Audio Magazines.....

I am not at all in the market for new equipment, and haven't been for a long time, but for years I have really been excited each time I get one of my new mags in the mail... Is that strange???

 

Gotta love Stereophile for eye candy alone.

 

I look forward to Stereophile as well - just to stay in tune with what's goin' on. They do review some wacko, stratospheric, mucho dinero equipment, though. But there's some reasonably-priced stuff as well. Stingy with the music reviews, however.

Used to really love the old Stereo Review - good technical articles, interesting equipment reviews for stuff at all price levels (they tended to "like" everything, though - we wouldn't want p-off any advertisers now, would we?). You had to "read between the lines" to determine what they REALLY liked and what they were lukewarm on.

The best part of Stereo Review was the music reviews. I was turned on to a lot of good rock (and classical) by that mag. Was very much in tune with Steve Simels' taste in music. Discontinued my subscription when the mag changed to Sound & Vision. Just not into surround sound or big-screen TV.

 

I get Stereophile, Absolute Sound and Sound & Vision.

I agree on the silly pricies on some of this stuff. Today I got TAS....$9000 for speaker cable??? $5800 for interconnects??? I love music, but come on...but I really love reading the mags, though........

Re: S & V, I have little interest in what they talk about now, but I have kept it just to keep tabs on that world of audio/video just for fun....

 

So was I...usually, if he liked it, I hated it! Just kidding, for the most part. I found my old stash of Stereo Review from 1979 and 1980 and have been reading them. A lot of the reviews are interesting in hindsight!

 

I miss the late, lamented Listener magazine.

 

I miss "Listener" as well...Art D. is a good guy.

...and what about "Positive Feedback"...? Can you still buy it in magazine form, or is it just an online publication now?

peace to all,

 

When I got into computer audio, I gave up on mags like Stereophile. I have been reading mags like Mix and EQ for years, though.

I miss Stereo Review and Compact Disc Review.

 

There was one magazine just called Audio that had great reviews and one killer of an annual equipment directery back in the early 90's. Now, the internet is more educational I've found, but yeah I do kind of miss and almost prefer the magazine feel in the hand over pushing keys.

 

The old small format Absolute Sound was a great read, whether you were in the market for gear or not.

Pity it's turned into just another glossy clone.

 

Hmmm, maybe it has something to do with the fact that they were very close to go down. At that time I had great problems getting my paid issues delivered.

 

Yep, ultimately HP was not quite the cold hard businessman he should have been to keep control of the publication. There were always production problems there from even the very early days.

 

I thought Audio was a great mag also Dave....and YES, I used to look fwd to that Big-A Equipment directory each year!!!

The one feature I looked fwd to each month with Stereo Review was where they would feature a reader's system w/ photos. I wish more mags today would do this. I picked up some great ideas for my own system from these articles.
TimW

 

Check out Ultra High Fidelity magazine too.

http://www.uhfmag.com

 

That's a publication I miss also. That October guide was legendary, a tradition that probably went back a couple of decades I'd imagine. Every year I subscribed to it, the October equipment guide was showing up in my mailbox. That and Lirpa Labs reviews every April. Corey Greenberg was on board when the ship went down...unfortunately he couldn't help save it.

I also miss Wayne Green's Digital Audio (aka CD Review), which I was a charter subscriber to. Between that magazine and Stereo Review's reviews (heh), I never had a lack of good recordings to pick from.

In addition, what was the name of that other magazine? I think it was High Fidelity, which was a rival of Stereo Review's from the early days. I remember their power amp reviews never stated watts, but "dBw" figures, which just frustrated me. Eventually I believe they were absorbed by Stereo Review in the 80s. Sound & Vision isn't really bad, but it's definitely not the same magazine I grew up reading, and is not as interesting.

Was a Stereophile subscriber for awhile, but just tuned out to their style. I had always wanted to subscribe to $ensible $ound, but never did. Never did read The Absolute Sound, nor many other publications of that type. I was a Speaker Builder subscriber for about three years--wish I had the time to build some of those projects!

I suppose it's no wonder I don't subscribe to any of them anymore. In fact, the only magazines I get (or want) now are related to my other interests. This Old House is consistently excellent. Popular Photography is good for keeping up on the latest camera techniques and gear. Motor Trend is still my favorite car publication. I don't even get computer magazines anymore--the best part of PC Magazine was the editorial section, followed by reviews, and both are available online for free now.

 

Audio use to do this yearly Best of Audio Magazine. I use to just drool over it as a young poor man. I think I still have a few stashed some where.

 

I love em all!

I also get Stereophile/ AV Guide (Stereophile)/ The Perfect Vision (excellent!)/ Sound and Vision/ Home Theater.

 

Almost correct - dBW or decibel Watts. They were trying to do the right thing.

Consider a magazine which has reviews of amplifier A and amplifier B.

Amplifier A is rated at 200 watts while amplifier B is rated at 100 watts. Both amps cost the same.

Most people naturally (but incorrectly) think that amp A is twice as powerful as the amp B and since they cost the same, A is the better choice.

Now consider a magazine that reviews amplifier A, rated at 23 dBW and amplifier B, rated at 20 dBW. Both amps cost the same.

Most people would not automatically conclude that A is the better choice and would read further to see what the authors felt.

From comments many members have made in this forum, it's clear that such erroneous thinking is not dead.

 

Geoff, 3 dBW plays twice as loud. What's the big deal, that is what 3 dBW means. It is a logarithmic scale.

 

ALP,

The reason I like the logarithmic scale for rating amplifier power is that it aligns with human hearing. Human hearing is extremely non-linear. In order to double the perceived intensity of a sound, the actual sound power must be multiplied by a factor of 10.

In order to sound twice as loud as the 100 watt amplifier (amp A), the amplifier we need is not the 200 watt amplifier (amp B), but amplifier C.

Amp C is rated at 1000 watts.

A number of HiFi magazines started using the decibel Watt scale back in the early '80s to try to counteract the marketing strategy of the Japanese, who produced a range of integrated amplifiers of 30w, 50w, 75w, 100w, 150w etc, rather like light bulbs.

 

Maybe they felt like they were doing the thing, but as a buyer, I'd rather see the wattage in the numbers the rest of the industry uses, rather than buck the trend. Yes I'm aware of the electrical meanings of deciBels and logarithic scales, but I can figure that out for myself. In fact, since I used to be the "audio nut", friends were always asking me if they should dump their 60 watt/channel receiver for a 100 watt. I usually told them not to bother. Hard to explain that to someone without electrical knowledge though.

 

Oh my gosh, where do I start. I've probably gotten dozens of audio magazines through the years, and I'll see if I can name some of them.

AES Journal
Audio
Audio Critic
Absolute Sound
Audio Amateur
Glass Audio
Hi Fidelity
Stereo Review
Pro Sound News
db Magazine
Recording Engineer/Producer
Mix
Stereophile
Home Theater
Sterophile Guide to Home Theater
The Perfect Vision
Popular Electronics
Goldmine
Surround Sound Professional
Studio Sound
Sound & Vision
Tape Op
EQ
Modern Recording
Pro Audio Review
Sound & Video Contractor

This is not to mention the musician magazines which often have articles pertaining to audio.

I'd have to say that the one I enjoyed the most out of all of these was Audio. This magazine had it's roots in the pro industry. In fact, before the AES journal, there was Audio Engineering, which I believe became Audio Magazine.

I generally never liked Hi Fidelity and Stereo Review nearly as much as Audio. They seemed to give good reviews for everything, and I think their strength was their record reviews and things like that. I never trusted what they said about equipment. In my opinion they were not much better than Consumer Reports, which I have very little faith in. They might be good with cars and washing machines, but I think they often totally miss the mark in their audio reviews. Of course I'm basing my opinions regarding stuff I read there in the 70's. Once I lost faith, I never read that magazine again.

Audio, on the other hand, appealed more to the hobbyists. There were many technical articles and advanced concepts were often discussed. I've built quite a few projects from articles in Audio magazine. I once built a Leach phono preamp that I read about in Audio. That thing was awesome sounding and cost next to nothing to build. I could go on and on raving about the knowledge I gained from reading this magazine through the years. I still have just about every one from the early 70's until their demise. This magazine was not really geared to professionals, like some of the other magazines I've listed, but I still think it was my favorite.

Audio amateur was also a favorite of mine. This was more geared for the do it your self person, with lots of projects. Glass Audio was an spin off of that one, and dealt with tube projects.

