Stereophile Class A.........

Unknown

Got anything that was on the "A" list over the years?:redface:

heiney9

Pass Aleph 3/30 and Adcom GFP-750.

H9

Systems

heiney9 wrote: »

Pass Aleph 3/30 and Adcom GFP-750.

H9

Nice!:cheesygrin:

BlueFox

Sony XA-5400ES SACD player. Aerial Acoustics 7T speakers.

ratster

Gfp750

Erik Tracy

Marantz SA-KI Black Pearl SACD player

decal

Marantz SA-8001

nooshinjohn

Magnepan MG-20's, and a Nakamichi Dragon cassette deck... The tube amp upon which my Carvers were based won amplifier of the year honors from TheAbsolute Sound.

F1nut

Yep.

headrott

Not any more. Bought something that sounds better and sold the Stereophile Class A rated item.

mhardy6647

probably not - although the ESL-57s presumably could have been (and might even have been) back in the day.

zingo

Nope.

steveinaz

Placette passive line stage
Benchmark DAC/PRE
Harbeth's were class B in "restricted low frequency" category

madmax

I've noticed over the years that several pieces have been on the class A list but I forget which ones. I know the Manley Steelhead phono pre was and I think the Avantgarde Duos and Ayre CD player was too. Oh, and my Benz Ruby 3 cartridge and SME tone arm may have been. You do have to have a very high level of performance to make the list although I wouldn't buy based soley on it, the components must work well together to achieve this level of performance in a system.

Lost240

Nope

Systems

As far as I know, I only have 1/2 of "Class A"!:redface:

I have 3 NHT M6's that are only half of the "Class A" moniker T6 system.

My Atoll pre might be on there, but I doubt it.

Nice gear you fellas got there!:cheesygrin:

treitz3

Dunno. Don't subscribe, never have.

Tom

miner

McIntosh C2200, C2300, MCD500

Rivrrat

Are you kidding? I'm like Kathy Griffin....I'm strictly a D list kind of guy.

Check out my sig tag, that says it all.:razz:

Systems

Catcables Kingcats ICs

I checked those out Miner........NICE!

I had never heard of them, but some experienced cable makers made those cables (pictured).
I have seen a few IC's.
Not as easy as it looks from what I have been told.:cheesygrin:

Like I have to ask, how do they sound?:redface:

PS: I had the Colorado 72vdbs listed in your sig, around here for a very short time (another member owns them now).

tonyb

Catcables ?
Are they the same dudes as these guys ? http://www.calaudiotech.com/

Some high end stuff, I remember awhile back they had a home theater system for a 100g's.

Owning class A stuff....heck if I know. I don't pay attention to Stereophile ratings anyway.

zingo

Rivrrat wrote: »

Are you kidding? I'm like Kathy Griffin....I'm strictly a D list kind of guy.

I love it!

miner

Catcables are made by the gentleman that runs the HTGuide.com forum. A very nice, sweet sounding IC. My best analog IC - I now run mostly balanced connections.

cnh

I'll tell you all, in the "next life" when I come back as a Bill Gates Billionaire! lol

If any of you young'ns are still around you're invited to the "best two channel system" on earth DEMO party! I'll log into this site as cnh 2.0!

cnh

DarqueKnight

Sterephile Class A recommended components in current 2 channel system:

Parasound JC 1 monoblock power amps,
Cary Audio CD 306 Pro Verion CD player,
Graham Phantom B-44 tonearm,
Ortofon MC Windfeld phono cartridge.

My Pass Labs phono preamp and line level preamp would probably be on the RCL (recommended components list) if Stereophile and Pass Labs had not had a falling out in 2003. Nelso Pass posted this on the Diyaudio.com forum on 11-21-2003:

"As an amusing sidenote, Stereophile has omitted Pass Labs from its Annual Directory."

[Link: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/pass-labs/21769-stereophile-review-xa-160-a-4.html#post268708]

In that same thread on the Diyaudio.com forum, Nelson Pass said this on 12-19-2003:

I have always found that big fancy ads aren't cost effective,
but it is important to maintain at least a small presence
on an ongoing basis.

To be avoided at all costs are the "shill" efforts by some
manufacturers, in which complimentary letters and posts by
aliases are used to create some buzz. Some companies
that have used this approach are no longer with us.....

[Link: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/pass-labs/21769-stereophile-review-xa-160-a-5.html#post286021]

An interesting discussion of how and why the Stereophile RCL was "prostituted" in order to increase subscribers and ad revenue can be found here.

From the above linked website:

"John Atkinson realized the most basic formula for "success":


By increasing the number of "Recommended Components", especially in Class A, there would be a corresponding increase of audiophiles who now had something "at stake" in the magazine.


These audiophiles would then become committed readers; Subscribers!

These audiophiles would look forward to each issue, which would (hopefully) "confirm" their choice(s) and purchase(s) of component(s). They would also now have "bragging rights" and "status" with their other (audiophile) friends who didn't yet own components of similar "stature". This would then pressure these friends to also purchase components on the RCL, just to "keep up".

The "confirmation" of their purchases had another soothing effect:

It reduced any residual anxiety and/or insecurity the purchasers might have had with the spending of large amounts of money. It even allayed serious doubts as to the actual in-house performance of their new components, since that same performance had now been "verified" as "Class A" by "official experts". These readers now felt that their previously futile search for "certainty" had finally ended. The RCL would be "the absolute certainty" they so desperately needed.

This growing number of readers, in effect, had joined an exclusive group of people, who either owned "the best attainable" components or anything else within the RCL. Each issue of Stereophile validated that imaginary "membership". When the component was inevitably removed from the RCL, the reader would be strongly encouraged, with another "rave review", to "upgrade" to the latest component in the RCL, which would then "reestablish" his "exclusive membership". It was almost like the equivalent of the "Stereophile Country Club".

