A question for the WHF review team

[idc]

What sort of balance of opinions the forum users have on increasing objective element in the reviews vs keeping as is? I for one is for increasing it.

What do others think?

AlmaataKZ, please do not think I am picking on you! It is just you keep making the points I want to raise!

What do you mean by objective element? Other magazines produce measurements and place them next to subjective reviews. It depends on the product how worthwhile that is. With speakers it is worthwhile. With cables it is worthless. With amps it is minimal, buit can help with speaker choice.

 

[AlmaataKZ]

Idc, this particular post of mine was dmittedly directed more at the logic of jd's post than the magazine in general.

 

[AlmaataKZ]

What sort of balance of opinions the forum users have on increasing objective element in the reviews vs keeping as is? I for one is for increasing it.

What do others think?

AlmaataKZ, please do not think I am picking on you! It is just you keep making the points I want to raise!

What do you mean by objective element? Other magazines produce measurements and place them next to subjective reviews. It depends on the product how worthwhile that is. With speakers it is worthwhile. With cables it is worthless. With amps it is minimal, buit can help with speaker choice.

Exactly! Use more space for objectivity whete it matters more and less where it matters less - and if cables measure or perform technically the same, say so. No need for fancy graphs here!

 

[idc]

What sort of balance of opinions the forum users have on increasing objective element in the reviews vs keeping as is? I for one is for increasing it.

What do others think?

AlmaataKZ, please do not think I am picking on you! It is just you keep making the points I want to raise!

What do you mean by objective element? Other magazines produce measurements and place them next to subjective reviews. It depends on the product how worthwhile that is. With speakers it is worthwhile. With cables it is worthless. With amps it is minimal, buit can help with speaker choice.

Exactly! Use more space for objectivity whete it matters more and less where it matters less - and if cables measure or perform technically the same, say so. No need for fancy graphs here!

I see now and agree :cheers:

 

[matthewpiano]

One of the reasons WHFS&V has the biggest distribution of any hi-fi/AV magazine is because it refrains from getting overly technical and scientific. The magazine is a consumer magazine with a broad appeal, covering all the different ways of listening to and watching entertainment - hi-fi equipment, systems, TVs, blu-ray players, mobile phones, portable music devices, tablets etc. The magazine makes it clear that its reviews are subjective and, for the 20+ years I've been reading the reviewers have consistently made clear the need for people to audition items themselves, taking the reviews as a starting point. The whole WHFS&V concept is one of being accessible and approachable to a range of readers, including technology novices.

If you want scientific objectivity look elsewhere at more niche/specialist publications and possibly at other forums too.

My own opinion on the HDMI cable matter is as follows. There are several cheap HDMI cables that simply don't provide a consistently reliable connection. I've seen myself, both when I was working in the trade, and more recently as a consumer. A certainly level of construction quality is necessary to ensure reliable handshakes and communication between HDMI connected devices. Beyond that, I'm not convinced that digital cables make much, if any difference to picture or sound quality although I do still believe analogue cables do.

 

[Anonymous]

In one of the reviews WHF state that £50 is the least one should consider spending on a HDMI cable, in another they state that compared to the freebies, one will see a better picture with bla bla cable.

In another they state that "this cable will improve even 1080p images"

I think that WHF should review the HDMI cable reviews, if they must remain then surely statements like the above should be edited out? Even when reviewing things that actually do differ, you don't come across such remarks.

Imagine a speaker supertest where the reviewer stated that you will think that this speaker is better than that speaker :roll:

Or, this amp is so good, it will even improve being at the live gig :shifty:

They're carelessly done, they really are, and are such a bad reflection on the mag, why not amend them a little? Make it clear that while there's no evidence they differ, the reviewers think they all do.

I'm not having a dig, I just think that if they've gotta stay something should be done to make them look a bit more down to earth, and to point out that there's no evidence to back them up.

[note from mods - edited to remove libel]

 

[AlmaataKZ]

Very valid point, Matt. It is not good to go heavy/geeky but there are ways to create and maintain technical authority (it is an electronic gear related subject after all) Without going heavy and keep the basics right, keep things constantly in petspective and keep certain things straight. E.g. In a chain of file format - nas - cable - streamer - cable- amp - speakers the latter will have far greater impact on sound than any other and cables will be megligible or zero so whats the point of talking about how musical a cable or a nas is thus reducing space left to explain how and why speakers are important and how they perform/compare.

 

[shooter]

Are we still talking about HDMI cables here guys?

 

[Ravey Gravey Davy]

See here

 

[char_lotte]

Are we still talking about HDMI cables here guys?

Unfortunately.

 

[Alec]

Are we still talking about HDMI cables here guys?

Unfortunately.

Aww, c'mon, you're having the time of your life!

 

[char_lotte]

Are we still talking about HDMI cables here guys?

Unfortunately.

Aww, c'mon, you're having the time of your life!

It's all beginning to make my teeth itch.