As per the topic title really ... whilst I understand that phones and tablets are yet another way to consume or stream media, I think too much emphasis and editorial space is given over to these devices. Is it really necessary to speculate and report on every iPhone 6 rumour, or produce a massive review of a £500 phone but only a few scant details of a £5000 hifi or AV component. There are plenty of other magazines that review phones... not sure why WHF has to be one of them ... perhaps it drives search engine web traffic to the site???
Are there too many articles about mobile devices?
- Thread starter tino
- Start date
chebby
Well-known member
tino said:
The three people who bought the £5000 hi-fi component probably didn't read about it in WHF? first. They would have either been told / emailed about it by their dealer, emailed about it by the manufacturer who they had their last one registered with, or found it in one of the other specialist hi-fi magazines (which tend to be aimed more upmarket).
Most of these people (the sort who think about a £15,000+ system in the same way they think about a fridge or a garden tractor*) will have their 'people' sort this c##p out for them and never go near a magazine.
Thousands more people will be interested in the latest £500 smartphone or television or Blurtooth speaker.
*Actually they probably give far more thought to a good garden tractor. I would.
One advantage of publishing online is that we get detailed analytics of exactly which reviews are most popular, what type of products people are searching for and feedback on how our content performs in Google. The fact is that smartphones and tablets are massively popular, and our reviews reflect that.
That's not to say we're against writing long-form reviews of more expensive/esoteric hi-fi equipment – far from it, that's exactly what our Temptations section is for – but the market for that is inevitably more limited. As the saying goes "you can't please all of the people all of the time", but getting the right mix of products and reviews – both in the magazine and on the website – is a matter of constant debate within the editorial team and something we're happy to keep under review.
We also try and keep most of the products we test at the more affordable end of the spectrum, as we realise not everyone can afford a £5k amp.
That's not to say we're against writing long-form reviews of more expensive/esoteric hi-fi equipment – far from it, that's exactly what our Temptations section is for – but the market for that is inevitably more limited. As the saying goes "you can't please all of the people all of the time", but getting the right mix of products and reviews – both in the magazine and on the website – is a matter of constant debate within the editorial team and something we're happy to keep under review.
We also try and keep most of the products we test at the more affordable end of the spectrum, as we realise not everyone can afford a £5k amp.
MrReaper182
Well-known member
chebby said:
Judging by the number of forum questions that ask 'how I should spend my 3K/5K/10K budget?' I'm not so sure. And who reads a HiFi website / magazine to learn about a phone? Not me ... there are better places than WHF to do that. I'm OK with Bluetooth speaker reviews so long as there is some balance
Yes tino, but remember our Forum members represent only a part (albeit a very important part!) of our overall readership.
chebby
Well-known member
I'm not sure what the magazine is aiming at anymore, and I feel there is too much recycled and speculative news especially around yet to be launched derivative phones. Do WHF readers really care that the next glass for an iPhone might be a 5.5 inch piece of sapphire glass??
MrReaper182
Well-known member
tino said:
What's the matter? Did you wake up on the wrong side of the bed? If you don't like an article then don't read about it, simple. The magazine can not just cater for your tastes as they have to cater for a wide range of tastes.
chebby
Well-known member
I really shouldn't comment on the magazine. I was a regular buyer many years ago (up until the mid 1990s), a sporadic buyer after I joined the forum in 2008 (helpng to pay the 'rent' I suppose) and, regrettably, a non-buyer now.
The cost of two or three issues will buy me almost any new paperback from my local Waterstones, the reviews start appearing on the website almost as soon as the magazine is on the stands and it's a very 'thin' read (sorry) once the ads and buying guide and non hi-fi features are subtracted.
The reviews themselves no longer seem to have anything of the reviewer 'invested' in them. (I used to despair a little of hi-fi being reviewed by writers but now I wish they'd get the writers back!)
Sorry to say this, but that's why I read Andrew Everard's blog nowadays. The guy could review electric kettles and make the article interesting and funny and convince the reader that he really cares about the subject.
That was harsh i'm afraid, but I have just enough examples of old magazines (not just yours) from decades past where the photography was lousy and the layout was clunky and the paper was cheap, but the writing - on a good month - could absorb you for a whole day and could even weather a few re-reads. I'd pass them to a friend (who is into hi-fi) after i'd finished and we'd sometimes discuss the articles and reviews months later. It's very different now.
I don't blame the magazine. I guess it's what readers want and it's in a format that is more compatible with the way people want 'bitesized' (but glossy) chunks that won't get overly thought provoking, challenging or distracting. Nice big photo, star rating, bit of blurb. All on a page. (Or half a page.)
The cost of two or three issues will buy me almost any new paperback from my local Waterstones, the reviews start appearing on the website almost as soon as the magazine is on the stands and it's a very 'thin' read (sorry) once the ads and buying guide and non hi-fi features are subtracted.
The reviews themselves no longer seem to have anything of the reviewer 'invested' in them. (I used to despair a little of hi-fi being reviewed by writers but now I wish they'd get the writers back!)
Sorry to say this, but that's why I read Andrew Everard's blog nowadays. The guy could review electric kettles and make the article interesting and funny and convince the reader that he really cares about the subject.
That was harsh i'm afraid, but I have just enough examples of old magazines (not just yours) from decades past where the photography was lousy and the layout was clunky and the paper was cheap, but the writing - on a good month - could absorb you for a whole day and could even weather a few re-reads. I'd pass them to a friend (who is into hi-fi) after i'd finished and we'd sometimes discuss the articles and reviews months later. It's very different now.
I don't blame the magazine. I guess it's what readers want and it's in a format that is more compatible with the way people want 'bitesized' (but glossy) chunks that won't get overly thought provoking, challenging or distracting. Nice big photo, star rating, bit of blurb. All on a page. (Or half a page.)
MrReaper182
Well-known member
chebby said:
The magazine can not just cater to your writing style tastes as it has to write it's articles in a way that's going to appeal to the the majority of people and I think it does a good job of that. Just because you find someone's writing style funny does not mean everyone else will. If the magazine was to try and appeal to everyone tastes then it would look very different each month and then most people would stop buying the magazine (as most people don't like change) and then this site would probably be gone.
chebby
Well-known member
MrReaper182 said:
You are right of course.
It has to appeal equally to everyone without 'personality' getting in the way.
jjbomber
Well-known member
plastic penguin
Well-known member
chebby
Well-known member
plastic penguin said:
Quote what I wrote, but please don't change the actual words.
I actually said ...
chebby said:
Please can the mods amend PP's misquote.
plastic penguin
Well-known member
chebby said:
Chebby it was changed for humorous reasons. The only person I'm taking the EDITED out of is ME!
John Duncan
Well-known member
I think it was fairly obvious what PP did. I shall save my red pen for when it's important (and I am not on my phone).
Sliced Bread
Well-known member
I think the reviews have actually improved recently.
I too was a fan of the old style reviews and for a while I found the reviews became too descriptive of features and had far less discussion on audio / picture quality.
But over the last few months or so the subjective impression I get is that more of the reviews are focusing on describing the sound / quality of the product. This is very welcome IMO.
If I could change anything, I would say that I would want every audio review to include a few sentences or a text box on kit partnering. By this I don't necessarily mean a list of current products as most of us tend to buy one component at a time, but rather somthing general like "...as this Network Player has a dull top end, it might be useful to remedy an overly harsh sounding system", or perhaps generic advice "...we found the amp worked well with a variety of speakers but in the price comparable bracket it particularly shined with Monitor Audio".
I too was a fan of the old style reviews and for a while I found the reviews became too descriptive of features and had far less discussion on audio / picture quality.
But over the last few months or so the subjective impression I get is that more of the reviews are focusing on describing the sound / quality of the product. This is very welcome IMO.
If I could change anything, I would say that I would want every audio review to include a few sentences or a text box on kit partnering. By this I don't necessarily mean a list of current products as most of us tend to buy one component at a time, but rather somthing general like "...as this Network Player has a dull top end, it might be useful to remedy an overly harsh sounding system", or perhaps generic advice "...we found the amp worked well with a variety of speakers but in the price comparable bracket it particularly shined with Monitor Audio".
The_Lhc
Well-known member
chebby said:
I enjoy reading Andrew's blog as well, but I don't read it for review purposes, I can't recall him ever reviewing anything he didn't absolutely love since he left the magazine, every review is a glowing tribute to how wonderful the current piece of kit he's listening to is.
Now, it may be that he has an agreement with the people sending him review gear that if he doesn't really like something he won't write about it but I'd have thought that would be a quick way to get a lot of manufacturers not sending you stuff any further, so I'm not sure what the explanation is. It feels a little artificial though.
Still enjoy reading his blogs though, he is a very interesting writer.
Interesting discussion. It has always been our policy to review as a team, not as individuals, which is why our reviews don't have bylines on them. Yes, one person will be responsible for writing each review, but it is a collective view of the product and how it performs – everyone listens in on each other's test in our listening rooms, there's lots of discussion about the overall verdict, and our technical editor does a second listen on every review. That way we dial out any personal bias creeping in and ensure a level playing field.
I appreciate that this sometimes means the reviews can lack personality, perhaps, but it is intended to be a What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision review, not that of a named individual. American magazines, in particular, tend to major on reviews by a named individual and that's fine – there's room for both approaches in my view, and both are equally valid.
I appreciate that this sometimes means the reviews can lack personality, perhaps, but it is intended to be a What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision review, not that of a named individual. American magazines, in particular, tend to major on reviews by a named individual and that's fine – there's room for both approaches in my view, and both are equally valid.
Sliced Bread said:
That's definitely something we've tried to address, with more emphasis on sound/picture quality and how the product performs.
Sliced Bread
Well-known member
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Chord teases Suzi pre/power amplifier concept that's like Lego for your hi-fi- Started by What Hi-Fi?
- Replies: 0
-
Sennheiser adds a pair of True Wireless earbuds to its mid-range Accentum family
- Started by What Hi-Fi?
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram