Stereophile recommended components

Perhaps it does not, in the purest form of the word, but to me it has. And let's not confuse informational with educational.

 

What's always baffled me about the recommended components is the $$$ rating. For example, in DACs (from the 2014 list), how can these, in class "A+" (which is clearly a load of hooey IMO):

Musical Fidelity V90-DAC: $299 $$$
NAD M51 Direct Digital: $1999 $$$

get the $$$ but:

Grace m903: $1995

does not??

And then in only class "A", you have:

Abbingdon Music Research DP-777: $4995 $$$

how could a $4995 class A DAC be $$$ when a $1995 class "A+" is not? Is this some sort of insider code?

 

I don't disagree. There is the occasional exception, but by and large review magazines stick to positive reviews of equipment they like provided the manufacturer advertises with them. I don't have a big problem with this. The magazine needs to make money to stay alive. I notice that sometimes equipment drops out of class A and I wonder if it is because the manufacturer stopped advertising. I like Quicksilver amps. I used to have the Sixties, which never got a review. I now thave the 88's, which I love and which were Class A, but are no longer mentioned.

 

It has become a bit of a quagmire, hasn't it? But I can't think of a better way to rank them really, and I don't agree with Arthur Salvatore on this point either, in that "there can only be one "best" no more". I have had three cats now for almost two decades, and to me, they are all the "best" (they are absolutely perrrrfect for the way they fit into the pack). The problem with equipment lists is a component needs to be judged by how it fits in (in context or its synergy) and that is a very complex issue, and even harder to explain simply. I think Bill Hart hit the nail on the head earlier in this conversation when he spoke of his issues with lists and of "context".

 

I have always liked Quicksilver amps too. If I hadn't fallen head over applecart for Atma-Sphere OTLs they may have very well gotten my business.

That is another thing that kind of drives my little squirrel brain crazy (or nutty) too...

Why so many things I like, never make the list or get dropped, and why?
Are they now outperformed, really?
Or has someone just YAWN!, grown bored with them??
Or is there just not enough room for one more A+++???

 

I'd explicitly disagree with the notion that the reader should have to read between the lines. If I have to do that, I'm not reading a review, I'm deconstructing a hagiography. To suggest one needs to read between the lines is an admission the writer isn't willing to give the straight scoop on the product they're reviewing.

I like the style of What Hi-Fi in they love direct comparisons, and things routinely get 3/5 stars. In these cases it's explained what they do right, but also why another product in the same price range does it better. Of course, I admit I find myself wondering about What Hi-Fi's biases as well, as certain brands seem to do no wrong in their eyes.

 

The policy for deletions has remained consistent based on the articles I've kept - but found it on-line:

As to why more stuff you (or I) like doesn't get reviewed - can't answer that one.

The A+ category seems to vary from year to year - I think reflecting specific products reviewed that were 'exceptional' for that year. Not every category has an A+ and from one year to the next it seems to change.

I did a quick/dirty count of some of the price ranges for some of the categories - seems to have a good range of prices - not just 'unobtainable to mere mortals' (or lottery winners).

 

That was my comment. I think we need to read it taking some responsibly for how we interpret it and understand what isn't said. Ha, ha, ha Saints? Perhaps not quite, I don't think I'm qualified to make that distinction, but no reviewer ever promised us they would faithfully look out for our best interests and protect us against our own lack of understanding. And again, I'm also not suggesting that any one of them has gone down to the crossroads one night with their pens (or guitars) and sold their souls to the devil, either...Isn't an audio review, more of a journalistic piece, than a consumer report? I get what you may want, but it may not be what they are serving.

You pose an interesting alternative. I'm OK with how What Hifi? does their ranking. Put that can only be accomplished in the context of a system and that has its limits as well.

 

You might very well be right, but I don't see any reason to let them off the hook on writing a proper review. Perhaps to some extent it's apple and oranges to compare an audio review to other types of reviews we might read, say cars, books, movies games, etc, but it's worth mentioning that every other type of review outside of audio seems to consider it a staple of the trade to mention highlights as well as lowlights. If we're going to exclude the audio review from this, and say they're simply "telling the story" of a piece of gear, I don't consider this a review.

 

Your taking the fun I was having way too seriously, must I always picture myself with tongue firmly planted in cheek? Yeah, I've read the small print...
http://www.stereophile.com/content/2015-recommended-components

 

Ditto.
Would you like a beer Erik??
the beave

 

Sorry - was still having my first morning infusion of caffeine...all better now...

 

Yeah, that's OK, I'm having my third Monday, this week.

 

The difficulty with audio reviews is that we have biases. You pretty much know mine and you know Art Dudley's. To me all the lists are dangerous because if you are an experienced audiophile then chances are you will have a preference that is well established - like High efficiency speakers and Single Ended Triode amplifiers. So I always cringe when I see a 400 watt Class A/B Solid State amplifier using toroidal transformers get class A ratings or product of the year awards. I have heard umpteen number of these, in my home, in good rooms for 25 years. Such ratings could not get further away from what I think good sound reproduction is supposed to be about. And whil there are the odd exceptions for me - they're not the brands models that get reviewed (and then don't get listed).

Some reviewers get endless amounts of gear coming through and rave about every single piece and in some cases - it always seems to beat the one they just reviewed last issue. I review very little because frankly I don't like most stuff. As Kfringe noted - I don't want to listen to something I don't like for 2 months.

Since 1990 there are maybe 20 speakers that I think I would be happy with long term - that I think are great. Out of that twenty, ten are probably out of the realm of affordability. Of the remaining ten, five will be ruled out for being either too big for my space or too inefficient (or both) to be run with affordable low powered tube amps. So that leaves about 5 speakers that I would consider. This makes it difficult to review - should I only recommend what I would buy?

