The Absolute Sound Or Stereophile? Which is your favorite?

[Digi&Analog Fan]

Also what reviewers are your favorites? Of course the late Harry Pearson, but who after him, and which reviewers do you not like as far as the accuracy of their evaluation or not mentioning pertinent things?

[Digi&Analog Fan]

As I have gotten more satisfied with my sound to the point that I sometimes wonder if there is much farther to go as far as the limitation of the recordings, I have not sought the magazines out as much as I used to. It is nice to take a look every now and then to see what's going on with the overall scene. There are music reviews and you can check out what music has been re-released in audiophile form. Sometimes a new format pops up, that's good to know about. I have been very pleased with some UHQCD's I have recently bought. UHQ standing for Ultra High Quality and in this case its proving to be much more than a buzzword. I miss certain things of the now distant past, End Lumley in TAS and Bert Whyte's articles in Audio magazine. Good to take a look to see what's going on though.

[Digi&Analog Fan]

I haven't seen it in a while but I used to really get a lot out of the British publication Hi Fi News & Record Review. Their music section had a dizzying amount of good reviews in addition to maybe near a hundred capsule reviews each issue. It put me onto a lot of good music that I otherwise might have never discovered. 

 

 There was another U.K. magazine that in addition to new equipment reviews each month; they had in every issue, page after page of capsule reviews that they had done full reviews of in the preceding months and years. 

[Digi&Analog Fan]

In an issue around 1980 Hi Fi News & Record Review, reviewing a Carver preamp, made the statement that there is a bigger improvement when you press the little button;  between Carver Sonic Holography and regular stereo than between stereo and mono. In my early 20's I had a full featured Carver preamp which in addition to the Sonic hologram switch, which increased focus and space between instruments by a great amount, it also had an Autocorrelator switch which decreased hiss on records and tapes, a dynamic range expander, separate tone controls for both left and right channels for those who had heavy drapes on one side of the room like I did, and a digital  time delay circuit where you could simulate the acoustics of anything from an intimate jazz club to a a large cathedral.

 

 If the amp would have been a little cleaner sounding, it might have been the greatest preamp of all time; bar none. On purity of sound, Carver once said, " once the sound is clean enough, there are more important things to worry about." 

[Digi&Analog Fan]

I think its a good idea that Stereophile gives a face and personality to some of its reviewers via YouTube Videos. How could anyone not get a kick out of Herb Reichert for instance. I think most people seek out the audio review magazines for guidance in making equip. purchases or hoping to be put on to some great equipment that's within their price range. Also to possibly deepen their understanding of judging sound through what a particularly good reviewer explains; like a student and a teacher. Perceptual learning to some extent can be achieved through words, if understood properly. 

[Digi&Analog Fan]

As the OP of this thread, perhaps the more relevant question is have you ever bought a piece of gear partially or fully based on what was said about the equipment in the magazines review, and were you glad you bought it?.. I have bought 3 things partly influenced by Stereophile reviews of them. Have been satisfied with 2 of the 3, especially for the price I paid. The only thing I bought that maybe I wish I hadn't, goes way back to the years of Sam Tellig "The Audio Cheapskate." He recommended the Optimus 3400 CD player. He failed to mention that it made instruments sound tiny as tiny can be, like munchkin land. Perhaps though I should have figured that, as its size ruled out it having a decent size transformer. Also he didn't mention it severely lacked resolution. Not too far into the 1990s, it was claimed that it was the only CD player that had "bloom".A little controversial. It was a little warmer than usual (perhaps to veil some high frequency distortion it had). I had a good time with it though, but when I went to a Magnavox its small warmish sound was relinquished to a drawer. No biggie. I only paid about $130 for it on sale.

[Digi&Analog Fan]

What was a little bizzare about the CD 3400 being claimed to be the only CD player with "bloom" was that:

1. It was a product from Radio Shack.

2. It was only a $180 list price  player.

3. There were CD players on the maket that cost around 100 times as much.

 4. Some people were supposedly using it as a transport (it had a digital out) reportedly people who had $30,000 systems (foolishly I think).

 5. People like Dick Sequerra (of tuner & speaker fame) were riding the wave by coming out with outboard "Power Station AC power supply platforms" made especially for the CD 3400.

6. I did not know what "bloom" was and thought I would find out by buying the player and listening to it.

 

 After a while, I knew the player well, but thinking that maybe I had a sub par sample, I went out and bought another CD 3400. Sounded just like the first one, so I just kept it as it was about to go out of production (a chip manufacturer or something was ceasing production on something used inside it), and I figured maybe it will be worth something someday like an out of print audiophile LP. Not too many years later someone offered me more than what was its list price when in production, but I couldn't find it.

