Consistency problems...

[Anonymous]

Ahhh i think we've slighty wandered off the garden path here, with what i was trying to say(or moan depending on how you take me!) I have no doubt you review more hi-fi equipment than any other mag but if you take last months issue with regards to the £1000 speakers, i felt this review had been slighty rushed. For the WHF reader, who is into their hifi this could have been a deal breaker or sealer in terms of what they might want to buy next, i don't felt there was enough information with regards to the speakers and what they where put through.

Also im all for new products and new media but reviewing such products as mobile phone mp3 players will only make my train journey more annoying!!!!The amount of people now who listen to their music through the speaker of the phone...is doing my head in, Now come on WHF these people need no more encouragment and you guys are going to have accept some of the blame for this!!!!

 

[Anonymous]

If you felt a review to be rushed, that's criticism we'll all have to pay attention to: if you could elaborate a little more on the information you believed the test omitted, I'd appreciate it.

However, I don't think I can let the second part of your point stand without comment. We have never advocated listening to an MP3 phone's speakers, and I'd imagine we never will. Through headphones, yes. Through a dock, yes. Through a hi-fi system or desktop speaker set-up, yes. But through speakers smaller than an old halfpenny bit, and to the distraction of other members of the public? No.

We didn't invent the notion of the MP3 phone. Nokia and other giant concerns did that. Nor did we invent (or foster) the notion that forcing passers-by to listen to your preferred music is in some way socially acceptable. You'll have seen our oft-repeated comments about how, in our view, open-backed headphones can be too intrusive for use on commuter trains and the like: the same applies, only much more so, to the notion of listening to your phone's speakers in public.

People acting in this manner don't think it's acceptable because What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision magazine encouraged them to. They're acting in this way because they're gits.

 

[Alec]

Erm...bit strong. I must be a git, as i listen to music in my flat (one in a block of 6), and the folk upstairs to me must sometimes be able to hear it, as i can hear them lumbering about the place.

 

[Anonymous]

Of course you're not. That wasn't what I was saying. You're in a flat, and there's nothing at all wrong with your choice of listening, any more than there is with someone listening to a £20,000 CD player (there's a quality difference, of course, but that's another matter).

The last poster was referring to people listening to their personal music players on a commuter train, regardless of others around them. That's somewhat different.

 

[Alec]

Fair enough. Nicely dodged. There are still people who can hear mine tho. maybe i have to much conscience about that, eh? Oh, and i should hope theres an unbelievable quality difference at that price lol!

 

[Anonymous]

Fair comment. You'd be surprised, although whether it's worth the money is another issue!

Good on you for having a conscience about whether people around you can hear your hi-fi (or are disturbed by it). All I was trying to suggest is that some MP3 phone users are so unconcerned about what other people think - or indeed, about other people in generalÿ- that they think it's socially acceptable to assault their fellow travellers' ears with noise pollution in a confined space, such as a train or bus. I don't think it is. Granted, maybe there's only a small difference between that sort of inconsiderate behaviour and noise intrusion caused by a living room hi-fi, but still.

 

[SouthaK]

Interesting your comment about MP3 mobile phone users being unconcerned about what other people think...I would argue that (going back to the original reason for this post) that's the very reason why you should not include mobile phones in WHF. The kind of people who buy a MP3 mobile phone rather than an MP3 media player are not going to audition the phones audio capabilities, much less care how it sounds. They will buy such a device merely on the fact of it's function (its plays MP3's) rather than form (how good it sounds).

I believe that the the qualifying mark for inclusion in WHF should be devices whose primary form and function IS AV excellence...devices that not just do something but are designed to do it well.

Under that criteria mobile phones would not qualify.

On another related point, it's laudible for the magazine to aim "to cover every type of music (and movie) source" but really it's unworkable...where are the supertests for memory cards, laptops, PC's, media playing software, sound cards, projector screens, in-car entertainment, graphics cards, etc...

So given that it's not possible to cover ALL types of AV media sources and intermediary devices, a line has to be drawn somewhere and I believe mobile phone MP3's shouldn't qualify!

If you must include mobile phones wouldn't it have been more useful to include a few MP3 devices as a direct comparison?

Phew! I'm going to lie down.