A question for the WHF review team

[Exshopguy]

I guess it depends on whether you see the "known" moderators postings as a stream of constant moderation, or whether it's just them expressing their own opinions.

My understanding is, if moderation is performed, it's clearly labelled as such - this is a rarity and only done when things are getting out of hand (and that's a good thing in my opinion). At all other times, the moderators are just getting involved in discussions with their own opinions (I believe this is also a good thing) and this shouldn't be confused as moderation.

Of course that's just the way I see it.

While the moderators expressing their own opinios is generally a good thing I think it makes it tricky to have a fair discussion if they have an obvious view as it's "their house" so to speak. One party will likely feel the underdog as if they disagree with the mods too strongly they can just say "this is getting out of hand" and lock the thread or delete posts, if they are making sniping comments to provoke those kinds of responses it can be seen as an intentional way of derailing a thread to that end.

Back on topic, has anyone who can see differences in HDMI cables given James Randi a call to get their million dollar reward yet? If not why not!? I'm sure most of us would find that amount of money useful!

 

[byakuya83]

Who is James Randi?

I'd like to know how HDMI cables are reviewed.

I can see obvious merit in comparing and commenting on build quality but I fail to see how picture/audio quality can be judged effectively.

 

[Lee H]

if they have an obvious view as it's "their house" so to speak.

But it's not. As the link above shows.

 

[Exshopguy]

What is being asked for here is not better moderation.

Nor is anyone seriously suggesting a mature debate on the efficacy of expensive cables. (Everyone knows that is a doomed enterprise.)

This is a simple exercise in poking staff and mods with sticks to get a reaction. (Hence the disparaging remarks about their competencies.)

I think the main point of this thread was to ask how the magazine test cables. There is now good proof to say hdmi cables make no difference and no proof showing that they do or can perform differently. The magazine recommends people spend a fair amount on ones the say perform better so as a consumer magazine it would be in their interest to explain that for credibility. It's not poking, it's a fair question.

 

[Exshopguy]

if they have an obvious view as it's "their house" so to speak.

But it's not. As the link above shows.

Yes, thank you for the link! I've only seen three mods on here openly and two were affiliated with the magazine, the third I don't know so he could well be independent. I'm just saying it as I see it, as I said I'm fairly new here so don't know all the history. I've read the magazine and other HiFi mags for a long time.

 

[Lee H]

Can we just skip straight to the bit where someone eventually loses their rag, threatens the PPC (after all, it's all a collusion with advertisers don't cha know) and reveals themselves to be a former forum member returned anew?

As I and others have said before, it's rare that anyone changes sides in this debate. WHF have their views, others have different views. Demo your own cable, draw your own conclusions and enjoy the movie.

 

[Exshopguy]

Who is James Randi? I'd like to know how HDMI cables are reviewed. I can see obvious merit in comparing and commenting on build quality but I fail to see how picture/audio quality can be judged effectively.

See link here (warning for some harsh language there). He has now extended his "reward" to cover hdmi.

http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2007/10/01/james-randi-calls-ou.html

 

[AlmaataKZ]

What is being asked for here is not better moderation.

Nor is anyone seriously suggesting a mature debate on the efficacy of expensive cables. (Everyone knows that is a doomed enterprise.)

This is a simple exercise in poking staff and mods with sticks to get a reaction. (Hence the disparaging remarks about their competencies.)

I think the main point of this thread was to ask how the magazine test cables. There is now good proof to say hdmi cables make no difference and no proof showing that they do or can perform differently. The magazine recommends people spend a fair amount on ones the say perform better so as a consumer magazine it would be in their interest to explain that for credibility. It's not poking, it's a fair question.

fair question.

 

[chebby]

What is being asked for here is not better moderation.

Nor is anyone seriously suggesting a mature debate on the efficacy of expensive cables. (Everyone knows that is a doomed enterprise.)

This is a simple exercise in poking staff and mods with sticks to get a reaction. (Hence the disparaging remarks about their competencies.)

I think the main point of this thread was to ask how the magazine test cables. There is now good proof to say hdmi cables make no difference and no proof showing that they do or can perform differently. The magazine recommends people spend a fair amount on ones the say perform better so as a consumer magazine it would be in their interest to explain that for credibility. It's not poking, it's a fair question.

So what was post #9 on page 3 all about then?

 

[AlmaataKZ]

Can we just skip straight to the bit where someone eventually loses their rag, threatens the PPC (after all, it's all a collusion with advertisers don't cha know) and reveals themselves to be a former forum member returned anew?

As I and others have said before, it's rare that anyone changes sides in this debate. WHF have their views, others have different views. Demo your own cable, draw your own conclusions and enjoy the movie.