[Digi&Analog Fan]

Any one of those things you just mentioned that you bought, probably cost more than the total amount of money I've spent on audio equip. in my entire life, even though I've upgraded dozens of times. I get stuff cheap. Everything that has stunning sound has stunning sound for down to Earth reasons, not because someone decided it should cost a lot. Figuring out those reasons, and implementing them with ones own unique creative ideas is the most satisfying and perfect way to achieve "perfect sound". 

[Digi&Analog Fan]

I've been purchasing for over 44 years now. I'm kind of old, but you would never know it in the least. I figured out some things there too. As far as audio, the shortest most direct signal path is best, which means there doesn't't have to be that much circuitry inside. Less parts; everything should be cheaper. Stuff from Best Buy with all the controls that do all sorts of things; that's the stuff that should cost. Tone controls if properly designed do not degrade the sound noticeably. I have never met a room with a flat frequency response.

[Digi&Analog Fan]

I am kidding a little bit. People deserve to be paid for their work (research and development). Good quality parts do cost. Lots of things have been advanced in audio; big advances even. Everything I use equipment wise has been bought. However I do second guess and modify my equipment and tweak everything I can think of. Some things are worth it and some things aren't. Analog is wonderful but digital at its best; people would be surprised. Being able to reproduce sound in your home, that often doesn't sound too far removed from live music is one of the miracles of modern life. My favorite companies are ones that give you great sound for the least amount of money; but the others... well its a free country. To each his own. Audio needs way better exposure. There has to be a better way than waiting for people to come in their doors. Infinitely more people would be amazed and interested in audio if they were given the right experience. Sometimes one listen is all it takes. People would be surprised and amazed at the level of realism that is possible. They would want it and get into it. I don't know what the answer is. Maybe a traveling audio show that shows up at high schools like a technical school recruiter, only more fun.

[Digi&Analog Fan]

Maybe the relative popularity of the two magazines depends on regionality; or something. The only place I see either.one is Barnes & Noble. The Absolute Sounds are usually either sold out or bought up except for the last one or two. The Stereophiles are usually there in abundance along with a few of the U.K. publications. It's nice to see equipment reviewed that most people can actually afford or choose to afford when there is some under review. A lot of the YouTube videos have sort of taken over that turf now; especially with reviews of bookshelf speakers. The sound of my main system is so good now that I am almost afraid to change anything, especially anything that might alter frequency response. It took me many years of experimentation and acquiring know how to get to this point. But no matter how good the sound gets there is always that reaching for more sound quality. We all need things to look forward to, and as audiophiles we all look forward to improving our sound. I have been buying a lot of music of late, even though I have too much already to ever get around to. People with the best reproduction capabilities know that even though it might not sound 100% believably  real, it is amazing enough that once it gets up to a certain level, maybe "real" doesn't matter. It's a thrilling enough experience.

[Digi&Analog Fan]

For classical RCA and Mercury Living Stereo & Presence, John Marks not only did an issue but many issues, on a monthly basis for TAS. I think it (the lengthy series) was called Marks Barks. Sometime I am interested in finding out what is the best (non classical)sounding recording of something. Steve Hoffman forums is what many people go to for that, but it seems that no one can agree on anything there on recordings, and you end up being more confused as to which one to get than you were at square one. That along with Audio Karam, is a very political forum, with among others, an in house "technical" guru who claims cable differences are imaginary, despite pretty much every respected designer, reviewer and audio store owner knowing otherwise (and obviously), along with millions of audiophiles with "ears.". Along with their related Audio Karma forum, it is like a turf gang and if the moderators decide they don't like someone they will readily let other forum members literally harass & bash them to smithereens in public, until the poor newcomer says something back to defend themselves, and then they kick them off and ban them over it. Those two forums are true insane asylums and like a corrupt third world country, where "its who you know", rather than any fairness at all, with the fox (moderators) guarding the hen house. The internet and other forums are chalk full of horror stories about those 2 forums. Cable companies and high end audio ought to band together and file a class action lawsuit for damages against both their forums, for using forum gurus masquerading as experts to persuade the public and attempt to further the belief that cables are snake oil, when they are not & could be proven with a demonstration in a court room. Also their conspiratorial politics to make cables seem like snake oil (which the high end supports and vouches for there being real differences in quality) also makes high end audio look really bad to many people over their shenanigans. 

 

 I think in general though people who like cars read car magazines, people who are into audio are attracted to reading audio magazines. If you are into any particular kind of music, chances are there is a magazine devoted to it. With classical music,  Gramophone and the BBC Music magazine which gives you a free CD in each issue are the ones I used to get.

[Digi&Analog Fan]

I liked the High Fidelity music reviews also. However, for a while they must not have really taken rock music seriously. For a while they classified classical music under the bold type category "SERIOUS" and rock under "LIGHT." Someone in the N.Y.Times made the praising remark that the Beatles were at least as melodic as Schubert. A classical reviewer for the magazine commented about seeing it, "after a week in a straightjacket they let me out."