Hi-Fi World

[Floyddroid]

I must admit to being a bit concerned about Hi-fi World. I have bought and own every copy since it was launched right up until the present day. I hope all is well at HFW towers and it isn't to cease publication. Just a foreboding!:scratch:

[Havana]

Anything specific to base this on ??

[hal55]

I looked a few days ago and the website hadn't been updated with the new issue, seemed a bit odd.

Hal55

[Floyddroid]

Well, the recent exodus of two key members of the team one of them being the editor and the very fact that neither of the two were mentioned in the magazine at all after they had left with any form of recognition of their contribution' It seems that little has been done to inform readers of any changes. Both of the above now contribute to rival publications. Something has changed and i can't quite put my finger on it. I hope i am wrong as i do feel very loyal to HFW prefering it over the elitist HFN or the advert driven HFC. I think it is about time Mr Keywood put a few words in to let the suspicious minded like myself know what is happening.
I may be totally wrong to suspect anything at all and i am totally happy to be. Long live HFW.

[YNWaN]

I wouldn't 'read' too much in to it. It's not common to read about staff movements in a magazine. When staff do leave they inevitably write for competitors.

However, I must admit that I don't read Hi-Fi World and pay little (none really) attention to its machinations. Unfortunately, I think the writing is on the wall for printed hi-Fi mags and both sales and circulation have been on a steady decline for many years.

[Wakefield Turntables]

However, I must admit that I don't read Hi-Fi World and pay little (none really) attention to its machinations. Unfortunately, I think the writing is on the wall for printed hi-Fi mags and both sales and circulation have been on a steady decline for many years.

True, but, I have never seen any numbers for digital circulation subscriptions. I have seen some numbers for quoted published circulation but I have no idea if they include digital subscribers as well. At least the hifi mags are going towards digital publication, its not like they have left it too late to embrace the digital age.

[YNWaN]

No, that's true. What I do know is that traditional product reviews make very little (often none at all) to those products sales - hence the rise of the shill.

[DSJR]

HiFi mags have been on the skids for decdes now sadly. To be honest, apart from the total lack of hard objective evidence to back opinions up, many of the better audio forums have taken the place of magazines with potentially biased reviewers since many of "us" share our experiences and discuss them, only really disputing? certain finer points (I'm thinking of my feelings about the Mini-T for example, which have changed much with experience of using it with different speakers :))

I've heard Ricardo (Ab Sounds) has his fingers in HFN and HFC now (citation needed here), as well as being behind the new face of retailer KJ W1. Nowt wrong with that at all as long as it's "just" a financial interest and not a means to "lean" on the staff to only promote only the products imported by this distributer.

[John]

I used to love reading Hifi World a few years back it was my favourite, espically when they used to champion old classics, it used to feel that it was aimed in the real world and used to always learn

[Floyddroid]

Yes, i would imagine that is so.

[sq225917]

I've always liked the stuff they review in HFW, but honestly who do they think the layout and design is appealing to? Either make it easy to read for the codgers or smarten it up for the younger readers but don't keep it looking like it is, the typography and layout is just 5hit.

If I was in the market to start a 'hifi publishing business' I'd be looking for something that combined the vibrancy of a forum with the learned reading and quality articles of the better mags, HFN and Stereophile, with the good content being available on subscription digitally. Like 6moons but with the addition of articles from people who actually have a 'trade' in the audio market rather than just an opinion.

[RobHolt]

I have the October issue of HFW.
What's the worry?

[Ammonite Audio]

I've always liked the stuff they review in HFW, but honestly who do they think the layout and design is appealing to? Either make it easy to read for the codgers or smarten it up for the younger readers but don't keep it looking like it is, the typography and layout is just 5hit.

I don't often agree with you, but here you are on the mark. HFW needs to smarten up.

[sq225917]

I don't often agree with you, but here you are on the mark. HFW needs to smarten up.


Wow, what's it like being wrong most of the time?













