växjö in Sweden, which was both unexpected and inconvenient. Fortunately, they were so stunned by the sonic majesty of the Teleborg water tower that they were easily recaptured.

We don't compete with TAS; we run with our TAS homies.

Word.
 

Alan Sircom

[Industry Expert]/Member Sponsor
Aug 11, 2010
302
17
363
Well Alan, might I add that the three audio magazines that did it are no longer in business.

And in their case, the cover was sold to a company with a product being reviewed in that issue.

Not to mention, getting a bigger premium for the front as compared to the back cover :) Don't we wish we could have a couple of back covers to pay for advertising ;)

A magazine of nothing but back covers would be useful. A dull read, granted. But it could be used to pay off Frankie Big Potatoes and his gang. Who would have thought taking out a loan with a mobster to pay for a giant panda in a clown costume for a weekend would be so expensive?

Oh well, what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas. Until it appears on YouTube.
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,236
81
1,725
New York City
A magazine of nothing but back covers would be useful. A dull read, granted. But it could be used to pay off Frankie Big Potatoes and his gang. Who would have thought taking out a loan with a mobster to pay for a giant panda in a clown costume for a weekend would be so expensive?

Oh well, what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas. Until it appears on YouTube.

Don't you think that there are some subsribers that just look thru the pictures and ads? Hell with reading :)
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing