advertisement


Journalism or public relations?

Given also the general 'huh?' factor toward measurement in the wider readership (which has reached the recording industry, because a lot of it now is bedroom studio stuff), it's a cost most publishers try desperately to cut because they fail to see the benefit. Unless, that is, the publisher is the measurement guy. But that only happens in audio now.

I just find it sad that I can probably tell you more about the 44 year old Quad 303 that's currently filling my back room with Thelonious Monk than you can tell me about anything your magazine reviews. That has to be the wrong way around!

I'd also be a little concerned about drawing parallels between your readership and that of a bedroom studio-targeted magazine. I'm prepared to bet the HiFi+ reader age bell-curve is even higher than pfm's (centred around 50-55 as far as I can work out) as you'll have exactly the same demographic plus the ones too old to understand what teh internets is!

Getting young folk interested is the biggest hurdle facing the audio industry at present by far. I've no real answers to that one at present. All I know for absolute certain is that young folk love music just as much as the rest of us, so there's certainly something to be addressed here - it doesn't have to die (though a mass extinction and rebirth in a slightly different form might actually be a good thing). I am certain there is a real need to make music louder, bigger, clearer and to place it in a more social context than an iPod's headphones. Whether that challenge is within the ability of an industry that seems targeted upon selling increasingly expensive trinkets to an dwindling supply of very wealthy elderly punters is anyone's guess. Until that point arrives I'm afraid you are stuck writing reviews for us lot!
 
I just find it sad that I can probably tell you more about the 44 year old Quad 303 that's currently filling my back room with Thelonious Monk than you can tell me about anything your magazine reviews. That has to be the wrong way around!

You are probably right, but probably not for the reasons you think you are right. If audio is to survive, it has to get past the obsessive phase it's currently locked into. Audio is an entertainment-providing service, and audio magazines are an entertainment-providing service about that entertainment-providing service. To today's end user, knowing every last detail about the things they use is obsessive to the point of insanity. Everything is about surfaces today; the user presses the little App logo that launches the music player app and they are done with it.

The future of audio (whether or not it has magazines in it) has more to do with engaging people who don't care about stuff to care just a little about stuff to give them pause.

I'd also be a little concerned about drawing parallels between your readership and that of a bedroom studio-targeted magazine. I'm prepared to bet the HiFi+ reader age bell-curve is even higher than pfm's (around 50-55 as far as I can work out) as you'll have exactly the same demographic plus the ones too old to understand what teh internets is!

Different readerships, different categories. I was responding to your suggestion that even pro-audio magazines are not measuring as much as they used to. However, given pro-audio readers earn their living from the devices they use, you'd expect them to be interested in how they perform on a more objective level. If even they aren't expressing the same interest anymore, are you really surprised the same thing applies in the domestic world?

Getting young folk interested is the biggest hurdle facing the audio industry at present by far. I've no real answers to that one at present. All I know for absolute certain is that young folk love music just as much as the rest of us, so there's certainly something to be addressed here - it doesn't have to die (though a mass extinction and rebirth in a slightly different form might actually be a good thing). I am certain there is a real need to make music louder, bigger, clearer and to place it in a more social context than an iPod's headphones. Whether that challenge is within the ability of an industry that seems targeted upon selling increasingly expensive trinkets to an dwindling supply of very wealthy elderly punters is anyone's guess. Until that point arrives I'm afraid you are stuck writing reviews for us lot!

I agree. The concept we are trying is to bring more new blood readers in by describing headphone and headphone related products to the fore (the headphone having now gone from being a few million shy of the audio market to being twice the size of the rest of the audio market inside of a year!) It's hoped that we can attract and convert. It's a struggle though.

The hipster vinyl market is also a good one to tap, but it's largely outside our remit. It's very much a retro thing, spread through social media, and our forays into the world have been exceptionally poorly received.
 
So precisely how would you approach the same review? Given you came up with the same conclusions I did, what would you do differently?

Seriously. I'm intrigued to see what you would do differently.

I was told not to review the product not long after I received it because of unprecedented response by Naim people. I even credited the modders with getting there first (and that has really, really pissed off one of the Naim faithful). I guess I could have compared it to one of the aftermarket PSUs, but given the reaction to even mentioning the nodders, I'm not sure I'd benefit from comparing one to the vaulted Salisbury one. Not in a financial way, more a some random flat-earther stitching my testicles to the inside of my mouth way.

I'd like to see what you'd do, under the circumstances.

Just read what was said at the start of this thread for most of my opinions.
 
Just read what was said at the start of this thread for most of my opinions.

Not good enough. Accusing me of being essentially a propagandist in a forum directly related to the execution of my job is about as close to defamation as I am prepared to put up with.

So I say again, given the findings I came to (unless you are also calling me a liar), precisely what would you do differently?

Here's your chance to shine. You want to see a review without propaganda, make one.
 
You are probably right, but probably not for the reasons you think you are right. If audio is to survive, it has to get past the obsessive phase it's currently locked into. Audio is an entertainment-providing service, and audio magazines are an entertainment-providing service about that entertainment-providing service. To today's end user, knowing every last detail about the things they use is obsessive to the point of insanity. Everything is about surfaces today; the user presses the little App logo that launches the music player app and they are done with it.

The future of audio (whether or not it has magazines in it) has more to do with engaging people who don't care about stuff to care just a little about stuff to give them pause.

I'd argue the area of home audio we both represent is entirely born out of obsession, and that obsession is to be cherished and built upon. For reference I've a complete bound set of Gramophone Magazines from 1955 through to 1978, plus many copies of Hi Fi News from the mid to late 60s and I started buying audio mags intermittently myself in the mid-70s. As such I'd say I had a reasonable grasp of history from the year dot, certainly from the pre-stereo days right through to today's computer audio. All pretty intense and obsessive stuff - from the very beginning people were buying separate loudspeaker drive units, motor units, tonearms etc and building their own plinths, cabinets etc. It was not that uncommon to build ones speakers into the room out of brick and concrete FFS! This linage of audio, now badged 'audiophile' in most quarters (and often in a disparaging way) has always run parallel to, though I'd argue disconnected from, lightweight turnkey home audio solutions such as radiograms, music centres, midi-systems etc, as has the press that supported it. In fact I'd go as far as saying any attempt to merge the two over the past 60 years has failed.

The biggest disappointment to my eyes is, outside of a handful of forums such as this one, this once proud hardcore has (with a few exceptions) de-evolved into rather lazy selling of over-priced and irrelevant trinketry to a over-wealthy and ageing elite. A world of difference from the pioneers such as Thorens, Garrard, AR, Quad, Tannoy, JBL, Klipsch, Celestion, Wharfdale, Leak, Rogers etc etc. Far too much bling, far too little about batting some serious air about. I'm sure it's a reason why so many of us who do care about the whole subject look backwards to what we view as a golden age (idler decks, tube amps, ESLs, Tannoys etc) rather than show much interest in the current stuff - it is no coincidence that the vintage audio market is booming at present.

The challenge is both to reinvigorate the hardcore and encourage some new blood into this hobby, and I'm far from convinced the answer has anything to do with cheesy painted MDF and blue LEDs such as so much of the industry appears to be backing at present. Really we should find this challenge easy as modern sources are superb - I can very happily listen to music ripped in iTunes or whatever, as I am doing whilst typing this (more Monk, bought 16 CDs worth the other day (link)). All we need to teach folk is flinging some proper air around the room is A Very Good Thing Indeed. That's exactly what captured my attention and got me interested in the first place - as a 12-13 year old I heard a Moody Blues album (AQ of B) on a friends dad's Thorens 125 / Quad / Ditton 66 system and I'd never heard anything like that before. I never knew music could even sound like that. I'm sure that's how to hook 'em - I had a good system before I was even 16.
 
This site contains affiliate links for which pink fish media may be compensated.
I just find it sad that I can probably tell you more about the 44 year old Quad 303 that's currently filling my back room with Thelonious Monk than you can tell me about anything your magazine reviews. That has to be the wrong way around!

<snip>

Getting young folk interested is the biggest hurdle facing the audio industry at present by far. I've no real answers to that one at present. All I know for absolute certain is that young folk love music just as much as the rest of us, so there's certainly something to be addressed here - it doesn't have to die (though a mass extinction and rebirth in a slightly different form might actually be a good thing). I am certain there is a real need to make music louder, bigger, clearer and to place it in a more social context than an iPod's headphones.

This, I think, illustrates the problem.

There is a fundamental disconnect between the top and bottom of Tony's post. One the one hand, he bemoans the lack of objective measurement, on the other he acknowledges the need to draw in more and younger people to the hifi world. A quick read of the off-topic forum shows the consensus that the yoof of today is ill-educated and fick. So how the hell are we supposed to get them reading hifi magazines, and listening to hifi, if we just throw increasing amounts of technical measurement at them, which they neither care about, nor are equipped to interpret?

Clearly, that's a gross exaggeration, derived from the general tenor of the off-topic forum of late, but the point remains: if you want to attract a younger audience, giving them more measurements probably isn't the most obvious way to start.
 
This seems rather contradictory to me Alan!
So yes you want to review new exciting and cheap British products... but you are not going to give them so good a review that it pisses off your major advertisers? Am I interpreting that correctly?

For example, as you may or may not be aware, I am myself a fledgling British hifi manufacturer...

Forgive me, I may be mistaken; but aren't you on record on this very forum as saying something to the effect of "all reviews are lies, I'd stick hot needles in my eyes before I'd submit any of my work to any of these arse-wipe rags for review".

(there may or may not be a smidgin of exaggeration in the above). ;)

Or was that somebody else?
 
Be careful what you wish for.

You may not like what we do, but what we do helps you do what you do. And if we don't do it, your survival gets harder by an order of magnitude.

True, in Spain before the crash there was about 4 audio/AV publications, the crash has wiped them all out, the end result is you can leave a pair of speakers in the street and people would just walk by them.
 
This seems rather contradictory to me Alan!
So yes you want to review new exciting and cheap British products... but you are not going to give them so good a review that it pisses off your major advertisers? Am I interpreting that correctly?

For example, as you may or may not be aware, I am myself a fledgling British hifi manufacturer... in as much as I sell a completely rebuilt version of the Cambridge Audio phono stages, incorporating circuitry of my own design.
It is only £160 for the rebuild (yes folks it's gone up £20!) and yet forum/internet reviews have said it's a real giant killer and can show a clean pair of heels to many £1k + products......
Now, I can't afford advertising in magazines such as yours...period!
Would you review something like this?
If you did and were shocked to find that it was on a par with a Linn Uphorik or a Naim Superline would you actually DARE to say so?? Would you be worried about "some random flat-earther stitching my testicles to the inside of my mouth" ? Or just very angry phone calls from Glasgow and Salisbury based marketing departments cancelling reviews and pulling ads!?

Yes. you did read that wrongly.

We need small new companies coming to the market. They frequently cannot afford to advertise. If there are not enough advertisers in the magazine, the magazine dies. The advertisers effectively act as patrons, but in the process require review space in return. We also have to pay tribute (more or less) to those brands that are sanctified by the Audiophile Gods, but don't advertise (Linn and Rega for example) and what's currently en vogue with our international enthusiasts. What's left after that goes to discovery brands.

The manufacturers frequently don't give a damn what else appears in a magazine. There's a massive myopia throughout publishing. Editorial teams are blind to advertising pages. Ad people think editorial is 'filler', manufacturers only read the bits about the manufacturer. Advertisers only look at their advert, and anything related to the manufacturer in print. As long as I didn't put a review damning a product next to one praising the product (or next to its advert) they hardly notice.

Client maintenance in a strongly enthusiast-led market is not necessarily about keeping the manufacturers sweet; it's about the enthusiasts themselves (why else would I be losing a Saturday afternoon doing this if it were all about the manufacturers?). From a purely commercial perspective (in advertising terms) running a review of a Rega or a Linn product are disastrous, because they demand heavy coverage, but there is absolutely no advertising support. We run them because they are big names in our small world and they are very popular with enthusiasts (especially UK enthusiasts).

So yes... I'd be perfectly happy reviewing your product. We're booking review slots into issues 101/102 right now.
 
Not good enough. Accusing me of being essentially a propagandist in a forum directly related to the execution of my job is about as close to defamation as I am prepared to put up with.

So I say again, given the findings I came to (unless you are also calling me a liar), precisely what would you do differently?

Here's your chance to shine. You want to see a review without propaganda, make one.

Well just re-read mine and other peoples criticisms of you here and you will get a pretty good idea of what you could improve on.

By the way, it you want to avoid accusations of Propaganda then try being more representative of other views IMO.
 
Well just re-read mine and other peoples criticisms of you here and you will get a pretty good idea of what you could improve on.

By the way, Propaganda =s a form of communication that is aimed towards influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position by presenting only one side ... etc. You could avoid such accusations by being more representative of other views and not such a brand darling.

So, by one side, you mean "my opinion". Your posting history does suggest you have a bit of an issue with Naim's current operations and I think that is clouding your judgment.

