What would make HiFi Reviews (more) useful? [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : What would make HiFi Reviews (more) useful?



Ajani
02-22-2010, 07:29 PM
A recent discussion with RGA in a Speaker thread reminded me, that I had planned to start this thread almost 2 weeks ago... However, a case of severe laziness has prevented me from doing so until now... So here goes:

What would make HiFi reviews (more) useful to you?


Objective versus Subjective?

Some of us younger audiophiles/enthusiasts weren't aware that before J. Gordon Holt launched Stereophile all HiFi was purely about objective measurements... No one felt the need to actually listen to equipment... You just ran test measurements and recommended whatever measured best...

Reviews based solely on Listening to the equipment are open to sighted bias. But reviews based solely on measurements assume that what we hear is solely determined by the items we know how to measure. (Scientists were convinced the world was flat until someone proved it was round - so just because we don't know how (or what) to measure yet, doesn't mean we won't find it out one day...

Advertising or Subscription only?

For major HiFi mags like Stereophile (US) and What HiFi? (UK), the editorial staff is seperate from the advertising team... So John Atkinson of Stereophile doesn't get to see ads that appear in the mag before you and I do, and he has no input in the advertising process...

However, the prevailing school of thought seems to be that HiFi mags are slaves to their advertisers and that negative reviews are never published (which is patently false and easily disproved by anyone with a desire to do so)... So would having all mags turn to subscription only and drop all advertising be the answer?

Also, would you be willing to pay 5-10x the current price of the HiFi mags for an advertising free version?

Lots of Negative Reviews or Mostly Positive Ones?

Here in the western world, we see far more positive reviews of products, than in the UK (where nasty reviews occur frequently)... The reason for so many raves here is because reviews mostly select products they are interested in to review, so odds are that they will like most of what they review. In the UK, reviewers/review teams pretty much review anything they can get their hands on. Also the UK tends to give ratings 1 - 5 stars or globes, while the US usually just writes a long article. So which one is better?

In the US, you see far less really nasty reviews, but in the UK, those nasty reviews are very often contradicted by other mags... So one mag well rate a product with 5 out of 5 stars and name it product of the year, while another will give it 3 stars and say they can't even recommend it...

To Shootout or not to Shootout?

UK Mags tend to do regular shootouts of products in the same price range, while US Mags generally don't. Is a shootout more or less useful than a solitary review?

Much like with negative reviews, shootouts in the UK usually contradict each other...

I'll add other areas for discussion later (assuming anyone is interested in this topic)... But feel free to share your own views...

Ajani
02-22-2010, 07:37 PM
the review industry is highly problematic due in part to the structure of the magazines and the honesty of the individual reviewers.

While I don't agree with Arthur Salvatore on all points he does raise some issue that should be considered when buying into review magazines.

Take the recommended component listing of Stereophile

Under Holt in 1985 there were 9 class A products (combined) in 2000 under Atkinson there were 104 class A recommended components.

"Please consider these statistics carefully. As for myself, I focused on just two obvious and highly relevant details:

In the Summer 1971 issue, there were NO advertisements and 7 components were in "Class A". In the Fall 1985 issue, more than 14 years later, there were still only 9 components in "Class A", despite going from 0 to 47 pages of advertising. However...
J. Gordon Holt was still the Editor during all that time.

Then John Atkinson arrived on the scene.

In short order, there were profound changes, starting from the late 1980's and continuing through the entire 1990's. By April, 1992, there were already 30 components in "Class A". This was just a "warm-up"...

By October 2000, 14 years after Atkinson's arrival, there were 104 components in "Class A". Could there be any "innocent explanations" for this obvious trend? Well, three "excuses" have been used.

Excuse No. 1

The performance of today's components has improved (or "advanced") on those of the past. Assuming that this is a fact, doesn't that mean more components should in "Class A"?

Answer: NO!

The fact that there were numerous "advancements" is totally irrelevant. This is because each and every new advancement must automatically supercede the previous advancement, or else it wasn't an "advancement" in the first place.

As each new improvement "raises the bar" to get into "Class A", any older model, which can not reach that new "bar", is relegated to "second best", which means they can no longer honestly remain in "Class A", which is supposed to be "the best attainable sound" at that time. Just as the newest, fastest computer chips relegate the older chips to "second fastest or best". Ruthless logic yes, but true when you are talking about "the best".

This principle is the primary reason why all of the numerous, earlier advancements during "The Holt Era", from 1971 to 1985, did NOT result in an increase in the "Class A" recommendations.

Excuse No. 2

There are more components available now than ever before. Doesn't that mean that more components should be in "Class A"?

Answer: NO!

The best is the best, no matter how many "participants" are competing for that "title".

An Example: There were far more competitors at the 2008 Summer Olympics "than ever before", but there were still only 3 medals given out for each event. In pro sports, there is just one "all-star team", no matter how many expansion teams and new players are added.

Stereophile, between 1971 and 1985, faced a huge, relative increase in the available number of components (plus the advent of accepting advertising). Even so, during this entire 14 year period, under J. Gordon Holt's direction, Stereophile went from 7 to only 9 "Class A" components.

This historical fact is the final proof that there is not any "law" or "rule" that the Editor must increase his "Class A" recommendations just because there are a greater variety of components.../...

"Class A"?

In October 2000, there were 46* amplifiers alone in Class A, the so-called "best attainable". There are still dozens as this is written. Only someone who is intellectually dishonest, in every sense of that expression, can claim there are 46 "best" anything's. (Do you know anyone with 46 "best friends"?) All the other Class A component categories have had similar, totally implausible expansions.

Atkinson even created a new Class, "A+", which is even better than "the best"! In all human history, and in all human cultures, it has been philosophically impossible to be better than the best, except in Stereophile. It's not even a rare occurance. In fact, in their April 2003 RCL, there were more Digital Processors in Class A+ (7), than in Class C (2)!

*During the publishing control of J. Gordon Holt, from 1962 all the way to the middle 1970's, the highest number of amplifiers in Class A was 4. The lowest number of amplifiers in Class A was 1. Holt kept only that one single amplifier in Class A even after it was discontinued. This means Holt refused to place even one unworthy component into Class A, because he understood and respected the true meaning of the word "best". Now compare Holt's intellectual integrity to that displayed by John Atkinson." http://www.high-endaudio.com/RR-STEREOPHILE.html

Now I want to say that I don't agree with Arthur on his attacks of Atkinson (and there is a heavy dose of unsubstantiated and unfair attacks) who very may well feel that such league tables are valuable - it is not dishonesty to have a different view than the guy you replace. Nevertheless, I do agree that having so many "class A" products and rave reviews dilutes what truly is the best of the best.

I think that such a league table would or should operate as a bell curve such that the best of the best would be in the smallest percentile - that's what best is supposed to mean.

Even then it is still just opinion - the best thing to do is find a reviewer with a similar ear to you. I like HE and SET based systems more than big power low efficiency systems and I believe a system should be able to play all music because the stereo should not care what is being played - it's job is to reproduce it. Others do not agree with that assessment and so they should find other reviewers who may offer them better help.

Audio reviewing is not all that different than movie reviewing. No matter what your favorite critic says - you're not going to agree 100% of the time.

Mike at AudioFederation and I agree 100% on Audio Note speakers and systems and many other rooms at CES but he HATED the Sony speakers and didn't like Magico speakers - I felt they were some of the better rooms at CES. The Sony just about made my top 5. So even though I trust Mike's advice - there are some polar opposite views.

I like Gordon's elite listing and I think that over time I may develop such a scheme of ranking. I went to over 70 rooms at CES and I could point to maybe 3 loudspeakers that I felt were true standouts. Then maybe another 10 that were excellent but a step down and then another group of good quality sound but didn't do it for me perhaps at the prices they were charging.

I wanted to address this point from RGA in another thread:

While I don't agree with Arthur Salvatore's attacks on John Atkinson (I think they are unsubstantiated) I agree that it is a good question of whether having so many 'Class A' components is actually useful... According to Stereophile, My Benchmark DAC1 is Class A, but the Bel Canto DAC3 and the Logitech Transporter are both supposed to be slightly better than it... What??? So the real question becomes what do they mean by Class A? Is Class A the best of the best (as Holt clearly had it) or just top quality HiFi? So maybe Holt regarded Class A as getting a 99% in a test, while under the Atkinson Admin, Class A means getting an A (90% to 100%)...

Another factor to consider it that when Holt was the only reviewer, he alone selected Class A, now John Atkinson does not select all Class A components. A product is rated Class A because at least one Stereophile reviewer regards it as being Class A (even if others disagree)...

JoeE SP9
02-22-2010, 07:55 PM
Maybe Class A+ is when two or more reviewers agree on a Class A rating for a given product.;)
I started reading Stereophile in the early 80's when JGH was doing the rating.:thumbsup: I too think that there is something terribly wrong with all the class A products.:p Everything and a bag of chips can't be the best!:mad2: The Class A+ rating is just plain silly.:crazy:
Stereophile should cut the list of recomended components by at least half, maybe even 75%.:ihih:

RGA
02-22-2010, 08:24 PM
I have started a discussion with my fellow reviewers at dagogo about a similar problem that pervades the review industry.

To me the stereophile class rating system is highly problematic but most such systems are compromised - probably why Constantine has so far avoided them.

No one single person can review every product so how do we come up with a best of listing. A reviewer can vote on it and submit it to the editor but in the end it is the editor's choice.

Take Art Dudley of Stereophile - he reviewed the Audio Note AN E/SPe HE - and he bought them as his reference speakers. Stereophile rates it as a class B loudspeaker even though Dudley says they should be an A. (I believe his words were should be an A+++)

So who made the decision? Did other reviewers agree? Well Wes Philips recently said (Jan 2009) that a room with an AN E loudspeaker was not only the best sound at CES but the best sound he has EVER auditioned. That's a second Stereophile writer - and these two guys are some of the top reviewers at the mag. A third writer there owns an AN E (Peter Van Wellinswaard who is a technical adviser) and John Marks called the AN E one of the most memorable experiences of his life.

What's more important - a reviewer who puts his own money out and buys them to use in his own house or something that is given a class A rating that not a single reviewer would touch with a ten foot pole? Audio Note does not advertise in Stereophile and John Atkinson and Peter Qvortrup don't see eye to eye on much. So I suppose it is amazing it got a class B - though PQ showed up at CES this year and you will notice they didn't cover the room - coincidence?

I think Arthur has a point about the rating systems with his analogy to the olympics. Even if stuff has improved there should be a league table where there is not more class A gear than class C - it makes no sense. Unless of course they are saying that it all sounds the same - in which case there are serious problems.

Notice that recently Stereophile gave very negative reviews to a Bryston and a Totem - the next issue did not have the usual advertising from either company.

To me there are so many problems with recommended component listings because they're highly arbitrary. Not everyone is on the same page at the same magazines so how on earth do they come up with such lists?

My list would be very different from Doug Schroeder's or Jack Robert's, or Fred Crowder's for example. I suppose the ones where we all agree that ABC speaker is very good but even then there are degrees of preferences.