I've also read the Audio Critics, Stereophiles, Absolute Sounds, and the like. Each one of these has their moments, but often I disagree with some of the opinions I've read there. On the other hand, I've read some pretty brilliant stuff in those as well. The bottom line, is I can't see and hear everything, and the magazines generally do a fair job of doing that. If I like what I see and read, I'll check the product out further on my own.

Of course the professional magazine were usually pretty good as well. db, RE/p and Studio Sound were great back in the 70's and 80's but they've disappeared. Most of the modern pro magazines seem to be more geared to home studios. Pro Sound News is almost like a Billboard type of magazine for the pro audio industry. I has listings for who's doing what in studios and live concerts. They often list the equipment and studio used for current projects. You can clearly see what platforms are in use by who. There is still quite a bit of analog recording being done these days.

Mix started out as a studio listing guide without great articles. It was so small that I actually had a few studio's that I built that were on the cover the first year. But it has matured to become a pretty good magazine with lots of great articles. There were some great historical articles in there as well over the years. I remember great interviews with Tom Dowd, a Motown cutter whose name escapes me, and things like that. If you want a laugh, there was a series of humorous articles by David Goggin (Mr. Bonzai) in the early years, and one of the main characters was based on me. He worked out one of those studios (Lyon Recording in Newport Beach) and based the articles on the people from there. I hate to admit this, but my character was called Smiling Deaf Eddie.

Tape Op is a pretty nifty magazine, and appeals to pro's as well as hobbyists. Lots of historical stuff in this one as well.

Another thing I don't generally admit is that I'm a packrat of sorts. I still have all these magazines sorted and stored. I also have a lot of old electronics and audio magazines from the 40's, 50's, and 60's. It's amazing how much I learned from the old mags. And you wouldn't believe who wrote many articles back in the old days. Names like David Hafler, Avery Fisher,George Augsperger, Williamson and many of the other great audio pioneers are all over the place. It seems like the more things change, the less they change. Much of the stuff I read in these magazines still applies today. IMHO this is essential reading for any body in search of a complete audio education.

 

Geoff, I may be really, really wrong but I thing you are confusing Voltage and Wattage. I think a 3dBW is a factor of 2 in loudness and 10 dB (voltage) is about a factor of 2 in loudness. Check this out. http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/~jw/dB.html

 

A difference of 3dBW between the power outputs of two amplifiers means that one amp makes twice as much power - electrical power.

The nearly linear nature of a loudspeaker means that the sound pressure in free air as measured by a microphone in front of the speaker will show the same ratio.

So much for the laboratory - enter the human. Quoting from your own reference mentioned:

My point was that the non-linear nature of hearing ("roughly logarithmic" above) means that a listener would not perceive the sound of the more powerful amplifier as being twice as loud as the other. Nowhere near it in fact.

From your reference once again:

 

When I once heard that Bose speakers won a lot of praise in that magazine, I lost faith myself. I also do not trust them for car reports. Sure, maybe for long-term tests of durability and usability they're somewhat satisfactory (the few I read were rather opinionated), but IIRC, at least one auto manufacturer sued them because they warned about the danger of SUVs, which they'd flipped over during testing. Well...umm...yeah, anyone can deliberately tip an SUV over, especially when they are not professional drivers. That's why I prefer to let someone like Motor Trend do a driving test: they can tell by repeatable, measurable test, and "feel", to tell us how a vehicle might react in use. A van or truck can feel top-heavy without having to try to flip one over, in other words. To their credit however, no one publication can be an expert on everything.

Alas, I'm of the unpopular view that Stereo Review's equipment reviews were actually quite useful. From a sound standpoint, maybe not, but they were fine for pointing out the design, unique features, usability and measured specifications on a unit, in a writing style that was easy to read and not condescending at all. In my teen years I learned a lot from reading Julian Hirsch's reviews...including, "I never met a component I didn't like". (And please, no arguments about the value of laboratory measurements--that is not my point here.) Some of their technical articles and columnist features were also very educational, and their music section's artist/band features were always worth reading. In the handful of old issues I looked at in the past week, I found a primer on what tape bias is and why it is used, and a technical dissertation on how "metal" tape differed from ferric or CrO2. I doubt many mainstream audio publications would even go to that extent today...IMHO, some of these mass-market publications have had to "dumb down" to sell subscriptions, sort of an indication that focus shifted from a "hobbyist" mentality to a "consumer" mentality. (And SR is not the only magazine guilty of that!)