;-)

[prestonchipfryer]

I have the October issue of HFW.
What's the worry?

Well, for me at least, most of the typesetting is too small, with too much white space and there are also many times when black print on a dark background is used. These issues make it very difficult to read and that's whay I've stopped buying it.

[RobHolt]

Can't say I've noticed anything wrong with the layout.
Not to HFN standards but not bad enough to spoil the mag IMO.

Rob

[hifi_dave]

None of the UK mags are particularly informative IMO. There is little in the way of technical description, design philosophy or measurements and far too much of the subjective quotes. Pics are also thin on the ground. For an idea of how it should be, look at the Japanese mags.

HFW has a lot of "first to spin" and then "next up" all followed (usually) by five globes. Surely it can't all be worthy of the maximum endorsement or maybe the scale is too crude and should be expanded to ten globes..:scratch:

[Audioman]

HFW has a lot of "first to spin" and then "next up" all followed (usually) by five globes. Surely it can't all be worthy of the maximum endorsement or maybe the scale is too crude and should be expanded to ten globes..:scratch:

This was brought up by a letter several years ago. DP's answer was that they had lots of gear in they thought was not good enough and didn't review. So it appears they only publish reviews of 4 or 5 globe equipment in the main (although there has been an occasional 3). Obviously doesn't embarrass anybody but hardly tells readers what products to avoid. :)

As for the format of HFW it is OK but hasn't been changed for years. At least better than the J Marks years when it was looking more like the Sun. When it started (the Alan Sircom years) it had an air of quality with longer reviews and smaller print. Probably would not be bright and flashy enough to attract today's readers. NK does provide technical reviews but they often don't fit in with the subjective review and his suppositions of SQ v measurement are often at odds with that of the main reviewer.

[Alan Sircom]

None of the UK mags are particularly informative IMO. There is little in the way of technical description, design philosophy or measurements and far too much of the subjective quotes. Pics are also thin on the ground. For an idea of how it should be, look at the Japanese mags.


AFAIK, the Japanese model is very different to ours. Here, the magazine pays for the review, and the manufacturer pays for advertising to help pay for that review. There, I believe the manufacturer pays the reviewer directly to review its products, and also pays out advertising to provide a vehicle to distribute those reviews, provide costs for photography, etc. Manufacturers or distributors not wealthy enough to be able to support this kind of double-payment scheme (and I believe it can get very, very expensive) are considered too small to survive as a professional in the Japanese audio market and their products simply don't get coverage.

It's one of those strange reciprocal arrangements that only - and could only – exist in Japan and work perfectly until they go catastrophically Olympus.

It's also worth bearing in mind we don't have an Electric Town in the middle of London, like Tokyo's Akihabara, suggesting the widespread interest in technical performance in UK readers is far lower than in Japan.

[petrat]

Here, the magazine pays for the review, and the manufacturer pays for advertising to help pay for that review.

Just to clarify, you're not implying that UK magazines pay manufacturers to review their gear ... rather that the magazine pays a freelance reviewer, who gets the review sample loaned for free by the manufacturer?

[hifi_dave]

Just to clarify, you're not implying that UK magazines pay manufacturers to review their gear ... rather that the magazine pays a freelance reviewer, who gets the review sample loaned for free by the manufacturer?

That's the way it works. The manufacturer loans the equipment for review and the mag pays the reviewer to do the write up and mags are kept afloat by advertising.

[Marco]

What HFW need (and HFC and HiFi+, too) is a Ken Kessler to wake up their sleepy pages!!

Here's what I've just written on another thread about Ken (here: http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?p=363219#post363219 )


Precisely (I couldn't agree more) - and do you know why he adds such value to HFN?

Well, it's first of all, because he's an excellent writer, whose use of the English language is exemplary, particularly descriptive terms that relate subjectively in some way to audio, thus allowing readers to 'get' where he's coming from easily, but more importantly, his passionate and entertaining style of writing holds one's interest and adds colour to subjects that can often be boring.