The same problem pervades magazines that give out yearly awards - so if XYZ speaker wins best loudspeaker in 2010 how often do you see it win again - or is the award given every year just to have something new in the limelight. If I were giving out reviews I may have the same product win year in and year out until such time as something proves to me that it is better. That may happen but I never see a product win over and over and over. Stereophile though dumps them from the list after a few years or if they're no longer sold - that is a problem too. The assumption is if it is new it is better - it ain't so.

And of course as massive a problem as all that - what about the stuff that Stereophile misses? For yeard they were recommending amps in the Class B such as my old Arcam Delta 290p but no one there reviewed the classic Sugden A21a which is a much better amplifier. Finally, after it's 30th+ year or so selling them they bother to get around to it and Marks felt it was the best sounding integrated for the money. So while they're out recommending good but not star budget integrateds to the thousands of people buying the magazine - the entire time they WOULD HAVE recommended the Sugden instead.

A smaller magazine has an excuse to miss a staple product - but the longest selling integrated amplifier on the planet is missed by Stereophile?

None of this would be problem if most of the readers understood these things and didn't put much stock in such ratings but I get the feeling that a great many people do put a LOT of stock in them. They believe if they shop off the class A list they will have a great sounding stereo. Some of the stuff that I have heard on the class A list is truly shockingly bad IMO. I think to myself - something is really odd - nobody working there bought them.

In the end it comes down to either entertainment or finding a reviewer you agree with - has a similar ear and values certain things you value. that is why so much stuff gets raves - they will simply give the panel to the panel guy, the SS to the SS guy the tube to the tube guy. Everything gets a rave. What you want is if you are the tube guy is for the reviewer to review two tube amps at around the same price and tell you the pro's and cons of each. But manufacturers often don't like that.

Ajani
02-22-2010, 08:49 PM
I have started a discussion with my fellow reviewers at dagogo about a similar problem that pervades the review industry.

To me the stereophile class rating system is highly problematic but most such systems are compromised - probably why Constantine has so far avoided them.

No one single person can review every product so how do we come up with a best of listing. A reviewer can vote on it and submit it to the editor but in the end it is the editor's choice.

Take Art Dudley of Stereophile - he reviewed the Audio Note AN E/SPe HE - and he bought them as his reference speakers. Stereophile rates it as a class B loudspeaker even though Dudley says they should be an A. (I believe his words were should be an A+++)

So who made the decision? Did other reviewers agree? Well Wes Philips recently said (Jan 2009) that a room with an AN E loudspeaker was not only the best sound at CES but the best sound he has EVER auditioned. That's a second Stereophile writer - and these two guys are some of the top reviewers at the mag. A third writer there owns an AN E (Peter Van Wellinswaard who is a technical adviser) and John Marks called the AN E one of the most memorable experiences of his life.

I guess the AN E must have been reviewed before Stephen Mejias started compiling the recommended components list... Since his policy that is stated in all the current rec listings is that Class A is based on one reviewer regarding the product as Class A... So the AN E should be Class A if Art Dudley thinks so...


What's more important - a reviewer who puts his own money out and buys them to use in his own house or something that is given a class A rating that not a single reviewer would touch with a ten foot pole? Audio Note does not advertise in Stereophile and John Atkinson and Peter Qvortrup don't see eye to eye on much. So I suppose it is amazing it got a class B - though PQ showed up at CES this year and you will notice they didn't cover the room - coincidence?

I think Arthur has a point about the rating systems with his analogy to the olympics. Even if stuff has improved there should be a league table where there is not more class A gear than class C - it makes no sense. Unless of course they are saying that it all sounds the same - in which case there are serious problems.

Notice that recently Stereophile gave very negative reviews to a Bryston and a Totem - the next issue did not have the usual advertising from either company.

To me there are so many problems with recommended component listings because they're highly arbitrary. Not everyone is on the same page at the same magazines so how on earth do they come up with such lists?

My list would be very different from Doug Schroeder's or Jack Robert's, or Fred Crowder's for example. I suppose the ones where we all agree that ABC speaker is very good but even then there are degrees of preferences.

The same problem pervades magazines that give out yearly awards - so if XYZ speaker wins best loudspeaker in 2010 how often do you see it win again - or is the award given every year just to have something new in the limelight. If I were giving out reviews I may have the same product win year in and year out until such time as something proves to me that it is better. That may happen but I never see a product win over and over and over. Stereophile though dumps them from the list after a few years or if they're no longer sold - that is a problem too. The assumption is if it is new it is better - it ain't so.

And of course as massive a problem as all that - what about the stuff that Stereophile misses? For yeard they were recommending amps in the Class B such as my old Arcam Delta 290p but no one there reviewed the classic Sugden A21a which is a much better amplifier. Finally, after it's 30th+ year or so selling them they bother to get around to it and Marks felt it was the best sounding integrated for the money. So while they're out recommending good but not star budget integrateds to the thousands of people buying the magazine - the entire time they WOULD HAVE recommended the Sugden instead.

A smaller magazine has an excuse to miss a staple product - but the longest selling integrated amplifier on the planet is missed by Stereophile?

None of this would be problem if most of the readers understood these things and didn't put much stock in such ratings but I get the feeling that a great many people do put a LOT of stock in them. They believe if they shop off the class A list they will have a great sounding stereo. Some of the stuff that I have heard on the class A list is truly shockingly bad IMO. I think to myself - something is really odd - nobody working there bought them.

In the end it comes down to either entertainment or finding a reviewer you agree with - has a similar ear and values certain things you value. that is why so much stuff gets raves - they will simply give the panel to the panel guy, the SS to the SS guy the tube to the tube guy. Everything gets a rave. What you want is if you are the tube guy is for the reviewer to review two tube amps at around the same price and tell you the pro's and cons of each. But manufacturers often don't like that.

A major part of the problem with recommended components lists (or any kind of product of the year awards or even reviews in general) is that consumers don't understand how to use them...

People just assume that if you combine 3 products of the year or 3 Class A components, you will get a great sounding stereo... Which can be a very costly mistake...

Despite the fact that many mags openly state how to use (and not use) their recommended products listings, so many persons either don't read or just ignore those explanations... It's a tough call for the mags....

Ajani
02-22-2010, 09:00 PM
If a reviewer buys a product below retail, can he be a judge of its value for money?

I know that (as RGA mentioned) the best recommendation a reviewer can make is to buy the product he reviewed... But can someone who buys a product for 40% or 50% of MSRP, give a credible opinion on its value for money? There are many products that persons are willing to buy used on Audiogon, but that they don't think are worth retail price...

So if a reviewer bought a $10K Speaker for $4K is that really a recommendation that we should buy the speaker at $10K? I've heard the argument that the reviewer could purchase any $10K Speaker he reviews for that price, so the fact that he bought the particular model means it is his favorite $10K speaker... That I have no issue with... But the question I pose, is whether the reviewer would still buy that Speaker if he had to pay retail ($10K) or would he think that the difference between it and a Speaker retailing at $4K is not that great?

Assuming he can buy any product at 40% of list, then a $4K Speaker would cost him $1.6K and a $10K speaker would cost him $4K... The difference between them being $2.4K... If he had to pay list, then the difference between them would be a far more substantial $6K, so would he still think that $10K speaker was really worth the extra outlay over the $4K one? Would he still buy it?

RGA
02-22-2010, 11:21 PM
I happened to read the Stereophile recommended list and it stated that Art felt it deserved class A++ or something and it went to class B. That was in 2009 so I am not sure what is going on there.

As for reviewer's discount - I can't speak for them all - I have not asked about any discounts. But in theory if we can get say 50% off then that would be typical across the board so all manufacturers are equal - so we would still choose our favorite product within our budget just like anyone else. In most cases I believe you could do better than a reviewer's price simply by buying it used. The McIntosh MA 7000 is $8800 new - I might be able to buy it for $4,000 maybe even $3000 with reviewer discount - my dealer sold a mint shape one used for $2000. This is a current model. So I don't consider discounts to be much of a plus - I have paid far more out of my own pocket being a reviewer.

As for value for money - this is always so difficult to answer. In my show report I try to do this by selecting my five favorite rooms with speakers under $10k (based on the speakers because generally less expensive speakers will have less expensive front ends) and then rooms with speakers over $10k.

I feel that most audiophiles who take this seriously will get to the point where they are spending in the $6-$10k price range for a set of loudspeakers. I managed the AN J going to university with no job and living on student loans - I chose not to own a car because audio was more important to me. So it can be done. I also bought the OTO during that time.

One thing that you raise is the reviewer's system has a great deal to do with "perceived" credibility. If you are a manufacturer selling $80,000 amplifiers who would you rather send your amplifier to. Richard Austen who owns a $4k amp and $5k speakers or Fred Crowder who owns $192,000 speakers and $95,000 amplifiers? Both of us may be just as good at auditioning gear and evaluating strength and weakness etc. And I may have auditioned the same ultra expensive amps - but if you are selling $80k amps you will send it to Fred.

I am on the one hand jealous that he gets to play with the expensive stuff - but if I did I might be heartbroken to have to say goodbye to it. Besides - I figure 80% of the readers are in my general budget zone so by reviewing the affordable stuff I might get read more. So there are always advantages - besides $80k amps ought to be darn good - It's more fun to find those $5k speakers that are truly wonderful.

I can't speak for others but I try to look at the price performance ratio of everything I review. The show report is a little different - I comment on the sound regardless of price. The Perfect8 Technologies speakers are $375,000 and they sounded very very good. There is no way on earth that what I personally heard justifies the $375,000 price tag. But this is a sculpted piece of art that are catering to a certain clientele and the technology is there the look is there and the sound is very good. If one has the pockets to pay that price they don't really care what I have to say about them in terms of price performance.

Vandersteen has a house sound you either like or you don't. If you like them and you want to keep going up the Vandersteen line then perhaps you would find their top $45k model worth it to you. I liked the sound of them I must say but I would sooner buy a Teresonic or Audio Note for under $10k because to me they simply sound more natural and right. In fact it's not much different than spending $51k on the AN E Sec Sig - if you get the sound of the AN E then it is possibly the only speaker for you and you may decide to continue up the line to $50k versions.

The other issue to go along with what I said about Fred is that I can't really look at a $50k speaker and say that it's good or bad value in absolute terms. The Vandy at $45k is their best speaker - it sounds better than all the others. Is it 10 times better than the $4k ones - no but then times better isn't the point some people are willing to pay ten times the price for a 5% improvement.

Still I think I can say that when I hear certain very expensive products that I can say "wow that truly is the best I have heard" or "it really does scale like little else". The Acapella High Violencello II with Plasma Tweeters at $80,500 is a speaker I will never own unless I win a lotto.

Of course the price seems absurd - this is not even on of their 5 most expensive - they go up over $800k. But I can safely say that it was truly stunning - It's a statement loudspeaker in a sense of transients on drum sticks that is exceptional. If you have the money they're worth it - and if you don't then who cares if it is worth it or not - it's moot based on your income.

