Stereophile review...legitimate?

jaxwired

So I'm rereading the April Stereophile review of the Monitor Audio PL200 speakers by reviewer Robert Deutsch and I notice that for the review he "borrows" a Sim Audio Moon amplifier and new interconnects.

I personally would never attempt to evaluate an audio product if I also introduced 2 other unknowns into my system at the same time. How would you know if the Amp, Cable, or Speakers were contributing to what you were hearing? This seems to really devalue the review IMO.

The gold standard for reviewers is to take a "reference" system which they are highly familiar with and introduce one new component to evaluate.

Thoughts?

dkg999

If you're looking for Stereophile to have unbiased and legit reviews then this would be a minor concern. I consider their reviews more paid placement advertising and the switch to the SimAudio gear was kind of like when you see the well placed can of Coca-Cola in the movie scene.

TG Meat

This is a tough one....I would like to trust the equipment reviews in magazines, but it is difficult to believe the reviews themselves operate in a bias free enviroment. I guess that's the reason I spend time in forums, such as this one.

jaxwired

dkg999, That's a little too cynical for me. They do occassionally publish reviews that are not raves.

Regarding reviews in general, they are never a substitute for a personal demo, but they do have value.

jaxwired

People criticize hifi mags for publishing too many glowing reviews, but my theory is that it's not at all a conspiricy. You see, not surprisingly, people that are professionally employed as audio reviewers, tend to love hifi. And they tend to review high end audio products. So you have people that already love audio reviewing the best audio products on the market. Wouldn't you expect the majority of reviews to be very positive. There aren't many products on the high end market that just plain suck. Most are excellent and a reviewer has to be very critical indeed to detect where they fall short.

Face

jaxwired wrote: »

dkg999, That's a little too cynical for me. They do occasionally publish reviews that are not raves.

Maybe Fremer. Otherwise, I agree with DKG.

reeltrouble1

what about Eric Lickte slamming Totem???? I laughed at the Totem guys two year old whining in the response section, although in the end Atkinson did fold a bit to appease the Totem Clown, waaaaaaaa, how dare anyone not like his speakers........

Since I learned to read recently, TAS and Stereophile, well, for the most part I like them, of course most of the guys I hang here with cant read, but the pics are nice!!!!!! TAS has got Mary now doing the Vincent shots showing some leg, so that part is nice as well.

RT1

nooshinjohn

dkg999 wrote: »

If you're looking for Stereophile to have unbiased and legit reviews then this would be a minor concern. I consider their reviews more paid placement advertising and the switch to the SimAudio gear was kind of like when you see the well placed can of Coca-Cola in the movie scene.

100% Correct. The best reviews here are bought and paid for. Objectivity has been dead at Stereophile for better than a decade.

bikezappa

nooshinjohn wrote: »

100% Correct. The best reviews here are bought and paid for. Objectivity has been dead at Stereophile for better than a decade.

Agree 100%.

reeltrouble1

their writers have style, oh and education in English compostion, ummm and experience, never really suprised me much the gear they review generally sounds good, they are not exactly scraping the bottom of the barrel now are they, but then maybe some here are on their board and privy to things????

RT1

dkg999

You have to understand how a publisher makes money. Whether it's audio/HT magazines, motorcycle magazines, RV magazines, etc. it's all basically paid placement advertising. It's not evil, or wrong, it's that way by design. Any type of publication that is going to depend on any type of advertising revenue has the same issue, although at varying levels depending on their business model.

Let me put it this way ...... would you pay $129 per year for Stereophile so you could have completely objective reviews?

Cpyder

reeltrouble1 wrote: »

Since I learned to read recently, TAS and Stereophile, well, for the most part I like them, of course most of the guys I hang here with cant read, but the pics are nice!!!!!! TAS has got Mary now doing the Vincent shots showing some leg, so that part is nice as well.

RT1

You too? I'm also in a class that helps me learn how to read. I'm getting better everyday! Okay I'll stop.

reeltrouble1

so my friend, oh I did not know you were a publisher, well, of an audio mag....this type of thing is the **** that is dragging this place to its grave, I am quite suprised to see you posting in this way as your supposed to know what the hell your doing.

now because you say the reviews are not objective they are not, oh, boy, what a crock and I sure as hell did not see you polking the bear with Phillips about it,


RT1

dkg999

RT1 - I've been supporting marketing and subscriber loyalty and acquisition in the publishing market for many years. It's always amazing how demographics are used to impact messaging and content.

bikezappa

dkg999 wrote: »

You have to understand how a publisher makes money. Whether it's audio/HT magazines, motorcycle magazines, RV magazines, etc. it's all basically paid placement advertising. It's not evil, or wrong, it's that way by design. Any type of publication that is going to depend on any type of advertising revenue has the same issue, although at varying levels depending on their business model.

Let me put it this way ...... would you pay $129 per year for Stereophile so you could have completely objective reviews?

I'm not sure what the cost would be but I certainly would consider buying a more expensive magazine that gave me less bias on equipment reviews.

I would also consider buying information on any subject that was fact based and had no advertisment

Consumer Reports doesn't cost that much and they have no advertisments.

anhchungdoan

I read the reviews and ONLY use it as a guide to narrow down certain products for the audition. There is no such thing as un-bias reviews but with the same equipments and the same room acoustic in which the products are reviewed. There is or there are some common ground that one can draw the conclusion for "to buy" or "not to buy" certian products.

The reviewers have their jobs and they are doing their jobs based on their own experience, the preference of their taste of music, that all I expect from any reviews: a reference but not an ultimatum for buying decision.

nooshinjohn

bikezappa wrote: »

Consumer Reports doesn't cost that much and they have no advertisments.

They are also biased... they don't even test half of what they report on. If they liked a Sony Trinitron tv back in the 80's, they tend to give a new Sony Bravia, even though it may completely suck, a free pass just because it's a Sony. Ask Toyota the benefits of this...

Zitro

I have a crapload of Stereophile mags dating back to 2001. It makes an interesting read and gives you a heads up to new market product. Would I trust the reviews fully? No, but I don't think they're completely made up, because I have seen some reviews that didn't exactly make the product look legit (the first one to come to mind in the Audioquest DBS cable system). I've also agreed for the most part with their reviews after listening to a couple of speakers they reviewed, so that built my confidence a little. All in all, I like the mag; it's interesting an informative, but nothing beats a good demo.

bikezappa

nooshinjohn wrote: »

They are also biased... they don't even test half of what they report on. If they liked a Sony Trinitron tv back in the 80's, they tend to give a new Sony Bravia, even though it may completely suck, a free pass just because it's a Sony. Ask Toyota the benefits of this...

I never meant to say that Concumer Reports had no bias. All articles and written material has a bias. However, if the advertiser pays the bills of the magazine you can be certain that the advertiser has some effect on the articles.

In the best world the magazine would explain why they have this or that opinion based some data.

reeltrouble1

dkg999 wrote: »

RT1 - I've been supporting marketing and subscriber loyalty and acquisition in the publishing market for many years.

and I have been working for the king of spin for my entire life., yes, the coke can thing is true, that stuff does proliferate our society and moves the mass, but Eric Lickte's review of Totem was totally subjective based on what he heard, no coke cans, so its not cut and dried at Stereophile, as also mentioned the Bryston amp and there are other examples, so I am standing up against the drama of generalization that now spins many CP threads.

Or in simple terms ****.

RT1

dkg999

RT1 - I respect that!

Danny Tse

What's the deal with Sam Tellig and Musical Fidelity/Triangle speakers?

madmax

I believe their reviews 100% without having to listen for myself.
madmax

Face

If we want to talk how politics affects reviews, maybe we should shift the discussion over to 6 Moons...

dorokusai

madmax wrote: »

I believe their reviews 100% without having to listen for myself.
madmax

You too!!??

Kex

I take reviews of just about anything with a grain of salt, but of the audio reviews I have read in recent years, I prefer those from Stereophile (and Home Theater Mag) to just about every other (it may be that I'm just not reading the right ones, of course).

Reviews really are nothing more than a starting point for research. There are plenty of things that I like that have not been positively reviewed, and there are plenty of things that I do not like that have been positively reviewed (in the audio field, the "Big Blue E" was probably the most obvious example of this).

madmax

dorokusai wrote: »

You too!!??

Never met a class A rated product I didn't love.
madmax

cstmar01

I just buy the gear I see in the mag and then just stare at it for days to see if I like it or not. Then I take it out and burn it on a huge fire to the audio gods while playing a flute dressed like santa.

Cpyder

Face wrote: »

If we want to talk how politics affects reviews, maybe we should shift the discussion over to 6 Moons...

Please no. We all know 6 Moons is payed to write their reviews by the companies who makes the products. The stuff they've endorsed has completely ruined their image.

FTGV

Stereophile ( JA specifically) publishes the most comprehesive measurements of loudspeakers in print or atleast since the demise of Audio 10+yrs ago.Having a strong interest in DIY speaker design I find it interesting to see what kind of results the pros are achieving.And yes I'm of the belief that unlike in the case of amps and preamps etc. frequency response measurements of speakers can have a strong correlation with how they sound.

hearingimpared

nooshinjohn wrote: »

100% Correct. The best reviews here are bought and paid for. Objectivity has been dead at Stereophile for better than a decade.

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: Thumbs down on that statement John!