That is precisely why subjective reviewing of audio equipment, when done properly, is more effective and of much greater use to most readers, than attempting to decipher reams of sleep-inducing (and often irrelevant) test measurements... YAWN! :nono:

Quite simply, I buy hi-fi magazines (these days, only HFN), not to read about how well someone can use an oscilloscope, but to find out if they have the ability to portray, through the clever use of descriptive language (not meaningless audiophile gobbledygook, however), but by effectively 'painting a picture' with words, describing what they can hear when reviewing equipment, in a way which I can recognise and appreciate, and thus succeeds in piquing my interest in buying a particular product.

In my view, no-one does that better than Ken Kessler, which is why he's an asset to HFN and one of the major reasons why the magazine is doing well in such difficult times. I also admire opinionated and outspoken characters, with a forceful personality, and dislike the bland, wishy-washy, 'sit on the fence' types, who play the corporate game, and have all the personality of a piece of cardboard.

Sadly, there are too many like that writing today for hi-fi magazines. Long live KK with his colourful style of writing and outspoken views!! :clap:


Quite simply, hi-fi magazines lack colourful and outspoken characters, like Ken, who engage the interest of the readership with their passion. *That* is what shifts copy, as people like to read what controversial characters are writing about on subjects of interest. Trust me, I know a wee bit about that! ;)

Marco.

[MCRU]

I wouldn't 'read' too much in to it. It's not common to read about staff movements in a magazine. When staff do leave they inevitably write for competitors.

However, I must admit that I don't read Hi-Fi World and pay little (none really) attention to its machinations. Unfortunately, I think the writing is on the wall for printed hi-Fi mags and both sales and circulation have been on a steady decline for many years.

Hi-Fi Choice readership is up!

[Macca]

Marco you are correct. HFW reviews are quite long, 2-3 pages incl pics so there is plenty of space for the reviewer to be 'entertaining' as well as to write specifically about sound quality. However most HFW reviwers seem to struggle to fill the space. They will use almost a page to describe the product by simply cutting and pasting from the manufacturer's blurb. A coulmn or two at best on what it sounds like, padded it out by mentioning obscure artists and recordings that they are really into but which no-one else has ever heard of. Then round it off by saying that the item reviewed was not as good as such and such but as such and such costs more it all turns out to be pretty good value for money.

I got to skipping so many of the reviews and just reading the measured performance, as it was more entertaining.

[YNWaN]

Hi-Fi Choice readership is up!

Is it? I honestly can't imagine why.

[Marco]

I would assume largely because of the influence of 'dastardly duo' of David Price and Adam Smith, who in my view, are two of the better reviewers out there. I also like Alan Sircom's style of writing, in Plush :)

Marco.

[Audioman]

Is it? I honestly can't imagine why.

Probably because a few David Price followers have come over from Hi-Fi World. Unfortunately apart from an improved queries section (copied from World) he is unable to do little to improve it. The whole multiple blind test thing needs to go together with some of the old hands.

It's 'unique' feature is it's undoing as no editor is going to improve things much without a complete revamp. At least that's what happened at HFN after a dramatic slump in quality. In fact they took on some of HFW's ideas and added a few others with a better layout. I'm surprised HFC hasn't changed more as both magazines are under the same ownership now. My only gripe with HFN is the compulsory mega expensive kit reviews that hardly anyone is actualy going to purchase.

Paul.

[Audioman]

I would assume largely because of the influence of 'dastardly duo' of David Price and Adam Smith, who in my view, are two of the better reviewers out there. I also like Alan Sircom's style of writing, in Plush :)

Marco.

Adam is writing for HFN. I assume you read his review of the Inspire Monarch. Would be interesting to hear this against a highly moded SL1200 to see which is better sounding and better value.

[Marco]

Hi Martin,


Marco you are correct. HFW reviews are quite long, 2-3 pages incl pics so there is plenty of space for the reviewer to be 'entertaining' as well as to write specifically about sound quality. However most HFW reviwers seem to struggle to fill the space.


Indeed, but the problem is that you need a personality first, before you can be entertaining.... ;)

Most of the soulless hacks, populating today's hi-fi press, wouldn't know what entertaining was, if it jumped up and bit them on the bum! Their writing style lacks flair and is too staid and predictable, for my liking. In reviews, I want to see a goodly dose of the writer's personality shining through, a skillful use of prose, and some thinking outside of the box!!

For me, many reviews that I read are simply too 'sober' in style, and not only lack providing much of the relevant information necessary, in order for me to consider buying a particular product, but little sense that the review has been written by a human being, as opposed to a robot. The latter is particularly true when reviewers go into 'objective' mode and drone on for too long about technical details.

That was my biggest criticism of how magazine reviews were written in the 'good old days' of the 70s and early 80s - bland didn't even begin to describe it, unless of course one had a mania for ogling at test measurements, and using such data as a form of 'bible'! :rolleyes:


They will use almost a page to describe the product by simply cutting and pasting from the manufacturer's blurb. A coulmn or two at best on what it sounds like, padded it out by mentioning obscure artists and recordings that they are really into but which no-one else has ever heard of. Then round it off by saying that the item reviewed was not as good as such and such but as such and such costs more it all turns out to be pretty good value for money.


Indeed. It's simply an exercise in blandsville.


I got to skipping so many of the reviews and just reading the measured performance, as it was more entertaining.

Lol... Those must have been some majorly boring reviews you were reading!!

Marco.

[Spectral Morn]

Adam is writing for HFN. I assume you read his review of the Inspire Monarch. Would be interesting to hear this against a highly moded SL1200 to see which is better sounding and better value.

Something that sadly will never happen in a conventional magazine - manufacturers/distributors will not want their kit put up against such items -, unless the reviewer happens to own a highly modified Technics 1200 and that is his or her reference but I suspect that the manufacturers/distributors would request another reviewer be used if that were the case.

Why you might ask? Simple if a cheaper modified unit did better it would damage sales. I am not talking just about the example sited but in general.

I agree re Ken Kessler he is a joy to read but sadly he is no longer given the space to write as freely as he once did as all the News reviews are edited to within an inch of their lives. I used to love Alan's writing as well - I only like it now - but I feel in the last few years it has suffered a bit for similar reasons. I smile now when I recall how he described the gravity well created by a Musical Fidelity heavy weight amplifier around which other amplifiers orbited. Sadly that type of prose is lacking these days from his keyboard though I have no issue with his reviews.

I personally prefer long form to short form as I think that a good review requires the space to fully dig into the performance of any item in for review - though there are exceptions to that in which little space is required to do the job well.

[Marco]

Adam is writing for HFN. I assume you read his review of the Inspire Monarch.


Ah yes, Paul, you're quite correct. Apologies for my error; it was indeed an interesting review, and one of particular interest to me.


Would be interesting to hear this against a highly moded SL1200 to see which is better sounding and better value.

Absolutely, and I'd even willingly loan the magazine my turntable, in order to make the comparison... But that would never happen, simply as there would be too many vested interests at risk! ;)

Marco.

[Marco]

Something that sadly will never happen in a conventional magazine - manufacturers/distributors will not want their kit put up against such items -, unless the reviewer happens to own a highly modified Technics 1200 and that is his or her's reference but I suspect that the manufacturers/distributors would request another reviewer be used.

Why you might ask? Simple if a cheaper modified unit did better it would damage sales. I am not talking just about the example sited but in general.

Quite, and that's exactly what I'm referring to. Thank goodness for forums, eh, where we're free to speak our minds! :D

Marco.

[Spectral Morn]

Quite, and that's exactly what I'm referring to. Thank goodness for forums, eh, where we're free to speak our minds! :D

Marco.