I think in the end too much is made of money spent. IMO the AN E/Spe HE is a speaker that can be the end of the road kind of speaker - it's $7,600 and it stands with anything I heard at CES regardless of price. Yes there is better - certainly better in isolated traits - but at silly prices based on my savings account. I liked them a LOT more than most of the $15,000 - $70,000 loudspeakers I was hearing. I could also say that about Gallo's new 3.5 at a modest $5,900 or KingSound's Prince II at $6,000 - or splurge and get the $8k Kings.

You can spend stupid prices and occasionally get the results but most of us are in the sub $15k camp for speakers. If I had the money I would buy the AN E/Spe HE. But I would also buy any of the speakers in my final 5 at the end of my show report as alternatives based on those auditions and I think they are worth the retail price - in some ways I find them all a little under priced based on the sound of the market at CES.

E-Stat
02-23-2010, 06:56 AM
Objective versus Subjective?
Wrong comparison. It is "objective" vs. "observational". To observe that a condition exists exists involves no subjectivity. Subjectivity occurs afterwards in either case with a judgment regarding that change. Two people can agree completely on a difference and yet arrive at different conclusions. I've known two prominent reviewers for decades and sometimes disagree with either as to the subjective side of what I find best - having heard exactly the same things.


You just ran test measurements and recommended whatever measured best...
Those of us who do remember that approach by Len Feldman and Julian Hirsch recall how utterly useless they were to convey any useful knowledge as opposed to information.


Reviews based solely on Listening to the equipment are open to sighted bias.
Unfortunately, the alternative is to employ switch boxes which using their common grounds (or cause horrible switching thumps) end up comparing both components to both. Theory and reality do not converge. As with cables, many attempt to look at the audible effect of the box in a vacuum and assume their impact while in circuit is identical - when it is not. When you examine their electrical effect in the system, however, you find a different situation. Frank Van Alstine pointed this out long ago.



But can someone who buys a product for 40% or 50% of MSRP, give a credible opinion on its value for money?
In the comparative sense, sure. Remember too that reviewers (and store employees) can get any component at accommodation (I've purchased a couple myself that way), so it is a level field when comparing one to another.

I think TAS should return to its roots with the approach HP took long ago before he had to turn the reins over to new management.

rw

Feanor
02-23-2010, 07:11 AM
Arrrgh ... just ... can't ... resist ... plug for AN ...


....

Take Art Dudley of Stereophile - he reviewed the Audio Note AN E/SPe HE - and he bought them as his reference speakers. Stereophile rates it as a class B loudspeaker even though Dudley says they should be an A. (I believe his words were should be an A+++)

So who made the decision? Did other reviewers agree? Well Wes Philips recently said (Jan 2009) that a room with an AN E loudspeaker was not only the best sound at CES but the best sound he has EVER auditioned. That's a second Stereophile writer - and these two guys are some of the top reviewers at the mag. A third writer there owns an AN E (Peter Van Wellinswaard who is a technical adviser) and John Marks called the AN E one of the most memorable experiences of his life.

....
:20: RGA's AN E/SPe HE wet dream.

Feanor
02-23-2010, 07:27 AM
I never trust a single review, not even from a reviewer with a good record in my own books. I look for corroboration amongst reviews, and not just all "thumbs up" but expressing a similar impression, explicitly or between the lines.

I do always enjoy a comprehensive technical description of the component, even if I don't always understand all the details. (In this regard I enjoy 6 Moons reviews for example.)

I do like objective information though I don't rely on it. For one thing, objective reviews are constrained to a certain uniformity of testing that doesn't necessarily reflect set up requirements the equipment, especially speakers.

So for example when testing some AN speakers John Atkinson didn't set them up in room corners as AN prescribes for best results. So what would the measurements have been if they were set up as specified? We don't know. Atkinson justified his approach on the basis that he test are speakers in a certain way to ensure fair and consistent testing -- that's objectivity, right??

mlsstl
02-23-2010, 07:38 AM
I believe many people invest far too much emotional capital in what reviews "should be."

For me they are interesting reading material but I can't remember a purchase I've made that was based only on a magazine review, whether print or online.

Reviews are useful to me in the follow ways:

1. If I am in the market for something, reviews can be useful for adding candidates that warrant further investigation.

2. Reviews are useful for keeping up on industry gossip as respects what's new and fashionable. Those fads and fashions may be of interest to me or could be further evidence of how low we've sunk as a society. ;-)

3. Mainly I just enjoy reading about audio since it is an area of interest for me. Sometimes articles are educational and sometimes the author is full of it or comes from a direction that simply doesn't connect for me.

What magazine reviews will never be for me is some kind of holy writ or scientific reference text. I think people make a basic mistake when they try to elevate what is essentially hobby-based reading entertainment to a level of authority that is neither deserved or intrinsic to the format.

Ajani
02-23-2010, 08:16 AM
I believe many people invest far too much emotional capital in what reviews "should be."

For me they are interesting reading material but I can't remember a purchase I've made that was based only on a magazine review, whether print or online.

Reviews are useful to me in the follow ways:

1. If I am in the market for something, reviews can be useful for adding candidates that warrant further investigation.

2. Reviews are useful for keeping up on industry gossip as respects what's new and fashionable. Those fads and fashions may be of interest to me or could be further evidence of how low we've sunk as a society. ;-)

3. Mainly I just enjoy reading about audio since it is an area of interest for me. Sometimes articles are educational and sometimes the author is full of it or comes from a direction that simply doesn't connect for me.

What magazine reviews will never be for me is some kind of holy writ or scientific reference text. I think people make a basic mistake when they try to elevate what is essentially hobby-based reading entertainment to a level of authority that is neither deserved or intrinsic to the format.

Very well said!

I read reviews for the same reasons... Nothing wrtten in review is Gospel.... It's entertaining and hopefully informative... but at the end of the day, it should never be taken as more than a basis for finding new products to audition...

Feanor
02-23-2010, 09:05 AM
One thing I'm NOT looking for in reviews are lengthy rambles filled personal anecdotes and reflections, We get a great deal of this especially at TAS and Stereophile. Is this narcisistic or literary pretense? Either way, I don't find it entertaining much less useful.

mijs
02-23-2010, 09:30 AM
Just informative, and I'd like to see more of them.

Comparos are done in motorcycle mags ALL the time and none of the manufactureres seem to suffer from them.

Bike A is slightly faster, but Bike B handles a little better, and Bike C is the most comfortable. Potential buyers can decide which ones they want to test ride.


Regardless of the type of audio equipment or the price range, a descriptive comparo between top contenders would be great. The reviewers can always find positive things to say about a quality piece.

What's the harm?

Ajani
02-23-2010, 09:39 AM
Just informative, and I'd like to see more of them.

Comparos are done in motorcycle mags ALL the time and none of the manufactureres seem to suffer from them.

Bike A is slightly faster, but Bike B handles a little better, and Bike C is the most comfortable. Potential buyers can decide which ones they want to test ride.


Regardless of the type of audio equipment or the price range, a descriptive comparo between top contenders would be great. The reviewers can always find positive things to say about a quality piece.

What's the harm?

Absolutely nothing wrong with comparison... the issue is when they attempt to pick a clear winner... Since many persons assume that the winner of a group test of similarly priced products is the one they should buy... When in reality the one that came last may be the most suitable one for their musical tastes....

The issue with HiFi is that many of us want a reviewer to tell us what is best and what we should buy... No reviewer/mag can do that....

Audio Note AN-E might well be the best speaker ever made in the opinion of several experienced reviewers, but that doesn't guarantee that you will like it... Same thing for any product that a reviewer recommends or buys....

I think the biggest question may actually not be what do mags need to do to be more useful, but instead how to get consumers to understand the use of mags....

Ajani
02-23-2010, 09:44 AM
One thing I'm NOT looking for in reviews is a lengthy rambles filled personal anecdotes and reflections, We get a great deal of this especially at TAS and Stereophile. Is this narcisistic or literary pretense? Either way, I don't find it entertaining much less useful.

lol sadly, that is true for many readers... I often skim through those sections of the review... As nice as it is to know what kind of music a reviewer listened to during the review, I don't care for paragraphs of detail on songs I've never heard and am not interested in hearing... But I suppose for person with the same musical tastes as the reviewer, such fluff may be interesting... same thing with the anecdotes and reflections....

nightflier
02-23-2010, 10:02 AM
Well one thing I've suggested in another thread is to have only the top products from each company reviewed, this being the absolute best they can produce, so there is no excuse about whether the company skimped on anything to save for the next model up.

Personally I always gravitate towards the shootouts, maybe only because they are more entertaining to read. It irks me to no end when reviewers "compare" a product under review with something that hardly resembles it or with their "memory" of a past product they reviewed. The European mags at least are more fun to read, even if they don't have all the scientific data to back everything.

manlystanley
02-23-2010, 10:05 AM
I also like to read foreign magazines for different perspective of reviews. For example, WhatHIFI goes ga-ga over the Proac speakers, but Norwegian and German magazines give them a big yawn. (Google translate is a big help with this.)

So, it make we wonder if Germanic peoples have a genetic predisposition to certain sound qualities.

Best Regards,
Stan

mijs
02-23-2010, 02:10 PM
Absolutely nothing wrong with comparison... the issue is when they attempt to pick a clear winner... Since many persons assume that the winner of a group test of similarly priced products is the one they should buy... When in reality the one that came last may be the most suitable one for their musical tastes....

The issue with HiFi is that many of us want a reviewer to tell us what is best and what we should buy... No reviewer/mag can do that....

Audio Note AN-E might well be the best speaker ever made in the opinion of several experienced reviewers, but that doesn't guarantee that you will like it... Same thing for any product that a reviewer recommends or buys....



I agree. That's why reviewers shouldn't pick a winner. IMO, that's not their preogative. They should just report the character, build quality, and strengths/weaknesses of each piece compared to the others. Let the buyer decide what would work best for him. As long as the pieces tested are similarly priced and are respectable pieces to begin with, it will work.

RGA
02-23-2010, 05:11 PM
So for example when testing some AN speakers John Atkinson didn't set them up in room corners as AN prescribes for best results. So what would the measurements have been if they were set up as specified? We don't know. Atkinson justified his approach on the basis that he test are speakers in a certain way to ensure fair and consistent testing -- that's objectivity, right??

Not really objective in the least - it is however easier but it forces a square peg into a round hole - his method doesn't do justice for a lot of speakers like, interestingly enough, panels. Though the problem with the AN E review has been discussed on the High efficiency forum of audioasylum by several engineers (and a speaker competitor named Duke). The problem I had with the measurement is that the manufacturer specs them in corners and Stereophile reviewed them in the middle of the room on axis at too high a height. Now even if you want to fit all speakers into the round hole you can't really claim it doesn't meet spec. The AN E in several other magazines and by a "more" technically knowledgeable guy in Martin Colloms (the guy JA goes to for help) measured them and got the numbers.

Peter Qvortrup noted that Stereophile does a disservice to panels and some other designs. Of course if you need the measurement to tell you it's good or not then you can shop via the Sears catalog because the ear isn't good enough to spend much more than that in my view.

Ajani
02-24-2010, 12:09 PM
Wrong comparison. It is "objective" vs. "observational". To observe that a condition exists exists involves no subjectivity. Subjectivity occurs afterwards in either case with a judgment regarding that change. Two people can agree completely on a difference and yet arrive at different conclusions. I've known two prominent reviewers for decades and sometimes disagree with either as to the subjective side of what I find best - having heard exactly the same things.

That's a good clarification... I actually had to read your point twice for it to really sink in (hopefully I was just really tired when I first read it)...


Those of us who do remember that approach by Len Feldman and Julian Hirsch recall how utterly useless they were to convey any useful knowledge as opposed to information.

I never read their reviews, but I can imagine how worthless it would be to try and buy a stereo based on just the test measurements in Stereophile (for example)... As informative as measurements are, I can't see how they can be used in isolation...




In the comparative sense, sure. Remember too that reviewers (and store employees) can get any component at accommodation (I've purchased a couple myself that way), so it is a level field when comparing one to another.

I think TAS should return to its roots with the approach HP took long ago before he had to turn the reins over to new management.

rw

Certainly, comparatively between products of the same price... but between products of different prices, the comparison gets skewered...

The difference between a $3K amp and a $1K (at accommodation) in terms of percentages, is the same as the difference between a $9K and a $3K amp (at retail)... but while someone may be willing to accept the difference ($2K) in the first instance, the difference ($6K) in the second situation, for the same amps, might be totally unacceptable...

Ajani
02-24-2010, 12:28 PM
Should they review mostly popular or exotic gear?

Major mags get criticized heavily for reviewing major brands just about every issue... Krell, Revel, B&W, KEF, NAD, Rotel, Arcam, Dynaudio, Musical Fidelity etc.... get constant reviews in The Absolute Sound, Stereophile, HiFi Choice, What Hifi? etc...

Some persons argue that these mags should focus more on smaller, exotic brands...

Interestingly, I find that the smaller mags/review sites often focus almost exclusively on smaller brands... sometimes even obsessing over small brands the way large mags obsess over large ones..

For example check the speaker reviews section of Dagogo and count how many reviews there are for Audio Note speakers... Just about every model of the AN-E Speaker has been reviewed there (seems almost every writer on the staff has reviewed and raved about an Audio Note speaker - not to mention the amount of AN DACs and Amps that have been reviewed on the site as well)....

So is obsessing over small, exotic brands any more useful to readers?

Would you rather read reviews of gear you might actually be able to audition and buy, or of gear you might only be able to get used (every few years) or purchase special order?

Should the goal be to have a mix of different gear, with a focus on popular brands, but still making regular space for the exotic?

What price range should be the focus of the reviews?

A constant criticism of some of the American mags has been the amount of attention that $100K speakers and equipment have received in recent years....

Should the focus be on affordable gear (let's define affordable as $2K or less per component for the sake of this discussion), Moderately Expensive $2K > $6K, Expensive $6K > $15K or Elite (>$15K)? Should there be a balance based on the amount of components in each category? Should the balance be based on what the average audiophile invests in his system?

RGA
02-24-2010, 04:44 PM
Ajani

It depends on what is considered small. Audio Note is not a good example really because they're not small. They only do 5% of their business in North America. They have over 700 products and many of them are not even listed on the website. When I went to CES I asked peter why he doesn't make a Tuner. He said "we make tuners" - I said "then why is it not on the website?" he replied "then people would want them and we'd have to build them." They can't keep up with their order book as it is.

I understand the argument you're making that when we review stuff that is hard to find that it doesn't help the average audiophile living in smaller towns that don't have access to such gear - but it "should" be about the better gear out there not how many retail outlets carry it. All of the writers at Dagogo heard the stuff in the United States and I am in Canada. There are AN dealers in BC, Alberta and Ontario (though only Soundhounds carries enough stock to show it decently) - and even they can't get stock.

Reviews can actually do a disservice to some makers because good reviews can generate a lot of interest and possibly a lot of sales. But if you are small company and demand heavily outstrips supply or the ability to supply then companies tend to move into larger buildings and hire more people. This put Reference 3a out of business when they were just called 3a. They moved Daniel Dehay lost the ability to oversee large production and the quality suffered heavily putting them under. The second time around he made sure to do it right under the Reference 3a name.

The problem too is that reviewers don't know what is available in your town. PMC is pretty big here but may not be in your city. Paradigm is big in North American and practically non existent in Europe. Audio Note is very big in Russia, Poland, Sweden, Croatia, Vietnam, Denmark, Britain, etc.

I believe there are only 10 dealers in the U.S. but one of the biggest and best is Audiofederation who are also the distributors.

On to a more general note - review sites can be valuable to put stuff off the radar on the radar. Anyone can go and audition a B&W - big deal - why does anyone need a review to tell you what you heard for yourself. I see the review being able to tell you about a Trenner and Freidl loudspeaker company making a speaker that can stand with anything. Until CES I had never heard of them before even though they've been around quite awhile in Europe making highly regarded products.

Heck Sugden is hard enough for most people to find and audition and they've been around for over 40 years.

Reviewers are also in it partially for themselves. I want to spend months with stuff I like and would consider buying - I don't want to spend time with the B&W 705 which I think is obscenely overrated - just because every town is selling it.

I think though that Dagogo and other sites review mainstream stuff as well. Generally though I find the mainstream stuff is a significant step down across the board from the smaller makers who have passion and often cost no concern approaches over choosing a price point and then making something to fit it.

nightflier
02-24-2010, 05:07 PM
RGA, the popularity malaise that you describe is exactly what Klaus at Odyssey told me when he was building my Candela and I complained to him about the website being out of date. He as only two other techs on staff and can't keep up with demand, not to mention keeping the website up to date (although he has found someone to do it now). He wishes that he had more time to grow the business side of Odyssey, but he's too busy building the gear. Outsourcing really isn't an option for him since that would increase costs and affect QC. He's actually retracted from previous outsourcing deals (The Nightingale and Circe speakers) exactly for those reasons.

To answer your other point, maybe there ought to be a magazine (or site) that doesn't claim to be a reviewing rag, but instead just showcases new gear with specs and pics. I know there are some mags that sorta do that, but I was thinking about one that would be a little more impartial and less advertising-driven. Also, if there is one thing that would make magazines like Stereophile more appealing is more photos, particularly of the back-sides of gear.

I also think that online sites are a useful source for reviews in general because it's a great place to aggregate many opinions together. Granted, this tends to favor the products with more distribution, but over time, I think the better products will eventually emerge. This site (Audio Review) is a good place, but I do wish it was more complete. It actually surprises me how few of us who contribute posts on the forums almost daily actually also write reviews. Maybe more incentives might help?

E-Stat
02-24-2010, 05:10 PM
Audio Note is...
Every post is always about AN...

rw

E-Stat
02-24-2010, 05:24 PM
That's a good clarification... I actually had to read your point twice for it to really sink in
I think it is a significant difference. For anyone who has extended experience with live, unamplified music, one can reliably identify differences in the signal chain.


I never read their reviews, but I can imagine how worthless it would be to try and buy a stereo based on just the test measurements ... but between products of different prices, the comparison gets skewered...
Certainly. Reviews are only designed to assist you in narrowing down the choices for you to audition. While I have not had (and will likely never have) the budget for the very best, I have found it extremely useful to understand what is possible for evaluating the components that I buy for myself. I bought my GamuT CD-1 nine years ago after hearing it directly compared with the magnificent $57k Burmester 969/970 transport/DAC combination on a finely tuned quarter of a million dollar system. Was the Burmester system better? You betcha! While I was pulling for the little guy since I was in the market, it beat the GamuT at both frequency extremes and offered better overall resolution. Were the differences, however, worth the 20x multiplier? Not to me!

As I have always been counseled by my mentors, you must make the choices for yourself based upon your priorities and budget. With sources, I have rarely disagreed with the assessments of my reviewer friends. On the other hand, I have frequently differed in my choice of speaker.

rw

Ajani
02-24-2010, 06:08 PM
Ajani

It depends on what is considered small. Audio Note is not a good example really because they're not small. They only do 5% of their business in North America. They have over 700 products and many of them are not even listed on the website. When I went to CES I asked peter why he doesn't make a Tuner. He said "we make tuners" - I said "then why is it not on the website?" he replied "then people would want them and we'd have to build them." They can't keep up with their order book as it is.

I understand the argument you're making that when we review stuff that is hard to find that it doesn't help the average audiophile living in smaller towns that don't have access to such gear - but it "should" be about the better gear out there not how many retail outlets carry it. All of the writers at Dagogo heard the stuff in the United States and I am in Canada. There are AN dealers in BC, Alberta and Ontario (though only Soundhounds carries enough stock to show it decently) - and even they can't get stock.

Reviews can actually do a disservice to some makers because good reviews can generate a lot of interest and possibly a lot of sales. But if you are small company and demand heavily outstrips supply or the ability to supply then companies tend to move into larger buildings and hire more people. This put Reference 3a out of business when they were just called 3a. They moved Daniel Dehay lost the ability to oversee large production and the quality suffered heavily putting them under. The second time around he made sure to do it right under the Reference 3a name.

The problem too is that reviewers don't know what is available in your town. PMC is pretty big here but may not be in your city. Paradigm is big in North American and practically non existent in Europe. Audio Note is very big in Russia, Poland, Sweden, Croatia, Vietnam, Denmark, Britain, etc.

I believe there are only 10 dealers in the U.S. but one of the biggest and best is Audiofederation who are also the distributors.

On to a more general note - review sites can be valuable to put stuff off the radar on the radar. Anyone can go and audition a B&W - big deal - why does anyone need a review to tell you what you heard for yourself. I see the review being able to tell you about a Trenner and Freidl loudspeaker company making a speaker that can stand with anything. Until CES I had never heard of them before even though they've been around quite awhile in Europe making highly regarded products.

Heck Sugden is hard enough for most people to find and audition and they've been around for over 40 years.

Reviewers are also in it partially for themselves. I want to spend months with stuff I like and would consider buying - I don't want to spend time with the B&W 705 which I think is obscenely overrated - just because every town is selling it.

I think though that Dagogo and other sites review mainstream stuff as well. Generally though I find the mainstream stuff is a significant step down across the board from the smaller makers who have passion and often cost no concern approaches over choosing a price point and then making something to fit it.

Audio Note is small in North America (since North America only accounts for 5% of AN Sales and the North American dealers can't even get enough stock to satisfy demand)... All the Dagogo reviewers (who reviewed AN gear) are in North America, so they fall into my example of reviewing smaller, exotic fare...

As to the question of mainstream stuff being a step down: maybe, but the most compelling review I read on Dagogo for the AN-E, was from a reviewer (can't remember the name) who owned (at least at the time of the review) a pair of Revel Performa F30 speakers... The fact that he had a pair of mainstream speakers (that I know and like) gave me a reference for his opinion... And though, he clearly preferred the AN-E to his reference speakers, he didn't bash the Revels in the comparison... That review really made me want to hear some AN speakers (too bad the lack of supply and dealers, means that's unlikely to happen anytime soon, and if I want to purchase a pair then I'm really in trouble)...

