Half-a-brain loonies and internet geeks

[Mike]

+1

[anthonyTD]

Well. Thank you Neil. I'm lapsed. A non-believer. But not ashamed of my ancestry. And happy to defend the rights of others to believe. Krav Maga helps. And now ........ I really must depart.

hi Howard,
thanks for your contributions on AOS, have a good one, and looking forward to your input in the new year.
regards,anthony,TD...

[anthonyTD]

+1

???
ARE YOU DRUNK AGAIN MIKE ?
or am i missing something?
maybe youve fallen asleep on the + button again.

[Mike]

Just being lazy.... I was 'seconding' what you said.

[anthonyTD]

Just being lazy.... I was 'seconding' what you said.

i guessed that,
just jesting with you mate.
already looking forward to more of your best in the new year.
anthony....

[Dave Cawley]

OK Howard and David, have a good time, will see you both after the New Year!

I'm hanging around, so if anyone wants to start a cable thread, I have some interesting comments!

Regards

Dave

[sastusbulbas]

Hi S,

Your argument seems to be based on the assumption that the magazines are personally holding a gun to your head, forcing you to buy a particular product, if it gets 4 or 5 stars. Of course, this isn't the case. Magazine reviewers are merely stating opinion - which in some magazines like ours is backed up by 'objective' measurements (which cannot be influenced by 'hype'). You can take it or leave it as you please. We constantly say, in our magazine, that our reviews are an entry point into the discussion, and not a 'final answer'.

Thankyou David, It is not an argument, nor based on assumption or guns or being forced. This is a dramatised thread showing just how things can turn opinion. Maybe you are being defensive, but the fact is that people make decisions to purchase items based on what they read in reviews. Take the reference "you" out, as it was about customers in general. (I actually like Hi Fi World)

The question of whether a product is good or not depends on so many variables. Loudspeaker/amplifier matching is critical, as is speaker/room matching - to name but two vital factors. All we can claim is that - in our room, with our ancillaries, with our tastes and our music - a product has real worth and is worth auditioning, and give reasoned argument why...

I know this fine well, and have debated such many a time, I have also been dismissed as a Foo monger for suggesting ancillary quality plays a part in perceivable difference, and that hearing acuity can vary between listeners.

This is a long way from you being conned. We are not issuing 'a compulsory purchase order' on your behalf for a particular product that gets a good review. There's something called 'agency', which is the ability for individuals to act in their own interests, which exists here - which you are denying. You're perfectly at liberty to act as you wish here!

Again this is not about YOU against ME David, as for denying something called "agency" get a grip. That can only be relevant IF the customer is aware of the facts, the very nature of advertising is to entice the customer that the purchase of a product would be in his interest. In the case of the Goldmund Eidos 18 that was clearly not the case. In the case of Chord cables apparently being identical to RS components catalogue items that may not be the case. The Chord cables are debatable as I have not seen conclusive evidence, but the Eidos was clearly a con. As I have had another reviewer state that such goes on, but magazines are unwilling to upset the apple cart, clearly this infers manufacturers and not customers are paramount to that publication?

I'm a big reader of magazines, and heartily disagree with what I read often. For example, it saddens me deeply that BMW can apparently do not wrong in CAR magazine. But I read those reviews 'actively', not passively. I can see that - for that journalist, this car is great. I can also tell that he's probably a late twenty-something boy racer who actually thinks lowered suspension and ultra low profile tyres are a great idea for Britain's 'traffic-calmed', potholed roads (like I used to do). I don't then automatically allege he or his magazine is corrupt and out to con me. This is where I struggle with your conclusions...

I too am a big reader of magazines, just about every Hi Fi magazine since the late 80's, plus fitness magazines, Bicycle magazines, computer magazines etc etc. I don't feel about the others the way I do about certain Hi Fi comics, and maybe too much spin is being put on my conclusions, the initial thread was my opinion regarding HI Fi magazines having "some" responsibility for half a brain loonies and internet geeks. These are not so much my conclusions, as they have all been offered by others at some point within forums.

I actually think you make some astute observations, but the explanations you offer simply aren't possible to substantiate. In this sense, your are outside the box looking in - but you can't see through the walls so you're simply guessing, and in a very tendentious way.

I do not need to substantiate that some magazines have got rather poor, my "explanations" are not substantiated because they are intended to open debate which I assume will answer the assumptions. I think I can see quite clearly, maybe that is the problem.

A few little details that make your conspiracy theory a little wobbly:

This is your "wobbly" assumption, as it is not "MY" conspiracy theory, but an opinion many fora members have on all Hi Fi fora, this is what makes it clear you have no idea what "looking from outside the box" entails, as you are clearly thinking within your own box. Maybe this is my mistake as I presume all arguments and debate is well known throughout fora.

[1] all magazines try very hard to be different from one another, because they are in commercial competition with one another - this makes it *less* likely for all magazines to uniformly agree with each other, not more.

No, advertising revenue, only reviewing "good" products, opinionated review, self importance, same reviewer names going around, same products being passed. Magazines are not night and day. This is only opinion mind you to many forum members most magazines are full of the same old shite.

[2] magazine editors are by nature rather competitive folk and are constantly trying to prove their rivals wrong! So reading a 5 star review in a rival title if anything makes them less inclined to print rampant praise of a product!

Hmmm, not sure about that.

[3] journalists are by nature rather opinionated, contrary and petulant beings, and would rather listen to their own instincts than those of others - again this makes them even more determined to find fault with things their peers like, not less.

Hmm, lets replace journalist with Forum members...

[4] the editorial departments of magazines are culturally very different to the marketing ones. To put things in slightly comic, exaggerated terms, the journos regard the marketeers as wide boys with the gift of the gab, and the marketing folk think the journos are po-faced, self-important, head-in-the-clouds types. Not a great start for a close working relationship...

A bit like the Foo and Non Foo brigades!

I am not defending hi-fi journalism/magazines per se, because it is impossible to defend it *all* for the same reasons it is impossible to attack it *all*. Hi-fi magazines are not one single whole homogenous block.

I think that yes - absolutely - there have been some real howlers in all magazines over the years, and some less than great moments in all magazines, but these all happen independently and for a number of reasons (none of which are ever accurately identified by people on forums) - rather than the single overarching conspiracy theory you suggest. The way your argument runs is that there's almost a 'polit bureau' of hi-fi journalism, with central edicts being written telling journalists/editors what they are - and not - allowed to say. Anyone who's worked in any form of publishing will find this amusing, and publishers would retort, "the chance would be a fine thing".

Sorry but again you have it wrong, this is general forum consensus, not my argument, of course they would expect a reviewer to state the hi fi magazines are not controlled by the advertising brands and such.

David

Steve

PS,

Thankyou David for the reply.

[sastusbulbas]

It is not valid, that is the problem. It is just another way of fooling yourself and others, probably even more evil as it pretends to be "scientific".



There some examples already given. I have seen many other manufacturers to defend their products both in their replies to magazine reviews and on the forums. I would not expect reviewers ever do the same on the subjective part of their evaluation, only on the measurement side.



"Non Foo brigade" most of the time just supplying a different kind of Foo with pseudo-scientific smell , that is my opinion. I design SOTA measurement equipment at work for many years. I know what it is possible to measure and what is not. And there is always a measurable difference even between two very similar cables, for example. However usually the "pseudo-scientific" crowd would dismiss these differences as irrelevant in audio or insignificant. It is not a matter of measurement - it is usually a matter of interpretation of the results that is a problem.



You are asking too much . The magazine people do what they can - and first of all they are trying to sell the stuff. It is their business. Is it surprising that the most popular magazines are less technical? Most we can expect from "the magazines, reviewers and manufacturers" - is to be reasonably honest in their information and their subjective opinions. If you look in the past of hi-fi magazines you will see that there were many attempts to do exactly what you are asking, and where are these publications now? Also different magazines do address different customers - that is also quite clear.

It is very nice to see David Price here in this forum - he did provide rather interesting inside view of hi-fi reviewing. It is not a very easy business and I do respect reviewers for what they do - thought for many years in the industry I had my share of bad reviews as well as good reviews.



Unfortunately, another side of this Internet freedom of information is that anybody pretends to be an expert and the value of a real expertise is diminished. It is a very sad state of affairs as the real knowledge and experience are lost in the high level of noise. Most of the time people reading the Internet would rather believe something they understand on a common sense level. It is in many cases rather incorrect understanding. Not many real experts would have time and ability to defend their knowledge on a public forum. It requires another special skill .



Yes. The respect for a proper skill in the art. Not just in hi-fi thought.

Alex

Yes I agree with many of your points Alex

[sastusbulbas]

Well. Thank you Neil. I'm lapsed. A non-believer. But not ashamed of my ancestry. And happy to defend the rights of others to believe. Krav Maga helps. And now ........ I really must depart.

I don't know if I want to believe or not LOL, but that is more to do with the forums than the magazines

As for Krav Maga helping, I don't agree. It is not defence.

[StanleyB]

I'm hanging around, so if anyone wants to start a cable thread, I have some interesting comments!

OK