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.
Holy crap! When did you get a shift key for your keyboard?i prefer audio eXpress. no nonsense.
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 (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!
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.
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 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 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...
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.
cheesy painted MDF and blue LEDs
Just read that David Price has left Choice. What a shame, and a loss.
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!?
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, 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.
I thought he worked for HiFi World?
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.
Beautifully put.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.