Ajani
02-24-2010, 06:13 PM
RGA, the popularity malaise that you describe is exactly what Klaus at Odyssey told me when he was building my Candela and I complained to him about the website being out of date. He as only two other techs on staff and can't keep up with demand, not to mention keeping the website up to date (although he has found someone to do it now). He wishes that he had more time to grow the business side of Odyssey, but he's too busy building the gear. Outsourcing really isn't an option for him since that would increase costs and affect QC. He's actually retracted from previous outsourcing deals (The Nightingale and Circe speakers) exactly for those reasons.

To answer your other point, maybe there ought to be a magazine (or site) that doesn't claim to be a reviewing rag, but instead just showcases new gear with specs and pics. I know there are some mags that sorta do that, but I was thinking about one that would be a little more impartial and less advertising-driven. Also, if there is one thing that would make magazines like Stereophile more appealing is more photos, particularly of the back-sides of gear.

I also think that online sites are a useful source for reviews in general because it's a great place to aggregate many opinions together. Granted, this tends to favor the products with more distribution, but over time, I think the better products will eventually emerge. This site (Audio Review) is a good place, but I do wish it was more complete. It actually surprises me how few of us who contribute posts on the forums almost daily actually also write reviews. Maybe more incentives might help?

I feel sorry for Klaus now, far as I know he's gone into hiding since The Absolute Sound raved about the Khartago Amp... poor guy has orders just piling up....

Which is why I question how useful it is for the Major Mags to review more exotic fare... Does it do anything but frustrate consumers and overload small manufacturers?

Ajani
02-24-2010, 07:05 PM
Certainly. Reviews are only designed to assist you in narrowing down the choices for you to audition. While I have not had (and will likely never have) the budget for the very best, I have found it extremely useful to understand what is possible for evaluating the components that I buy for myself. I bought my GamuT CD-1 nine years ago after hearing it directly compared with the magnificent $57k Burmester 969/970 transport/DAC combination on a finely tuned quarter of a million dollar system. Was the Burmester system better? You betcha! While I was pulling for the little guy since I was in the market, it beat the GamuT at both frequency extremes and offered better overall resolution. Were the differences, however, worth the 20x multiplier? Not to me!

As I have always been counseled by my mentors, you must make the choices for yourself based upon your priorities and budget. With sources, I have rarely disagreed with the assessments of my reviewer friends. On the other hand, I have frequently differed in my choice of speaker.

rw

I've learned that almost everyone in this hobby believes in diminishing returns, but we all disagree on where it starts.... I also believe that our opinion of where diminishing returns starts, varies greatly as our disposable income increases (or decreases)... So I suspect that if you win the lottery and become a multi-millionaire, then that Burmester system may well be worth 20x multiplier....

E-Stat
02-24-2010, 07:13 PM
So I suspect that if you win the lottery and become a multi-millionaire, then that Burmester system may well be worth 20x multiplier....
That was nine years ago. Today, I've heard an EMM Labs combo that sounds better still and lists for far less - if not as exotically housed. Call it $25k for better results.

rw

RGA
02-24-2010, 07:41 PM
Ajani

Yes your point about Audio Note makes sense - but I think it becomes an issue of philosophy and Peter simply will not cave into sacrificing that philosophy for immediate sales. My dealer, Soundhounds, has said that Audio Note should make far less products so that they're builders are not overwhelmed with many different designs. If you sell 4 amps and 3 cd players and 3 loudspeakers then it is far easier to manufacturer and keep costs down because you don't have to support so many different parts. Audio Note has a ridiculous number of tubes to stock let alone resisters and caps and transformers. Soundhounds has a point because with orders for so many products backlogs begin. I waited 10 months for my turntable because they have one guy (Mario) who builds the whole thing from scratch among other duties. If you are a dealer - this is a frustrating company to sell.

For instance if you walk into a dealer carrying "Typical" products and you audition XYZ product and you say right I want to buy it. You can usually take it home then and there. The dealer usually has several of them in stock or can get one in a week - maybe two. But if you are a dealer and you spend time letting people listen to a set of AN E speakers and the customer loves it and says he wants one - the dealer then has to say - gee sorry but you'll have to wait 8 months. You have to be darn well dedicated to the line and TRUST that you can convince customers to part with their money up front and have them wait 8 months. And then that date goes by and they're still not in. The customer will be phoning and bugging you about when the speaker will be ready. It's just no a hassle businesses really want to get into.

Even the owner of Soundhounds shrugs and says it's very frustrating but then again it's also the best stuff he sells. They lend the customers several of the demo products to fill the wait. A set of AN J's has been shipped all over B.C. as people wait for the AN E's. But then the AN J is in a home and not being sold - so that too is a kind of cost. They had to buy that AN J after all and while it's in a home it is not in the store being demoed.

In my case Audio Note was just pure luck. I happened to move to Vancouver Island to go to University and Soundhounds happens to be on the island. There are several dealers in California and on the East Coast and Colorado being the biggest and outside of that you're pretty much out of luck.

So I agree that AN is small and exotic fare if you compare them to mainstream but I guess it's difficult for me to really be able to answer your issue. There is one good audio dealership on Vancouver island - that dealer carries Audio Note. So in my particular corner of the world it is just as common as B&W, Magnepan or Bryston.

There's no doubt there's an element of esoteric with smaller companies - anytime you get into SET makers the market of dealers gets real small.

That is why I have been trying to find other alternates that I like a whole lot - even if I like them a bit less - There are still many companies I really like - so in your town there may not be Audio Note but there might be Teresonic - or Acapella, or Acoustic Zen, King Sound, or Silbatone, or Sonist, or Harbeth, Tannoy, Studio Electric or Gallo etc.

All of the above are worth listening to but only one may be in a given person's city and in most cases they are 2-3 men operations. That said most Audio Note guys are pretty passionate about it. It's a well known group and you can usually find an owner who will let you listen. Sending an e-mail to Peter or Dave cope or the Audio Federation to find the nearest owner to you to let you audition it is not a bad way to do things. In fact the advantage is that is a real home not a dealer trying to sell it.

Usually they are complete systems which IMO is the only way to hear them. That is the designer's intent and that is how they work best. Hear a system like this http://www.audionote.co.uk/articles/_home_reviews_01.shtml for awhile and it's hard to stay objective to be perfectly honest. Granted these are stupid prices but the sound justifies the prices. And let's face it if you can afford those prices you can afford a flight to go audition them.

Even the big Wes Philips of Stereophile had a tough time being objective. I get dumped on all the time because I am perceived as not being objective but Wes Philips said after CES that Audio Note was the best sound he ever heard and that "everything else" at CES was "just noise." Even for me that is going over the top. But I have read a lot of show reports over the last five years and an awful lot of them say very similar things.

Ajani
02-24-2010, 08:40 PM
Ajani

Yes your point about Audio Note makes sense - but I think it becomes an issue of philosophy and Peter simply will not cave into sacrificing that philosophy for immediate sales. My dealer, Soundhounds, has said that Audio Note should make far less products so that they're builders are not overwhelmed with many different designs. If you sell 4 amps and 3 cd players and 3 loudspeakers then it is far easier to manufacturer and keep costs down because you don't have to support so many different parts. Audio Note has a ridiculous number of tubes to stock let alone resisters and caps and transformers. Soundhounds has a point because with orders for so many products backlogs begin. I waited 10 months for my turntable because they have one guy (Mario) who builds the whole thing from scratch among other duties. If you are a dealer - this is a frustrating company to sell.

For instance if you walk into a dealer carrying "Typical" products and you audition XYZ product and you say right I want to buy it. You can usually take it home then and there. The dealer usually has several of them in stock or can get one in a week - maybe two. But if you are a dealer and you spend time letting people listen to a set of AN E speakers and the customer loves it and says he wants one - the dealer then has to say - gee sorry but you'll have to wait 8 months. You have to be darn well dedicated to the line and TRUST that you can convince customers to part with their money up front and have them wait 8 months. And then that date goes by and they're still not in. The customer will be phoning and bugging you about when the speaker will be ready. It's just no a hassle businesses really want to get into.

Even the owner of Soundhounds shrugs and says it's very frustrating but then again it's also the best stuff he sells. They lend the customers several of the demo products to fill the wait. A set of AN J's has been shipped all over B.C. as people wait for the AN E's. But then the AN J is in a home and not being sold - so that too is a kind of cost. They had to buy that AN J after all and while it's in a home it is not in the store being demoed.

In my case Audio Note was just pure luck. I happened to move to Vancouver Island to go to University and Soundhounds happens to be on the island. There are several dealers in California and on the East Coast and Colorado being the biggest and outside of that you're pretty much out of luck.

So I agree that AN is small and exotic fare if you compare them to mainstream but I guess it's difficult for me to really be able to answer your issue. There is one good audio dealership on Vancouver island - that dealer carries Audio Note. So in my particular corner of the world it is just as common as B&W, Magnepan or Bryston.

There's no doubt there's an element of esoteric with smaller companies - anytime you get into SET makers the market of dealers gets real small.

That is why I have been trying to find other alternates that I like a whole lot - even if I like them a bit less - There are still many companies I really like - so in your town there may not be Audio Note but there might be Teresonic - or Acapella, or Acoustic Zen, King Sound, or Silbatone, or Sonist, or Harbeth, Tannoy, Studio Electric or Gallo etc.

All of the above are worth listening to but only one may be in a given person's city and in most cases they are 2-3 men operations. That said most Audio Note guys are pretty passionate about it. It's a well known group and you can usually find an owner who will let you listen. Sending an e-mail to Peter or Dave cope or the Audio Federation to find the nearest owner to you to let you audition it is not a bad way to do things. In fact the advantage is that is a real home not a dealer trying to sell it.

Usually they are complete systems which IMO is the only way to hear them. That is the designer's intent and that is how they work best. Hear a system like this http://www.audionote.co.uk/articles/_home_reviews_01.shtml for awhile and it's hard to stay objective to be perfectly honest. Granted these are stupid prices but the sound justifies the prices. And let's face it if you can afford those prices you can afford a flight to go audition them.

Even the big Wes Philips of Stereophile had a tough time being objective. I get dumped on all the time because I am perceived as not being objective but Wes Philips said after CES that Audio Note was the best sound he ever heard and that "everything else" at CES was "just noise." Even for me that is going over the top. But I have read a lot of show reports over the last five years and an awful lot of them say very similar things.

I think Audio Note either needs to cut back on the number of products, like Soundhounds suggests OR hire and train some new staff... They don't need to move production to China, just hire and train some more skilled workers... They have more than enough demand to support bringing in skilled workers.... 8 Months is a ridiculous waiting period for a HiFi product....

There's nothing wrong with being totally in love with a brand, but comments like the one from Wes Philips hurt a reviewer's credibility.... I've heard lots of HiFi that did nothing for me, but I wouldn't call any of it noise...

RGA
02-24-2010, 11:34 PM
Ajani

The thing with credibility is this - is it an "honest" portrayal of the experience. The job of a reviewer is to tell you how he feels - even if it risks people thinking he went over the top. If I tell you Bose is complete and utter junk compared to Quad 57 - even people who have never heard Quad or the Bose - they will say "yeah that seems reasonable" because Bose as a reputation and Quad has a reputation.