I should like to point out that I don't play the game, in my little online venture - see below - as I don't carry advertising and I have got into grief - in the past and I no doubt will again in the future - for writing honest reviews and comparing unlikely items together.

[Marco]

It's 'unique' feature is it's undoing as no editor is going to improve things much without a complete revamp. At least that's what happened at HFN after a dramatic slump in quality. In fact they took on some of HFW's ideas and added a few others with a better layout. I'm surprised HFC hasn't changed more as both magazines are under the same ownership now.


Indeed, and they did that very well. For me, the balance now in HFN is just about right, although I dislike their obsession with certain brands, such as Musical Fidelity (a company that, IMO, produces little worth buying these days), and audiophile jewellery, from the Absolute Sounds portfolio. The music reviews, however, are undoubtedly the best of any audio magazine, and there are only occasionally articles featured in relation to AV or computer audio, neither of which interest me, plus the vintage section is fantastic.


My only gripe with HFN is the compulsory mega expensive kit reviews that hardly anyone is actualy going to purchase.


One could say the same for almost the whole of Hi-Fi+! ;)

On that subject, despite Alan's best efforts, the magazine is still a pale shadow of its former self. One only has to read the current issues, and compare the output now, to that of the magazine during the first few years of its birth, in order to realise that fact.

Hi-Fi+ was a breath of fresh air when it first appeared on the scene, as the writers had something genuinely different and interesting to say, and so it appealed to a more thoughtful and intelligent readership. Jeez, it even contained restaurant reviews - now *that* was quality (as was the once outstanding photography)!

Sadly, now, it appears as if the writers have simply ran out of interesting things to say and, for me, the magazine acts as little more than a vehicle to promote all manner of 'audiophile jewellery', for those who are entertained by staring at shiny pictures of equipment that they will never be able to afford. For me, that stuff is pointless in the extreme.

Marco.

[Marco]

I should like to point out that I don't play the game, in my little online venture - see below - as I don't carry advertising and I have got into grief - in the past and I have no doubt will again in the future - for writing honest reviews and comparing unlikely items together.

Quite right, and more power to you, Neil, for sticking to your principles. I will too, in terms of the direction AoS continues to take. I'll always tell it as I see it/hear it, and bugger whoever it 'upsets'! :exactly:

Let's face it, the writing is on the wall for the paper format of audio reviewing, which is why the likes of your on-line magazine and the major UK forums, such as AoS, are the future for the hi-fi industry!

Marco.

[Spectral Morn]

I


One could say the same for almost the whole of Hi-Fi+! ;)

On that subject, despite Alan's best efforts, the magazine is still a pale shadow of its former self. One only has to read the current issues, and compare the output now, to that of the magazine during the first few years of its birth, in order to realise that fact.

Hi-Fi+ was a breath of fresh air when it first appeared on the scene, as the writers had something genuinely different and interesting to say, and so it appealed to a more thoughtful and intelligent readership. Jeez, it even contained restaurant reviews - now *that* was quality (as was the once outstanding photography)!

Sadly, now, it appears as if the writers have simply ran out of interesting things to say and, for me, the magazine acts as little more than a vehicle to promote all manner of 'audiophile jewellery', for those who are entertained by staring at shiny pictures of equipment that they will never be able to afford. For me, that stuff is pointless in the extreme.

Marco.

Sadly once Roy Gregory - lets leave the Nordost stuff aside as + was his baby, he guided it, developed it and it looked and read the way it did because of him - left HiFi Plus and the Absolute Sound took over the magazine's former look and content died.

Alan has done his best with it under the new ownership and only he and God knows what hoops AS made him jump through re it, but it is a very different magazine to what it once was.

I used to wait with great anticipation for each new issue and while some dislike Roy's writing style I loved it and I thank him for all the interesting items he and others wrote about in + then.

I don't feel excited by any current magazine the way I was about + back then, though I do look forward to reading Stereophile each month still.