Avoid any that advertise the most expensive products.They usually ask in between 10k to 100k dollars for a positive review.If you have a really good product, but you don't give'em anyhing they'll review you anyway with one or two stars out of 5...If you pay them like 40k they'll put you on a third star after the guys who paid 50 and 60k...It's as simple as that.
The German magazines have been said to be more honest than most others. https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/es9038q2m-board.314935/page-213#post-5756265 ...Post #4,248
EDIT: Regarding claims of bribes in exchange for good reviews, that's not how I hear it works in the US. However, it does help to advertise in magazines; that is true. IIRC a full page ad in Stereophile was said to go for possibly $100k. A regular advertiser is more likely to get a product reviewed as opposed to having a product ignored. Of course, that sort of thing applies to all sorts of areas of consumer marketing. There is a website that archives TV commercials, including how much money was spent running them in different geographic areas. Easy to spend $10M running a 30-second commercial a now and then over a month's time. https://www.ispot.tv/
EDIT: Regarding claims of bribes in exchange for good reviews, that's not how I hear it works in the US. However, it does help to advertise in magazines; that is true. IIRC a full page ad in Stereophile was said to go for possibly $100k. A regular advertiser is more likely to get a product reviewed as opposed to having a product ignored. Of course, that sort of thing applies to all sorts of areas of consumer marketing. There is a website that archives TV commercials, including how much money was spent running them in different geographic areas. Easy to spend $10M running a 30-second commercial a now and then over a month's time. https://www.ispot.tv/
Last edited:
The ones that are retired. 😈
Many years ago I thought I could read through the bias, but gave up.
We can trust objective measurements from sites like ASR, but can't discuss sonic differences as it is against several of the sites followers ( and admin it seems) beliefs. Whatever. So, objective tests can weed out the junk, but we still have to go listen. I agree, the German rags tend to be a little better.
FWIW, the worst speakers I ever bought were the all-star rave in all the mags, Paradigm Studio 20's. Horrible tweeter. Now I did just buy some Sennheiser 560's as they both have decent objective ratings, and quite a following of the no-numbers bloggers. More comfortable than my 40 year old Yamahas, and seem quite nice. Need a touch more eq than my old ones, but could live without it. So sorting through the weeds may be useful.
As an example, I think I have narrowed down why three well measuring DACs sound different in my stereo, but do not on head phones. At least for the problem I hear. Goes back to high order harmonics and tweeter breakup. So it is not so much a "fault" of the DACs, but a mess of compatibilities. I am working on ways to test and maybe prevent. It actually makes sense, if my theory holds, why some fantastic measuring equipment sounds like junk on some systems, but nirvana on others. Not placebo, inherent bias, or Brown effect.
I came across an tid-bit. A hint where several have suggested they thought Mac's just sound better than some amps. Measurements are good, yes. What I noticed is they use a transformer output. This both isolates the amp from the load which we know can make a ten fold increase in distortion, but it also is inherently a low pass filter. Correlation? I don't have 5K to test, but curious. I do have the bucks to do another speaker build paying more attention to a LP on the tweeter and it's inherent ultrasonic behavior. Being old with less high end hearing, I can roll it off lower and suppress the harmonics further.
I am one of those engineers with ears. Seems that rattles cages in both the pure subjective who cares not the numbers and the numbers are everything you can't hear the difference sect. I don't know why we have to be so bi-polar about everything. We can move forward if we actually look for the differences.
Many years ago I thought I could read through the bias, but gave up.
We can trust objective measurements from sites like ASR, but can't discuss sonic differences as it is against several of the sites followers ( and admin it seems) beliefs. Whatever. So, objective tests can weed out the junk, but we still have to go listen. I agree, the German rags tend to be a little better.
FWIW, the worst speakers I ever bought were the all-star rave in all the mags, Paradigm Studio 20's. Horrible tweeter. Now I did just buy some Sennheiser 560's as they both have decent objective ratings, and quite a following of the no-numbers bloggers. More comfortable than my 40 year old Yamahas, and seem quite nice. Need a touch more eq than my old ones, but could live without it. So sorting through the weeds may be useful.
As an example, I think I have narrowed down why three well measuring DACs sound different in my stereo, but do not on head phones. At least for the problem I hear. Goes back to high order harmonics and tweeter breakup. So it is not so much a "fault" of the DACs, but a mess of compatibilities. I am working on ways to test and maybe prevent. It actually makes sense, if my theory holds, why some fantastic measuring equipment sounds like junk on some systems, but nirvana on others. Not placebo, inherent bias, or Brown effect.
I came across an tid-bit. A hint where several have suggested they thought Mac's just sound better than some amps. Measurements are good, yes. What I noticed is they use a transformer output. This both isolates the amp from the load which we know can make a ten fold increase in distortion, but it also is inherently a low pass filter. Correlation? I don't have 5K to test, but curious. I do have the bucks to do another speaker build paying more attention to a LP on the tweeter and it's inherent ultrasonic behavior. Being old with less high end hearing, I can roll it off lower and suppress the harmonics further.
I am one of those engineers with ears. Seems that rattles cages in both the pure subjective who cares not the numbers and the numbers are everything you can't hear the difference sect. I don't know why we have to be so bi-polar about everything. We can move forward if we actually look for the differences.
Who has been bonkers loony fringe for decades. He claims he can easily hear the difference between inconnects based on solder type used...
Arthur Salvatore, the audio critic who runs high-endaudio.com, published a trenchant article about audio reviewers some time ago: http://www.high-endaudio.com/reviewers.html. I suspect Mr. Salvatore is spot-on, and also suspect that things have only gotten worse since his article was posted.
Really? I can't believe it. Too much snake oil BS babble anywhere you're looking.
Yes, absolutely true. In Germany we've once had a mag called HiFi Stereophonie which was well respected by it's mainly measurement based reviews. It sadly had to fold in the 1980ies.
Best regards!
Unlike rock music Stereophile didn't benefit from the British invasion.
What Hi Fi is an incomprehensible joke. Spot the trend in this UK magazine's best floor standing loudspeakers for 2021:
Wharfedale - Diamond 12.3...
Triangle Borea BR08 Hi-Fi...
Wharfedale - EVO 4.4 (Black...
ProAc Response DT8
Spendor A7
What Hi Fi is a british magazine reviewing things you can buy in British hifi shops. Unsuprisingly it therefore features a lot of British companies. What's the point of reviewing models only available stateside?
I recall Martin claiming he could hear the difference in S.Q. of a panel type speaker that had an illuminated logo on it when the switchable logo light was either ON or OFF. Seems farfetched to me.
How about actual audio design publications? AudioXpress, Linear Audio? Fav authors?
Jan
Jan