To me there is a clear league of products to my ear that some will agree with and some won't. I think the only difference between someone calling a Bose "noise" compared to a Quad and calling established high end brands "noise" compared to an Audio Note system is also a matter of perception.

I have said it many times that it boils down to experience. Listening to a good car stereo is WAY better than listening to those $14.99 clock radios. Listening to an iPod with the stock headphones versus listening through AKG is a revelation. Listening to Klipsch Reference over Bose is a big step up and so on and so forth.

But for whatever reason people believe it all stops once they buy from a boutique. After all they carry the best right? Well not really because if they carried the best they would carry Audio Note, Marten, Trenner and Freidl, Acapella, King Sound, Tannoy Prestige, Cary, Einstein, Shindo, and several others. But they don't - they carry big easy to sell companies, B&W, Paradigm PSB, Rotel, Naim etc that while they are a step up over Bose and Polk and Denon receivers they're just not very good compared to these other makers IMO. Now that is no slight on them - they ALSO are not charging at those price levels so I would not place the expectation on them.

Wes went way over the top I suspect because it was his first time auditioning it - and AN does have the ability to have that effect on people - for heaven sake look at me. I've been on about them for nearly a decade. And I still go in and listen to AN E's in corners and grin in disbelief or reduced to tears by the music. What else should a reviewer do other than to tell the reader their gut reaction to what they hear?

That may insult a lot of other companies - to which I say - do a better job. The review should be there for the readers not the manufacturers. Like the Stereophile founder noted - there should not be 100 class A products there should be a handful - one handful at most of "bests".

Our entire society has become this PC world where everyone should be an equal - treated as an equal sure but no not everyone or everything is an equal. Sorry Johnny but if you don't do your homework and you don't study and you can't spell your name you are not "EQUAL" in ability to Albert Einstein, you should not get a pass to the next grade (they do because it might hurt their self esteem).

Now I am getting more diplomatic as I age probably because I am a teacher and I do have to be EXTREMELY diplomatic in my profession (though it doesn't serve the students or their parents in the end because while we're falling all over ourselves to refrain from offending anyone - the kid doesn't get early intervention to get them on the right track because we're not telling them - "You're kid is a bully and probably a sociopath and seems a little "thick" and you should get him a shrink and a tutor." - No it is " Little Johnny is overly active in the classroom and is excited easily and has difficulty focusing on tasks. That is all lala language that doesn't seem so bad - heaven forbid we distress the parents. Little Johnny turns into a drug dealer by grade 9 and drops out because he's as thick as a bucket of bricks because no one forced him to do the work in grade 5, 6, or 7.

The Bryston 3B is miles and miles better than my old Pioneer Elite Receiver - and I have said so many times. No one has ever complained about that remark. But if I say that the GakuON is miles and miles better than the Bryston 3b - oh now I am shill, not objective, a nut, or whatever. Which is odd because in virtually every case - no one has heard the GakuOn. I say well gee you agree with my assessment that the Bryston is WAY better than the Elite and I am correct but if I say the GakuOn is WAY better than the Bryston I must now suddenly not be able to hear.

Wes' remarks don't bother me very much because I have auditioned a very similar system this year at CES and after wading through more than 70 rooms (many I did not cover in my show report at all because they were frankly terrible), the AN system can do certain things than very little else approaches. I think Wes took a HUGE risk making those remarks because of the fact that many products he has reviewed favorably over the years takes a bit of a hit and many manufacturers could be upset. Instead of getting "credit" for coming out with a risky "truthful" commentary - he is blasted for telling people that in fact there is a league - and in fact some stuff truly rises above a lot of other stuff and is a LOT better than other stuff such that the other stuff is unlistenable.

Fremer - although I disagree with his taste - in fact did the same thing with Musical Fidelity and raved about it and called SET guys kind of out to lunch. That group would include me. But I respect the fact that Fremer truly believes in his view - he feels that the MF amps rise above the rest and that SETs are stone age junk. He's alienating a lot of tube fans and again I think Fremer is completely wrong - but I also believe that he believes what he says and he's certainly not being PC. Good for him. Recently he gave a negative review to a popular Bryston amp - while recommending a similar priced unit from a competing maker (Parasound I think). Everyone wants negative reviews - but the problem is when they come out it can offend owners and Bryston has a LOT of owners.

The audio review industry is not objective - it is subjective - it is people listening to a product and then deciding if it is portraying the music in a way that is truthful to either the disc or the live event or both. But wow that is hardly absolute science. If one thing sounds like a 10 and everything else sounds like a 4 then the thing that sounds like a 10 should not be stomped down to a 6 and the 4 brought up to a 6 to make for a nice touchy feely everything is good and it's all a matter of taste.

Of course if all the magazines don't do this then the High end will be reduced to about 8 companies who are TRULY deserving of being called the High End. This goes back to Stereophile's founder. He had 1 amp in class A - that is the best - that is "high end" everything not in class A is a step down - and is not the best or high end (or not at the top end of the high end). Our PC nature has turned everything into equals which does nothing but a disservice to everyone who then misses out on what truly is the best stuff out there. The 10 will be drowned out in the sea of watering down everything.

When Wes goes on a limb and made those comments - does anyone say - wow I have to make sure I audition something from them? Nope! It's all about how he's not objective. No. Could it be that indeed it really is just THAT much better than everything else he heard it at the show? No one stops to consider that he truly may have felt that everything else sounded like rubbish in comparison. Is that possibility too much for the fragility of the audiophile egos out there? Is it possible that like Holt this for him was the ONE class A deserved room and way above the rest.?

Maybe he just didn't here some of the better competitors?

Ajani
02-25-2010, 06:13 AM
Ajani

The thing with credibility is this - is it an "honest" portrayal of the experience. The job of a reviewer is to tell you how he feels - even if it risks people thinking he went over the top. If I tell you Bose is complete and utter junk compared to Quad 57 - even people who have never heard Quad or the Bose - they will say "yeah that seems reasonable" because Bose as a reputation and Quad has a reputation.

To me there is a clear league of products to my ear that some will agree with and some won't. I think the only difference between someone calling a Bose "noise" compared to a Quad and calling established high end brands "noise" compared to an Audio Note system is also a matter of perception.

I have said it many times that it boils down to experience. Listening to a good car stereo is WAY better than listening to those $14.99 clock radios. Listening to an iPod with the stock headphones versus listening through AKG is a revelation. Listening to Klipsch Reference over Bose is a big step up and so on and so forth.

But for whatever reason people believe it all stops once they buy from a boutique. After all they carry the best right? Well not really because if they carried the best they would carry Audio Note, Marten, Trenner and Freidl, Acapella, King Sound, Tannoy Prestige, Cary, Einstein, Shindo, and several others. But they don't - they carry big easy to sell companies, B&W, Paradigm PSB, Rotel, Naim etc that while they are a step up over Bose and Polk and Denon receivers they're just not very good compared to these other makers IMO. Now that is no slight on them - they ALSO are not charging at those price levels so I would not place the expectation on them.

Wes went way over the top I suspect because it was his first time auditioning it - and AN does have the ability to have that effect on people - for heaven sake look at me. I've been on about them for nearly a decade. And I still go in and listen to AN E's in corners and grin in disbelief or reduced to tears by the music. What else should a reviewer do other than to tell the reader their gut reaction to what they hear?

That may insult a lot of other companies - to which I say - do a better job. The review should be there for the readers not the manufacturers. Like the Stereophile founder noted - there should not be 100 class A products there should be a handful - one handful at most of "bests".

Our entire society has become this PC world where everyone should be an equal - treated as an equal sure but no not everyone or everything is an equal. Sorry Johnny but if you don't do your homework and you don't study and you can't spell your name you are not "EQUAL" in ability to Albert Einstein, you should not get a pass to the next grade (they do because it might hurt their self esteem).

Now I am getting more diplomatic as I age probably because I am a teacher and I do have to be EXTREMELY diplomatic in my profession (though it doesn't serve the students or their parents in the end because while we're falling all over ourselves to refrain from offending anyone - the kid doesn't get early intervention to get them on the right track because we're not telling them - "You're kid is a bully and probably a sociopath and seems a little "thick" and you should get him a shrink and a tutor." - No it is " Little Johnny is overly active in the classroom and is excited easily and has difficulty focusing on tasks. That is all lala language that doesn't seem so bad - heaven forbid we distress the parents. Little Johnny turns into a drug dealer by grade 9 and drops out because he's as thick as a bucket of bricks because no one forced him to do the work in grade 5, 6, or 7.

The Bryston 3B is miles and miles better than my old Pioneer Elite Receiver - and I have said so many times. No one has ever complained about that remark. But if I say that the GakuON is miles and miles better than the Bryston 3b - oh now I am shill, not objective, a nut, or whatever. Which is odd because in virtually every case - no one has heard the GakuOn. I say well gee you agree with my assessment that the Bryston is WAY better than the Elite and I am correct but if I say the GakuOn is WAY better than the Bryston I must now suddenly not be able to hear.

Wes' remarks don't bother me very much because I have auditioned a very similar system this year at CES and after wading through more than 70 rooms (many I did not cover in my show report at all because they were frankly terrible), the AN system can do certain things than very little else approaches. I think Wes took a HUGE risk making those remarks because of the fact that many products he has reviewed favorably over the years takes a bit of a hit and many manufacturers could be upset. Instead of getting "credit" for coming out with a risky "truthful" commentary - he is blasted for telling people that in fact there is a league - and in fact some stuff truly rises above a lot of other stuff and is a LOT better than other stuff such that the other stuff is unlistenable.

Fremer - although I disagree with his taste - in fact did the same thing with Musical Fidelity and raved about it and called SET guys kind of out to lunch. That group would include me. But I respect the fact that Fremer truly believes in his view - he feels that the MF amps rise above the rest and that SETs are stone age junk. He's alienating a lot of tube fans and again I think Fremer is completely wrong - but I also believe that he believes what he says and he's certainly not being PC. Good for him. Recently he gave a negative review to a popular Bryston amp - while recommending a similar priced unit from a competing maker (Parasound I think). Everyone wants negative reviews - but the problem is when they come out it can offend owners and Bryston has a LOT of owners.

The audio review industry is not objective - it is subjective - it is people listening to a product and then deciding if it is portraying the music in a way that is truthful to either the disc or the live event or both. But wow that is hardly absolute science. If one thing sounds like a 10 and everything else sounds like a 4 then the thing that sounds like a 10 should not be stomped down to a 6 and the 4 brought up to a 6 to make for a nice touchy feely everything is good and it's all a matter of taste.

Of course if all the magazines don't do this then the High end will be reduced to about 8 companies who are TRULY deserving of being called the High End. This goes back to Stereophile's founder. He had 1 amp in class A - that is the best - that is "high end" everything not in class A is a step down - and is not the best or high end (or not at the top end of the high end). Our PC nature has turned everything into equals which does nothing but a disservice to everyone who then misses out on what truly is the best stuff out there. The 10 will be drowned out in the sea of watering down everything.

