A Audio, hi-fi and car audio  forum. Audio Banter

Go Back   Home » Audio Banter forum » UK Audio Newsgroups » uk.rec.audio (General Audio and Hi-Fi)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.rec.audio (General Audio and Hi-Fi) (uk.rec.audio) Discussion and exchange of hi-fi audio equipment.

Too neat to waste...



 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #821 (permalink)  
Old September 14th 06, 12:44 PM posted to uk.rec.audio
MiNe 109
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 109
Default Too neat to waste...

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"MINe 109" wrote in message


Did Stereo Review and S&V fund DBTs?

Yes, AFAIK the authors of a goodly number of articles
that included the results of DBTs were paid reasonably
well.

Funded indirectly, then. Presumably the authors were paid
for the article, not the test itself.

Right. Note that it was the authors themselves, many of whom were
independent subcontractors, that footed the bill for the blind tests.
These
are the tests that Atkinson says that Stereophile can't afford.


What Stereophile can't afford is unpopular articles.


Well that, and Stereophile can't afford to rock its own boat very much.


I agree that Atkinson can't afford them - he can't afford the
consequences.
IMO the probabable results of fairly-run equipment tests would eviscerate
his magazine's technical stance that just about everything sounds
different,
and reduce or eliminate his reviewer's ability to invent what many
purchasers perceive to be facts.


Gotta like those measurements.


Some of them are botched and misleading to raise irrelevant concerns.


The price of transparency.

They're even compared to the subjective impression.


Comparing data to noise doesn't shed a lot of light.


Comparing subjective impressions to measurements can be enlightening.

Note that subscribers get this hype about how authoratative SP is, while
advertisers are told that SP is a magazine of opinion.


Authoritative? I'm a subscriber, and I haven't noticed SP claiming to be
the last word for anything.


One example of many:

http://www.stereophile.com/news/10170/

"Stereophile Magazine, published monthly, was founded in 1962 and is the
country's oldest and largest-circulation magazine reviewing high-end audio
components. Stereophile Magazine provides the world's most authoritative
information about high-end audio and music systems."


LOL! All bow down to the masthead boilerplate!

Finally, should anybody lose their mind and think that Middius is being
honest when he paints me as being Stereophile's only critic:

http://www.randi.org/jr/121004science.html#11


Middius doesn't say that, and the Randi thing is silly as Stereophile
doesn't make supernatural claims.

Stephen
  #822 (permalink)  
Old September 14th 06, 02:04 PM posted to uk.rec.audio
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16
Default Too neat to waste...


MINe 109 wrote:
Arny criticized Atkinson because Stereophile borrows while S&V
buys review samples...


Seems odd for US-based magazines to be discussed in this group.
But just to put the record straight, _both_ magazines are loaned
review samples. Neither purchases review samples, except in
rare circumstances. See, for example,
http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/1194awsi/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

  #823 (permalink)  
Old September 15th 06, 07:30 AM posted to uk.rec.audio
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 277
Default Too neat to waste...


Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , MINe
109 wrote:


What Stereophile can't afford is unpopular articles.


This indicates a dliemma for many commerical magazines. They may well have
established a group of frequent readers who have views and expectations of
what they want to read in the magazine. Any change of stance or content
risks losing some of those established readers.



I don't see it as a dilemma. The established group are established
because they like the content. The content was established because it
was what the editor and staff chose to publish. Jut like it was never a
dilemma for magazines like Stereo Review to print reviews which
routinely claimed that certain components sound just like all others in
the same catagory. Both reflected the beliefs and experiences of each
magazines' editors and staff. Each also has their audience. I don't
believe that either operates/operated out of fear of ****ing off the
readers with review content.




In the longer term, newer readers might start buying the mag. But changes
of content can be risky. So any sigificant change may be "unpopular" if it
conflicts with expectations of those who are used to seeing what they have
become accustomed to in the mag.



Over he years Stereophile has evolved and has published many a review
or article that managaed to anger some of it's readers. Yet the
magazine survives. I have never heard of any instane that a review has
been rejected due to the oinions expressed. IOW there is nothing to my
knowledge to prevent a reviewer from stating they cannot distinguish a
product from others like it by sound. I see no evidence that any
reviewe does not believe the content of their review.


Scott

  #824 (permalink)  
Old September 15th 06, 03:23 PM posted to uk.rec.audio
Iain Churches
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 617
Default Too neat to waste...


wrote in message
oups.com...

MINe 109 wrote:
Arny criticized Atkinson because Stereophile borrows while S&V
buys review samples...


Seems odd for US-based magazines to be discussed in this group.
But just to put the record straight, _both_ magazines are loaned
review samples. Neither purchases review samples, except in
rare circumstances. See, for example,
http://www.stereophile.com/asweseeit/1194awsi/

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile



Thanks for putting the record straight John. It is well-known
that the majority of reviewers borrow the equipment about
which they are to write, and enough of us here are involved
in the audio industry to confirm this.

But Arny will be Arny:-))

Iain



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 12:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.SEO by vBSEO 3.0.0
Copyright ©2004-2025 Audio Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.