Stereophile discount

halo

Ern Dog wrote: »

Are you sure it was pee?

WAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

jwhitakr

Not to resurrect an old thread, but after reading a couple of the reviews from Stereophile ... and one recent one in particular ... I don't place much, if any, weight on their opinions. It seems to me that they are primarily interested in making the advertisers / manufacturers happy.

George Grand

The first issue I got, was a couple days after I brought home my first Polks, a pair of RTA-11t. They savaged them. "How Matthew Polk plans on being competitive with THESE at the $1k price point is anybody's guess," sticks in my mind. The very next issue, they highly recommend some $5k mini-monitors but only if you buy the matching $5k each subs. Eat me okay?

Pre-internet, there were about 15 FULL pages of classified ads for used stuff in very small print. There was a ton of stuff in each issue. THAT was the value of Stereophile.

All those writers, (especially that snob Jonathan Scull, and probably Fremer too) I'd like to see them strapped in chairs with their eyelids clipped open ala Clockwork Orange, and forced to watch the great unwashed play their records and touch their rigs.

I-SIG

George Grand wrote: »

All those writers, (especially that snob Jonathan Scull, and probably Fremer too) I'd like to see them strapped in chairs with their eyelids clipped open ala Clockwork Orange, and forced to watch the great unwashed play their records and touch their rigs.

ROTFLMAO!!!

If those guys are in Tampa, maybe my "friends" I mentioned before could help you out on that.

Wes

TroyD

The thing that kills me about both Stereophile and TAS is that every review is practically the same. The always describe how a piece sounds SO much better than the standard dreck in it's price class (yet we never hear about those pieces). It's ridiculous. Plus, other than the recommended components list, you can NEVER tell where they actually rate a piece of gear. I'm a subjective person when it comes to audio but at a certain point, you have to establish baselines for reference.

I also agree with George, the snob factor in Stereophile is off the charts. Less so with TAS with the exception of Harry Pearson who I think is a complete jerk off (the biggest of them all). The take this **** WAY too seriously. Fremer, God love him, is just a cheap turntable away from going into a Best Buy and start wasting people with an automatic weapon.

BDT

treitz3

So why read?

mrbigbluelight

hearingimpared wrote: »

Stereophile is great throne material but everytime I bring Playboy in there I always get hit in the chin with pee and it goes all over the place.:eek:

Thanks, Joe. I just sprayed a mouthful of FunYuns all over my monitor !

TroyD

I read it because it's cheap, one.

Two, I dig the music reviews, the industry updates and some of the columns are good. I like Art Dudley's column. I think he's a communist but I like his column.

I read TAS because I like the reviews better. With the exception of HP, on the whole, I prefer TAS.

I do not have a problem with the gear that they review. I'd prefer to read about things I can't afford. I just laugh at the pretentiousness that some of the reviewers seem to have.

BDT

dorokusai

If you want good music reviews, subscribe to Paste.

reeltrouble1

I think stereophlie and tas are fine audio magazines, I look forward to my copies, stereophile has certainly started reviewing more mid-fi stuff, there is a nice article on auto room eq devices this month. I enjoy laughing at some of the snob write-ins. I just renewed my subscriptions for another two years. I agree with the "new improved" slant on the gear though, what have we been using "old and lousy". Can't really say though that I ever bought a piece solely on a magazine review.

I certainly agree that the music reviews are worth the cheap **** subscription price all by themself.

RT1