When Wes goes on a limb and made those comments - does anyone say - wow I have to make sure I audition something from them? Nope! It's all about how he's not objective. No. Could it be that indeed it really is just THAT much better than everything else he heard it at the show? No one stops to consider that he truly may have felt that everything else sounded like rubbish in comparison. Is that possibility too much for the fragility of the audiophile egos out there? Is it possible that like Holt this for him was the ONE class A deserved room and way above the rest.?

Maybe he just didn't here some of the better competitors?

I'm not suggesting that reviewers should claim that everything sounds fine or pretend that they like everything... Excessive PC is a waste of time to readers....

My issue is that extreme positions are just as worthless as being too Politically Correct...

When a reviewer gets a new toy in for review and suddenly raves that it is the greatest he's ever heard and beats everything up to 3x its price, that is generally crap that doesn't hold up against future reviews from that reviewer (and sometimes the very next review finds a new greatest product)...

I find the position that certain products make everything else sound like junk to be mere HiFi snobbery.... For all the talk, I don't regard JBL, Denon, Yamaha, Klipsch or even Bose to be junk.... I'm one of those persons who has not gone into the extreme position of "I can't listen to music unless it is played on XX quality system".... Despite having a Benchmark DAC 1/ AKG K701 Headphone setup, I can still enjoy music played through an iPod with the stock headphones (and I don't regard it as junk)....

You can honestly state that you preferred one product to another (and gives reasons) without resorting to nonsense like "everything else is just noise"... I don't believe for a second that Wes thinks his reference system and all the stuff he raved about before is noise... Yes, they may all be inferior, in his opinion, to the AN setup he heard, but that doesn't make them noise....

We don't need to pretend that all HiFi is equal... but the extreme positions are generally BS.... Just give detail descriptions of the sound of a particular product, what you think its strengths and weaknesses are... You can tell us whether or not you liked it or would use it in your system...

I owned NAD gear previously and I found it to be too smooth, which I found boring in the long run... I switched to Rotel and it injected excitement into my system and made me want to listen to music again... Now I could shorten that to: "NAD sounds like $#!+", but then that's a worthless comment, as it conveys nothing useful to a reader... At least my description earlier lets you know why I didn't like the NAD, so you can make your own decision...

RGA
02-25-2010, 07:52 AM
Ajani

Yes I see what you are saying in a certain sense but to me it boils down to what is being compared. I like the B&W 604 more than I like the similarly priced Paradigm 100V3. And I could write a review outlining why I like the 604 more but at the end of the day neither really stands out much from the other one. They're arguably lateral moves. I like the Rote RA-01 considerably more than the Nad Bee of the same money - but even here the RA-01 is not exactly the last word of SS.

I could compare Bryston power amps to Rotel to MF to Sim Audio and I could even rank them in order of preference but even here - the differences just are not very big. They're made big by the audio press but they really are not. Not in my view to justify a doubling or tripling the price of one over the other. The differences just are not very big. In a sense they're big differences because people have not heard components that "really are" leaps ahead.

Price has nothing to do with it - it boils down to design - the AN E or the King Sound Prince II under $8k have a certain design approach that little else regardless of price has. I liked both of them more than Avalon loudspeakers at $47,000 for example. So I would be in the camp saying that the Prince II and AN E/Spe HE is preferable to speakers at 5+ times the price.

Consider the speaker example. Most of the floorstanding speakers in the $1k - 3k price range that are designed similarly - 3-4 6 inch woofers with a metal tweeter in a slim deep box following the Floyd Toole approach sound very much alike. A person then auditions a Magnepan or Martin Logan panel - and raves - astonishing can't believe how "different" it sounds and brings things to the table that none of those boxes brings. I also think they bring a whole new set of weaknesses that those boxes don't possess; nevertheless, they sound "wildly" different and if you buy into them then they sound "wildly better.

I am not talking about what one can enjoy - I have a set of AKG 26p headphones and an iPod - I enjoy it. I have a stock car stereo - I enjoy listening to music in my car. That's a different issue. For Wes it was comparing expensive stuff to expensive stuff and claiming that a particular system rose above the best. The AKG 26p is a very nice headphone but the top AKG and Stax and Sennheisers are vastly better. The over the top remarks depend on how serious one takes music reproduction - or perhaps how anal one is about it.

Ajani
02-25-2010, 09:09 AM
Ajani

Yes I see what you are saying in a certain sense but to me it boils down to what is being compared. I like the B&W 604 more than I like the similarly priced Paradigm 100V3. And I could write a review outlining why I like the 604 more but at the end of the day neither really stands out much from the other one. They're arguably lateral moves. I like the Rote RA-01 considerably more than the Nad Bee of the same money - but even here the RA-01 is not exactly the last word of SS.

I could compare Bryston power amps to Rotel to MF to Sim Audio and I could even rank them in order of preference but even here - the differences just are not very big. They're made big by the audio press but they really are not. Not in my view to justify a doubling or tripling the price of one over the other. The differences just are not very big. In a sense they're big differences because people have not heard components that "really are" leaps ahead.

Price has nothing to do with it - it boils down to design - the AN E or the King Sound Prince II under $8k have a certain design approach that little else regardless of price has. I liked both of them more than Avalon loudspeakers at $47,000 for example. So I would be in the camp saying that the Prince II and AN E/Spe HE is preferable to speakers at 5+ times the price.

Consider the speaker example. Most of the floorstanding speakers in the $1k - 3k price range that are designed similarly - 3-4 6 inch woofers with a metal tweeter in a slim deep box following the Floyd Toole approach sound very much alike. A person then auditions a Magnepan or Martin Logan panel - and raves - astonishing can't believe how "different" it sounds and brings things to the table that none of those boxes brings. I also think they bring a whole new set of weaknesses that those boxes don't possess; nevertheless, they sound "wildly" different and if you buy into them then they sound "wildly better.

I am not talking about what one can enjoy - I have a set of AKG 26p headphones and an iPod - I enjoy it. I have a stock car stereo - I enjoy listening to music in my car. That's a different issue. For Wes it was comparing expensive stuff to expensive stuff and claiming that a particular system rose above the best. The AKG 26p is a very nice headphone but the top AKG and Stax and Sennheisers are vastly better. The over the top remarks depend on how serious one takes music reproduction - or perhaps how anal one is about it.

You can describe (as you did above) that you don't notice large differences between various SS amps... But the difference between SET and SS is substantial.... Nothing wrong with that (it gives a frame of reference for your opinion)... You can also say that you vastly prefer SET and give your reasons...

If someone prefers the presentation of Panels to Box speakers, there must be reason(s) for the preference... Those reasons can be explained... For example I always hear E-Stat talking about the coherence of full range panels not being matched by multi-driver speakers with advanced crossovers.... From that I can determine how important coherence is to me, versus SPL and bass impact that I will get from box speakers... Just saying that Panels destroy Cone Speakers tells me nothing useful....

A brand that really intrigues me is actually Audio Note - not because a number of reviewers make over the top claims about how magical it is, but based on actual description of the performance:

1) Works with all genres of music, as Peter Q loves to demonstrate at HiFi Shows - That is a major PLUS for me and immediately grabs my attention. I don't want a HiFi setup that is only good with Jazz....

2) Designed to be used in small to medium sized rooms - I like HiFi that I won't have to build a new room in my house to accommodate... How many persons really have dedicated listening rooms that allow you to pull a speaker out 4 or 5 feet from the back wall and still have a comfortable distance to the listening position? Corner loading is more practical for small rooms (a 2nd bedroom for example - as is commonly used as a listening room for many audiophiles)

3) High Sensitivity - So I know I can get whatever volume level I need, regardless of amp power and so I can just concentrate on getting the best sounding amp...

4) Good bass response - I'm not a bass junkie by any stretch, but with a wide range of tastes in music, including rap, rock and classical... I like speakers that will go full range without a sub....

5) The sound is not analytical - I want to listen to the music, rather than get caught up in how the bass is produced or the imaging or PRAT or any such HiFi nonsense (IMO)...

6) The sound is not too smooth (nor too bright) - It doesn't make every genre sound smooth or sweet or relaxed... Not all live music is relaxing and smooth... Clashing Cymbals should be bright and somewhat harsh... A drum sequence should wake you up and grab your attention... I don't want HiFi that is like a glass of warm milk; designed just to put me to bed at nights... But I don't want something that has me on edge all the time.... I want something that will be bright if the recording is bright, smooth if the recording is smooth, etc...

I find that when the AN reviewers (yourself included) speak about these points, it gets my interest... But when I hear that it makes everything else sound like noise, I start to wonder if they've lost touch with reality (which is sad, since they may very well be on to something)...

Even products you don't like, can be described in a way that clearly shows their strengths and weaknesses and who might want to consider buying them... I remember J Gordon Holt's review of the Bose 901, accurately describing the pros (yes there are pros) and cons of the 901... his conclusion made it clear why most 'traditional' audiophiles won't like them, but much of the general public would be impressed...

RGA
02-25-2010, 05:23 PM
Well yes that is why I found Wes to be "over the top" and coming from me - that says a lot LOL.

Hyperbole tends to get people into trouble and many have taken issue with me over the years for doing just that. Which is why I have tried to tone that down and provide examples of what It is that makes something superior to something else.

And I have also tried to point out where the AN E speaker is beaten. Nothing is perfect after all. I have compared the AN E directly to the Quad 2905 and what is interesting for me is that it has everything I like about what the panels offer up. The AN drivers do not act like "pistons" like typical cone speakers - they use the cabinet and the drivers act more as resonators than typical drivers - which is why they have very little cone movement - and they're extremely light - which is why they possess lightning fast transients and sound just as open and holographic as an electrostatic. But then they also have the horn dynamics speed and live sensation that panels do not possess that the better horns possess.

And then add some actual bass response and use the room to your advantage not a detriment which is why they sound uniform from room to room. You can have an empty room like at shows or a heavily carpeted room with tons of "stuff" in it - or a room with lots of glass and hardwoods - so long as there are corners you're essentially get the sound from the front wall and the speakers vanish.

I think Wes should simply have said - "This was the best sound I heard at CES because (fill in the blanks)" and thus gives credit to the room he felt was best without insulting everything else at the show. Even if he felt Audio Note room was a 10 and everything else was a 1 the fact is the room he auditioned was something like a half million dollars and being objective - frankly it SHOULD bloody well sound good at that price - it SHOULD be better than a Mystere running a Gallo for a system cost that is less than the AN cables.

I don't believe in berating good value for the sane budget because something 100 times the price is better. I don't think that was Wes' intention but I can see how it could come across like that.

poppachubby
02-26-2010, 03:15 AM
I understand the value of a small business model in terms of profitablility. If the orders are there, and AN has been around for years, why not grow the business?

If he's worried about falling demand, that's nuts. The deman will be inherent with the value. Us little fish will spend a lifetime drooling, and the big fish will certainly want to join the club of "bigtime" audio.