I work in a very brand-oriented field. We have enough trouble internationally getting any UK brand of any size (apart from Monitor Audio, KEF, B&W, Rega and Cambridge Audio) on the map. Linn and Naim at least have some of the support infrastructure worldwide to join or rejoin this select list (as do Wilson Benesch and PMC) and that's why I continue to support them.

If this were a predominantly UK-based magazine (where Naim is king), it would be worthwhile exploring alternate options to the Naim HiCap DR. Because there is an understanding of the Naim brand and how it is PSU-oriented. To the rest of the world, it's a discovery brand, and discussing aftermarket power supplies for Naim products is about as left-field as discussing different battery options for the Veloce LS-1 preamp here.

If they made pony products, I would either not review them or say they were pony.
 
Alan,

Well, if you would rather attack me than consider what I have to say that is entirely your choice. I have no problem with Naim products whatsoever, most of my kit is Naim.... I dont like their forum much, but that is a separate matter, of no relevance here. And my criticism was not just Naim related.
 
I thought he worked for HiFi World?

He went to Choice last year as editor.
Has he now left Choice too?

Alan is to be thanked for his usual candour in this discussion which far from being another 'lets slag the press' thread has touched on some issues which run to the heart of the problems faced by the industry as a whole. I hope he hasn't dropped himself in it!

I really think we need to appreciate the pressures on magazines and adjust our expectations accordingly.
We cannot have completely objective (in the true sense) reporting totally divorced from industry pressures.

IME it's often possible to read between the lines of a review and pick up on the clues which indicate a degree of writer discomfort.

The real problem with HIFI is simple. Once true high-fidelity reproduction was available for a few hundred quid in the late seventies/early eighties it was largely over in terms of sound quality barring the continued development of digital. It amazes me that it has taken hifi companies so long to realise that they are simply in a 'user interface and appearance arms race' with the computer industry and act accordingly- something brands like B&O and Bose realised decades ago.

That's spot-on.

Failure to learn the lessons and adapt to reality has lead to two things:

- Reinvention based on spurious half-arsed nonsense to justify new product, rather than tangible change.

- The active downgrading of fidelity within products, or the introduction of various colourations which are then sold as 'new and improved'.

I'm not against the latter at all, so long as it comes with honesty as to why these things are different.

It's against this backdrop that the audio press has to operate.
 
Of course I have. But, precisely to whom should I be honest? What about those customers who want to know whether they should buy a set of Nordost or Crystal or ZenSati power cords, at roughly £10,000 a pop? Telling them "it's all the bleedin' same" is not an option because that just leads to an ex-reader. Worse, it leads to an ex-reader who goes somewhere like AudioAficionado.com and tells the core readers of the magazine that it is 'soft' on cables and therefore, 'deaf'. Which means your credibility among those who are your enthusiast readers is undermined.

So, if you think cables are "all the bleedin' same" you keep your council.

For all the enmity you and yours have toward the magazine, our biggest potential loss of readers right now is coming from my stance on hi-res. I still maintain that you are paying a premium for microphone thermal noise and - at best - a more careful mastering process. I know a lot of manufacturers of DACs who (privately) agree with me... but have to continue to develop their products from 24/96 to 24/192 to 32/384 to DSD-over-USB because the audiophiles (who, let's face it, buy our stuff) will not accept anything less. This is a sham, especially as there is a better campaign to be had (something like "brick-wall mastering is worse than brick-wall filtering", but more pithy). However, the upshot of the excellent exposé of the hi-res game by Hi-Fi News did not cause an army of hi-res-loving audiophiles demanding more from their hi-res, it caused some of them to consider Hi-Fi News 'hostile' to hi-res.

We have to be the promoters of the audio industry because no-one else is doing that. It would be absolutely fantastic if the audio industry was large enough to be able to afford a truly independent voice. Like they used to be, before the business got really, really small.
Beautifully put.
 
One of the reasons for the constant drive to deliver a Mk XXXVII version of any given product is as result of the computer industry being the trend setter for all things consumer electronic. Even a decade ago, audio products has a reasonable expectation of a minimum of a six-to-eight year life cycle, and a 20+ year lifespan. Now it's at often most three years - less if it's a DAC. If it's a USB device, less than a year.

If you don't play that game, it's all "what have you done for me lately?" And "didn't you used to make DACs, back in the distant past of last year?" Also, because the computer world reinvents the wheel (as if) every time the latest iThing or Anodyne comes along, companies in audio are forced to do the same. If we point to the subsequent changes as 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' upgrades, we just killed the product.
 


advertisement


Back
Top