Own demo is one thing (it does not have responisbility to anyone apart from oneself), a review in a (leading) mag is another. when it highly rates/recommends a more expensive product against a less expensive one to a target audience it shoudl be able to explain why/how etc. in simple terms, understandable by the target audience. is that not fair?

 

[Anonymous]

Can we just skip straight to the bit where someone eventually loses their rag, threatens the PPC (after all, it's all a collusion with advertisers don't cha know) and reveals themselves to be a former forum member returned anew?

As I and others have said before, it's rare that anyone changes sides in this debate. WHF have their views, others have different views. Demo your own cable, draw your own conclusions and enjoy the movie.

Lee, wouldn't it be more beneficial to the WHF readership if they were advised to buy a cheap HDMI cable as opposed to a £50 one? There's no difference between them, surely that's obvious to everyone at this point? So why are they being told otherwise in the reviews? And what would be the point in demoing cables?

People need to be made aware of the truth, IMO, not advised to go and see if they imagine non existent differences, and until they're made aware of it, on here and by WHF, these threads will always appear.

 

[chebby]

Can we just skip straight to the bit where someone eventually loses their rag, threatens the PPC (after all, it's all a collusion with advertisers don't cha know) and reveals themselves to be a former forum member returned anew?

As I and others have said before, it's rare that anyone changes sides in this debate. WHF have their views, others have different views. Demo your own cable, draw your own conclusions and enjoy the movie.

Lee, wouldn't it be more beneficial to the WHF readership if they were advised to buy a cheap HDMI cable as opposed to a £50 one? There's no difference between them, surely that's obvious to everyone at this point? So why are they being told otherwise in the reviews? And what would be the point in demoing cables?

People need to be made aware of the truth, IMO, not advised to go and see if they imagine non existent differences, and until they're made aware of it, on here and by WHF, these threads will always appear.

Picking up on Lee's point, how did that thing with the PCC go Max?

 

[AlmaataKZ]

What is being asked for here is not better moderation.

Nor is anyone seriously suggesting a mature debate on the efficacy of expensive cables. (Everyone knows that is a doomed enterprise.)

This is a simple exercise in poking staff and mods with sticks to get a reaction. (Hence the disparaging remarks about their competencies.)

I think the main point of this thread was to ask how the magazine test cables. There is now good proof to say hdmi cables make no difference and no proof showing that they do or can perform differently. The magazine recommends people spend a fair amount on ones the say perform better so as a consumer magazine it would be in their interest to explain that for credibility. It's not poking, it's a fair question.

So what was post #9 on page 3 all about then?

I was trying to explain why cable/hdmi etc threads degenrate in my opinion - and I though it was due to lack of positive moderation (as explained down the thread).

My vision of WHF (or any other similar leading publication/forum) is of a competent one, educational, able to explain, facilitating accumulation and dissipation of knowledge, ecouraging positive discussion, arrivng to sensibile conclusions and recommendations. divisive/disimissive/provocative does not help imo. that would be stepping into tabloid domain.

 

[Anonymous]

Can we just skip straight to the bit where someone eventually loses their rag, threatens the PPC (after all, it's all a collusion with advertisers don't cha know) and reveals themselves to be a former forum member returned anew?

As I and others have said before, it's rare that anyone changes sides in this debate. WHF have their views, others have different views. Demo your own cable, draw your own conclusions and enjoy the movie.

Lee, wouldn't it be more beneficial to the WHF readership if they were advised to buy a cheap HDMI cable as opposed to a £50 one? There's no difference between them, surely that's obvious to everyone at this point? So why are they being told otherwise in the reviews? And what would be the point in demoing cables?

People need to be made aware of the truth, IMO, not advised to go and see if they imagine non existent differences, and until they're made aware of it, on here and by WHF, these threads will always appear.

Picking up on Lee's point, how did that thing with the PCC go Max?

Let's not go there, Chebby.

 

[AlmaataKZ]

In general, as a hifi fan and WHF reader for many years, I am in favour of competent WHF. I think it is lacking a bit now and I have previously offered my opinion on improvements directly to WHF staff via email. I did not get any reply. I have no idea if it was useful or useless for them and if it fits or not with WHF's business strategy.

but I genuenly beleive that comeptent, objective and informartive is better long-term than superficial / subjective / provocative.

I have no other agenda than to appeal to WHF to increase technical competence and objectiveness (without getting heavy if they do not want to become too geeky). I think it is possilbe. but I do not know - I have never run a magazine or a web site. I know some examples, though.

 

[chebby]

Well it's in the public domain and it's relevant to WHF and their reviewing of HDMI cables...

http://www.avforums.com/forums/hdmi-cables-switches/1534820-press-complaints-decision-re-what-hifi.html

 

[Anonymous]

Well it's in the public domain and it's relevant to WHF and their reviewing of HDMI cables...

http://www.avforums.com/forums/hdmi-cables-switches/1534820-press-complaints-decision-re-what-hifi.html

Even though they [EDITED BY MODS], and they're carried out by a team, the reviews are considered the opinion of the writer, and are thus perfectly ok in the eyes of the PCC.

They are what they are, reviews of products that no other publication reviews, such is life..

 

[Anonymous]

When you review HDMI cables do you use any scientific method to check for differences or are your reviews purely subjective?

That is a fair question to ask.

Is anyone from the What Hifi team going to give an answer?

 

[Lee H]

When you review HDMI cables do you use any scientific method to check for differences or are your reviews purely subjective?

That is a fair question to ask.

Is anyone from the What Hifi team going to give an answer?

Like this?

http://www.whathifi.com/how-we-test

 

[John Duncan]

When you review HDMI cables do you use any scientific method to check for differences or are your reviews purely subjective?

That is a fair question to ask.

Is anyone from the What Hifi team going to give an answer?

Well they didn't the last time he asked it. He knew what the answer was then as well (that the reviews are subjective opinion), so not sure why he's asking again.

 

[busb]

ASAIK WHF don't perform any measurements. I personally support this for most discreet products such as amplifiers, DACs & speakers. If such measurements illuminated how a particular device sounded, I would call for such measurement to be done.

However, when reviewing servers, HDDs that keep music in the digital domain, I believe that the only thing that effects SQ is dropped bits ultimately - that maybe caused by jitter or loss of sync by any means. Trying to argue that something else plays a part bothers me greatly. Having said that, many measurements have got more sophisticated because a suffient number of people insist they can hear differences. We may, at some point in the future have measurements that do correlate to SQ but not yet. How frequency distortion is measured is a prime example of gross incompleteness.

As for challenging any HiFi magazine on how SQ is derived is a non-starter. Take the OP's HDMI cable question as an example. Mags are being squeezed by the internet just as much as shops are. Would it be in their interest to have proved that all well-made HDMI cables sound view the same? I'd say of couse not! The last thing any comercially driven society wants is anything but a tiny proportion of that society knowing what the hell is going on. This view is not that cynical or new! What the hell do you think WHF's advertisers would do if the mag proved that the differences between competently made digital cables were vitually non-existent? It would be suicide!

The other oft mmeantioned theme is to challenge HiFi hacks to a double blind ABX test session where all differences fail to be noted. The pure objectivist don't want to admit the ABX testing is very flawed. Any test must be able to show both positive & negative results not just to try & prove a positive. Lets take an example where such a test involves 2 amplifiers that essentually measure the same by asking which how & in what way they sound "different", if indeed they do. This is a pretty pointless test because all the participants that either feel or "know" there can't be any differences can skew the result either incidentally or actively by merely saying that they didn't hear any differences even if they did. Under those circustances you cannot easily determine if they were lying, not listening, are just cloth-eared or being genuine. Any ABX test must include deliberately introduced audible differences to be valid so as to weed out out those who say NO to each section of a test sequence.

 

[Alec]

This is really sad and pathetic. Chebby, you're right, the OP is exactly what you said it was. It is also just true that HDMIs do not differ in their performance.

If a respected mathmetician said to me that 2+2 is, in his subjective opinion, 17, I don't think I'd listen to him anymore.

And yes, John, thay should be locked and banned under house rules, and some kind of sticky should be written. But it would have to be completely neutral in tone and information provided, so it wouldn't work.

This is where you all rush to the mags defence, and call me out for owning some speakers, though the shame you could make me feel is nothing compared to that which the company has already made me feel, so knock yourselves out.

 

[char_lotte]

This is really sad and pathetic. Chebby, you're right, the OP is exactly what you said it was. It is also just true that HDMIs do not differ in their performance.

If a respected mathmetician said to me that 2+2 is, in his subjective opinion, 17, I don't think I'd listen to him anymore.

And yes, John, thay should be locked and banned under house rules, and some kind of sticky should be written. But it would have to be completely neutral in tone and information provided, so it wouldn't work.

This is where you all rush to the mags defence, and call me out for owning some speakers, though the shame you could make me feel is nothing compared to that which the company has already made me feel, so knock yourselves out.

For what it's worth, I agree with evrrything you have said Alec.

 

[Alec]

Thanks.

 

[John Duncan]

This is where you all rush to the mags defence, and call me out for owning some speakers, though the shame you could make me feel is nothing compared to that which the company has already made me feel, so knock yourselves out.

I'm not going to rush to the mag's defence. If I was the editor I'd stop reviewing cables altogether. But I'm not, and they can do what they like as far as I'm concerned. If people don't like the way a particular magazine does things, they can ignore that aspect of a magazine in favour of the stuff that is useful to them, go and buy other magazines or set up their own, as far as I'm concerned. No point whining about it.

As for calling you out for owning some speakers, I would never do that, as I hope you know.