Linn has a state of the art factory in Scotland. They employ the best tool/die and machinists in the world, literally. My point is that it can be done, without sacrificing quality.

I'm sure the owner has all kinds of eccentric ideas about audio, but when it comes to business, it would appear he's missing out. If somebody is willing to spend a megabuck on an AN tuner, build the damn thing and take his money!!!

Ajani
02-26-2010, 03:37 AM
I understand the value of a small business model in terms of profitablility. If the orders are there, and AN has been around for years, why not grow the business?

If he's worried about falling demand, that's nuts. The deman will be inherent with the value. Us little fish will spend a lifetime drooling, and the big fish will certainly want to join the club of "bigtime" audio.

Linn has a state of the art factory in Scotland. They employ the best tool/die and machinists in the world, literally. My point is that it can be done, without sacrificing quality.

I'm sure the owner has all kinds of eccentric ideas about audio, but when it comes to business, it would appear he's missing out. If somebody is willing to spend a megabuck on an AN tuner, build the damn thing and take his money!!!

Agreed! Many times a small business owner is a genius in terms of developing products or service, but has no clue about the actual business side... AN (and possibly Odyssey as well) really need to expand... Demand is there and will clearly continue to be there, so they should just invest in new skilled workers....

RGA
02-26-2010, 07:46 AM
The thing is Peter is a multi-millionaire and has other things he's interested in that take up a lot of his and his design team's time that may not result in making money. Building new microphones for the recording industry and a completely new A to D converter to improve the sound of the actual recordings. New mixers, etc.

The bigger a company gets the less control the owner has overseeing everything. I agree - I wish they would increase production and I know they're working on it.

Feanor
02-26-2010, 07:57 AM
...

I'm sure the owner has all kinds of eccentric ideas about audio, but when it comes to business, it would appear he's missing out. If somebody is willing to spend a megabuck on an AN tuner, build the damn thing and take his money!!!
Or buy an OEM's product and relabel. Like Lexicon, right?

Ajani
02-26-2010, 11:12 AM
Or buy an OEM's product and relabel. Like Lexicon, right?

Ummm.... I think that's a bit of a stretch from the point PoppaC was making... I think he was really just referring to a small company expanding workers to deliver goods, they know how to make... And not just repackaging competitor's cheaper products and selling at inflated prices, as Lexicon has done with the OPPO BR Player and Bryston Power Amps....

Ajani
02-26-2010, 11:23 AM
The thing is Peter is a multi-millionaire and has other things he's interested in that take up a lot of his and his design team's time that may not result in making money. Building new microphones for the recording industry and a completely new A to D converter to improve the sound of the actual recordings. New mixers, etc.

The bigger a company gets the less control the owner has overseeing everything. I agree - I wish they would increase production and I know they're working on it.

Problem is that trying to be involved in so many areas is exactly what a bigger company is capable of doing... You can't expand to have such a massive product line without actually... well... expanding.

And since all the existing AN products have already been designed, tested and sold to satisfied customers, then he doesn't need to do much overseeing of them... he just needs competent persons to follow his design instructions and assemble them... And then he can focus his time and his top designers attentions on new endeavors...

You can expand without losing all control of a business...

RGA
02-26-2010, 03:39 PM
Agreed and I know Peter is working on some things - he has for example outsourced production of the zero series to a second plant in Lithuania and apparently a third is being looked into for other things.

Unfortunately some stuff just takes a lot of time to build. It's not like this stuff is made from molds and slapped together on assembly lines.

nightflier
02-26-2010, 05:24 PM
There is another problem with expanding a small company in that its products (and I can say this is definitely the case for Odyssey), are not exactly static because they tailor to the customer's requests. It's what gives the smaller shops a notch up on the competition, but also makes reviewing a bit risky since what the reviewer reviewed isn't necessarily the same product another customer might get.

For example, I asked Klaus to custom configure something for me, use different components and add ports. No problem (if you're willing to pay extra, of course). But is that the same one that 6moons and other sites raved about? Weeeelll not exactly. Smaller shops can do this, but good luck trying to get Arcam, Integra, or even Conrad-Johnson to do this - you'd have to be a lot more important than I am or be willing to pay much more than I can afford. I suppose you could also 3rd-party mod your gear, and that is always a good option, but again, these have nothing to do with the standard product line that reviewers have to review.

RGA
02-27-2010, 05:08 PM
Nightflier

You raise an interesting advantage with small companies in that you can get what you want. Odyssey is online but you can order it the way you like it and then wait. This is similar in some respects to laptops. You can walk into a big box chain and buy a laptop that may give you what you want but chances are far better that if you buy your laptop from XoticPC that you will get a vastly better computer AND for a lower price - but perhaps more importantly you will get exactly what you want.

In the case of Audio Note or perhaps Teresonic you can audition the products and then if you like it you can purchase the product the way you want it. The AN E comes in over 20 different wood finishes has several different cabling and driver choices. I see a similarity in Odyssey's approach and Audio Note's approach in that you can buy the "same" amplifier in terms of design but you can "beef it up" in terms of parts quality. The M3 Preamp for instance is exactly the same design as the M8 preamp - the difference is in the parts quality inside the units and the resulting sound. In a sense there is a "kit builder" element to the companies in that they take a platform and have various supercharged editions of those units and how far you want to take it is up to you.

I am less enthused by after market modifications because why would one think that some guy in a basement can do a better job than the manufacturer? Unless of course the manufacturer is on board with the outside modder.

I think a lot of products out there could be better with a similar approach of upgrading the level of parts inside. Sort of like those cars that had V4, V6, v8 options. With the big companies you don't generally get any of this - you can buy the Arcam integrated amp at $800 or the one at $1500 but you may be paying for stuff in the second one that is unnecessary such as more power instead of a better power supply. I notice that Teresonic does the same thing with several different Lowther drivers.

mlsstl
02-28-2010, 10:52 AM
...And since all the existing AN products have already been designed, tested and sold to satisfied customers, then he doesn't need to do much overseeing of them... he just needs competent persons to follow his design instructions and assemble them... And then he can focus his time and his top designers attentions on new endeavors...

You can expand without losing all control of a business...

While many businesses are interested in ever-expanding, this doesn't necessarily apply to all small businesses. I know a number of craftsmen who are only interested in continuing what they are doing right now. They don't want to add production, people, gain new sales or otherwise expand.

I'd make the observation there are two ends to the business spectrum. Some people start a business to make money. They don't care if they sell speakers, toilet bowl plungers or widgets. At the other end are those who get into a business because they truly love their craft and a business simply gives them the means to pursue doing things exactly the way they want.

Certainly lots of businesses are someplace in the middle.

I'd imagine Peter at AN knows what his options are, and he's probably doing things just the way he wishes. That can be frustrating for his retailers who'd like more product and faster, but they can always drop the line and move to another product if things get too bad.

blackraven
02-28-2010, 01:49 PM
The bottom line is that we will never be able to get a totally objective review for a number of reasons.

1-We all hear things differently and have our own personal tastes.
2-Different reviewers use different amps, preamps, speakers, cable's,
listening environments, etc. How can you properly evaluate Brand A
amp when you are using Brand B preamp and Brand C CDP as well
as different music? And some other reviewer is evaluating Brand A
amp and using Brand X preamp and Brand Z CDP.

It would be nice to see some standardization. For example, when evaluating an NAD amp, then do so using all NAD equipment. Once you have done that, then you might want to do a review with the NAD amp with some higher end preamp to get a frame of reference.

The bottom line is to just use a review as a starting point and take it with a grain of salt.

paulspencer
03-01-2010, 05:02 AM
What would make reviews more useful? When it comes to speakers, much better measurements. Speaker reviews are often tedious to read, they go on at length about how various samples of music sound, but I find myself skimming through those parts. Not that I'm not interested, it's just that I might not know those tracks, and even if I did, do I trust their subjective opinion? What would really be useful would be some real measurements - the kind that aren't typically shown. Impulse response and polar response out to 90 degrees in small angular increments. Harmonic distortion broken down into components and shown at small and large signal levels.

nightflier
03-01-2010, 10:59 AM
Here's another item that's not often well covered: build quality as it relates to sound. Lots of articles will give a quick overview of good build quality, but very few go into why that might matter (this is especially important for analog gear). That is one of the things that draws me to Audioholics because they do take the cover off and talk about the insides. Most reviewers in magazines (Stereophile is notorious for this) will take the manufacturer's word for what's inside and then move onto how their own esoteric music (that no one else owns) sounds on said piece of gear.

Speaking of music choices, there should be a number of well known top-quality recordings that are used in this industry as standard baselines. Everyone owns at least one Diana Krall or Norah Jones album, likewise everyone probably has a copy of Carmina Burana, or Beethoven's 5th. Can't this industry settle on a few well recorded ones and use those for auditioning? I have my own favorites, but I wouldn't mind switching to someone else's if it will mean I can go to the point 2:45 minutes into their favorite auditioning track where they said they heard such and such.

Ajani
03-01-2010, 12:03 PM
Here's another item that's not often well covered: build quality as it relates to sound. Lots of articles will give a quick overview of good build quality, but very few go into why that might matter (this is especially important for analog gear). That is one of the things that draws me to Audioholics because they do take the cover off and talk about the insides. Most reviewers in magazines (Stereophile is notorious for this) will take the manufacturer's word for what's inside and then move onto how their own esoteric music (that no one else owns) sounds on said piece of gear.

Yep, it would be nice to see more exploration of build quality and reliability in reviews...


Speaking of music choices, there should be a number of well known top-quality recordings that are used in this industry as standard baselines. Everyone owns at least one Diana Krall or Norah Jones album, likewise everyone probably has a copy of Carmina Burana, or Beethoven's 5th. Can't this industry settle on a few well recorded ones and use those for auditioning? I have my own favorites, but I wouldn't mind switching to someone else's if it will mean I can go to the point 2:45 minutes into their favorite auditioning track where they said they heard such and such.

Have to disagree there... I don't own any of the above... I'd rather see reviewers try out all different types of music on gear.... How it performs on one or two specific genres, is only relevant to persons who primarily listen to those exact genres...

paulspencer
03-01-2010, 04:33 PM
Even if they talk about a track you know and often listen to, you might not have the same listening impression if you heard the system they are reviewing. I remember listening to some large panel speakers that many considered the best of a number of speakers demonstrated. I thought they had no special features, were generally average and in terms of their distortion at moderate levels, awful. Female vocals were heavily distorted, yet somehow a number of others appeared not to notice. For me that was the beginning of my suspicion that I shouldn't trust other's subjective impressions too much. Not that I automatically assume I'd disagree - just that I take these things with a pinch of salt. More recently I had a short listening session with a female friend. On a reference track I played my system with different active crossover settings. Each time I asked her what she thought, comparing one to the others. I avoided biasing her comments by saying anything first, and each time her comments matched my impressions precisely. I was intrigued, as it showed me that a person who isn't an enthusiast can easily pick up on relatively subtle changes and notice the same things we do. I'm a little suspicious that many enthusiasts learn to hear things with their minds as much as their ears, and in so doing don't quite have the fresh honesty of a person with no real expectations.