This was not done overnight. It was done slowly, almost imperceptibly. The RCL (Class A) went from 9 in 1985, slowly up to 30 by 1992, a seven year process. When no one publicly complained, it went all the way up to 104 by 2000.


The Manufacturers

Meanwhile, the manufacturers were also very happy. Many more of them could now claim that their components were in Class A; adding "prestige" even to their less ambitious models. Plus, advertising, in the magazine that gave them this new found "status", was now of triple benefit to them:

1. There was the increased readership from newly committed subscribers, and
2. It augmented, and reminded these readers of, their newly elevated status in the RCL, and
3. It also insured that Stereophile would be profitable and regularly publishing their (now valuable) RCL."

"The Stereophile Recommended Component List is a Total Fraud"

tonyb

It always amazed me how the ones who advertise the most in audio magazines get the best props. Just once I'd like to read how x,y, or z product sucks instead of trying to candy coat their shortcomings.

BlueFox

DarqueKnight wrote: »

An interesting discussion of how and why the Stereophile RCL was "prostituted" in order to increase subscribers and ad revenue can be found here.

Wow. Somebody has a grudge on their shoulder. This guy sounds like the Roger Russell of audio critics/writers. :rolleyes:

While I suppose it is possible, I personally seriously doubt anyone subscribes to any magazine in the hope that their gear, car, pots and pans, etc. appears on some annual list. Well, maybe Consumers Reports, but that is it.

tonyb

DK has a point Fox. Some audiophiles are more into the stigma aspect rather than how well something works for them. If it's not rated by the likes of stereophile or others, then it doesn't belong in a true high end system....so some think. Ask yourself how many products they review that don't advertise with them.

Erik Tracy

tonyb wrote: »

DK has a point Fox. Some audiophiles are more into the stigma aspect rather than how well something works for them. If it's not rated by the likes of stereophile or others, then it doesn't belong in a true high end system....so some think. Ask yourself how many products they review that don't advertise with them.

I think the same can be said of ANY list by ANY publication.

So what is the crux of the criticism - the list itself because it is a list, or the individual reviews which are then used to put on the list?

I doubt even Stereophile knows when an item is provided for review that it will even be on their list or where it is placed (A, B, C, or whatever).

Any list will result in generating interest (sales) to the public because it is a list of the supposed 'best of <put your interest here>' compiled by supposed 'experts'.

Does that make it a 'fraud'?

Car and Drivers Top Ten Sports Models
Consumer Reports Top Ten Vaccuum Cleaners
Wine Spectators Top Ten Cabernets
The Oscars

All will generate interest in the items on the list....cuz its a best of list.

And anyone who has bought what is on the list will get to say that their purchase made 'the list' and anyone looking to get something highly recommended will be inclined to buy from the list.

Again - does that make the list a fraud?

DarqueKnight

BlueFox wrote: »

Wow. Somebody has a grudge on their shoulder. This guy sounds like the Roger Russell of audio critics/writers. :rolleyes:

After reading the page I linked to, I did not get that impression at all. To me, he seems to be an audiophile fed up with the hyperbole and crass commercialism in the audio press.

BlueFox wrote: »

While I suppose it is possible, I personally seriously doubt anyone subscribes to any magazine in the hope that their gear, car, pots and pans, etc. appears on some annual list. Well, maybe Consumers Reports, but that is it.

How many times has a newbie come to our forum to ask our opinion of "what's best", and then get pissed off at us when were tell him that they are going to have to listen to a variety of things and make up their own mind?

Some people prefer to shop according to reviewer recommendations and price tag. "If it costs a lot, it must be good." "If it was recommended by X reviewer in Y magazine and placed highly on Z equipment list, it must be good." I personally know people like this.

tonyb wrote: »

DK has a point Fox. Some audiophiles are more into the stigma aspect rather than how well something works for them. If it's not rated by the likes of stereophile or others, then it doesn't belong in a true high end system....so some think.

Sad, but true. Even sadder is that all audiophiles get stereotyped as being this way.

tonyb wrote: »

Ask yourself how many products they review that don't advertise with them.

Ask Nelson Pass about that.

DarqueKnight

Erik Tracy wrote: »

Any list will result in generating interest (sales) to the public because it is a list of the supposed 'best of <put your interest here>' compiled by supposed 'experts'.

Does that make it a 'fraud'?

Car and Drivers Top Ten Sports Models
Consumer Reports Top Ten Vaccuum Cleaners
Wine Spectators Top Ten Cabernets
The Oscars

All will generate interest in the items on the list....cuz its a best of list.

And anyone who has bought what is on the list will get to say that their purchase made 'the list' and anyone looking to get something highly recommended will be inclined to buy from the list.

The difference between the "lists" you listed and Stereophile's RCL is that the RCL is ever expanding, even to the point of having an A+ category which is essentially an absurd category of "better than the best".

All of the lists you stated have a set number of winners, which remains the same year by year. You either make the top ten or you don't. If you make the top ten, you are rank ordered according to established criteria. There aren't ten movies winning the best picture Oscar.

Erik Tracy wrote: »

Again - does that make the list a fraud?

Yes, I think that when they do things like this, it makes the list a fraud:

There might be 10 or more amps rated class A by Stereophile, then, when another amp appears that outclasses all the current class A amps, rather than bumping all the former class A amps to class B, and class B amps to class C (and pissing off a whole lot of manufacturers and subscribers), the outclassed class A amps hold their A rating and a new, A+ class is created.