Well no. I have heard a lot of SS amplifiers and I recognize that some are superior to others so I feel comfortable recommending a given $2,000 SS integrated because I have heard and owned amps in the class enough to feel comfortable recommending it. I owned a fantastic turntable - the Audio Note TT2/Arm3/IQ 3 which I purchased over several $5,000 turntables. But I chose not to review the thing because my experience level isn't good enough across a wide enough spectrum of turntables. I don't feel comfortable recommending a $5k machine when my previous table was $500 and before that junker duals. Sure I can tell people soundly that it's better than the Rega clone I had but it's useless to someone looking at $5k turntables and wanting to know how it compares to others. I heard the others in dealer and show conditions which is hardly a fair comparison.

I have never liked Cable reviews - logically - they all serve at best as a form of tone control. There may be 8 different cables in an audio system and switching out the IC in one system with 8 different cables may yield an improvement in one and do zilch or make it worse in another. There are internal cables in CD players, Tansports, DACs, preamps, amps, speakers and speaker voice coils. In a mix and match system you could have completely different wiring and sonic priorities.

This is why I think beginners should ALWAYS try and get a complete one brand system as a place to start. Typically it's all voiced by the manufacturer's owner or design team. If you want to hear what Roksan sounds like or Audio Note, or Rega, or Linn - then listen to a complete system from them -- Roksan turntable, CD player into their amp and into their speakers. Now you know the Roksan Sound- aha are they are after tone and decay over the other brand that puts imaging as the priority.

The term "House Sound" is applicable but you can't know what the House Sound of speaker is unless you know what amp or source they designed the speakers for. Experienced audiophiles are likely better able to change things out without screwing it up.

 

I have generally been a subscriber over the last 15 years or so. I have many opinions both good and bad about their modus operandi. I personally wish they would offer more space or a column to new components hitting the market such as the new Yamaha stereo amps and receivers or Onkyo, etc. , with range comparisons. There are many products out there introduced each year that are ignored. I don't mean product placement announcements which are a form of puff-ads but real reviews. I also thought they should do more vintage review-a column devoted to the outstanding classic components out there. Art has done some of that but it isn't a regular feature and it isn't comprehensive. They try to have low price in there in addition to the high to insanely high price stuff but they miss so much of what is out there. I would like to have them evaluate the Marantz gear, more Luxman, Teac, Accuphase , etc. you get the idea and gear that doesn't get reviewed. Denon's excellent anniversary integrated amp never got mentioned at all. What about Belles and there are more brands out there which are never mentioned. Someone mentioned Quicksilver-Sam is the only one who ever reviewed their stuff and they make true heirloom products which should be mentioned more often.

 

Been a subscriber for the past 22 years and can't help but notice if you don't advertise in the mag your chances of getting a review are extremely slight.

 

I've been a long time subscriber and enjoy reading the mag.

It seems to me that they just present their opinions and you either agree or disagree. I just take what they say for whatever I think it's worth.
Sometime I agree and sometimes I don't. I think it helps to drive forums like S.H. where we can discuss things like this.

As for the recommended components, I like having everything grouped together so I can go back and find the original review if I find something I need more info on.

 

I agree with most of what you said. My main area of disagreement would be for a newbie to buy a one-brand system. Over the years I tended to cobble my systems together used, though lately I have purchased some new pieces that were not available used. But if I had to do it over again, I would go to a reputable audio dealer (we have one where I live) who would let me test stuff at home before I buy, and I would buy all new from that dealer, but not necessarily all of the same brand. On the whole, I probably wasted a lot of money buying used and switiching stuff out, and probably would have saved money (and certainly hassle) if I bought new, provided I got to try it out first.

 

Well the problem for many years was that companies were not always equal across their products in that Linn was excellent at turntables but arguably merely average with amplifiers and speakers.

The other problem is that it is difficult to buy a complete entry level+ audiophile stereo system all at one time. Most people can afford maybe 1 upgrade a year so they have to do things in stages.

Also, relying on a good dealer is helpful but dealers, in general, are out there to move boxes at the highest margins. My experience with dealers has been something like 1/10 that I would trust. But certainly dealers have all day to put stuff together and of course most brands don't make complete stereo systems. My suggestion is for people to get a sense of what the maker's sonic goal is. For instance Wilson Audio or ARC uses the other as their listening equipment - then it's a good idea to hear that combo versus something that doesn't seem to fit the designs at all. Basically, I think it's important to have a baseline where you know what the maker's sonic goal (aesthetic) is. Chances are good dealers don't grossly mismatch things.

 

The best thing about the magazine is the myowncover.com thing.

Insert your gear and title on the cover of Stereophile and it makes a real nice wall hanging in your stereo room.

 

No. I loved Listener. At least Mr. Dudley still writes, so the spirit is still there.

 

To me Listener was the best audio mag published. None of the others did or do come close. I did also like the old TAS before they went to standard magazine size format. With Stereophile it is hit or miss for me.

 

Everything drops off the list from every class if it has not been auditioned/used by any reviewer for more that 3 years. Consider them emeritus.

 

Kal,
In some of your speaker reviews you use recent model Rotel amplifiers. We interpret this as recommended by default. I have interest in them, they seem like a good value.
Why are there no listings of Rotel amps in the recommended components sections?

 

There are two Rotels in Class B of Surround-Sound Components: RMB-1585 5-channel power amp and RSP-1572 prepro, both of which I reviewed in my column but do not own. I do not know if any other Rotel amps have been reviewed recently.