Harbeth speakers

[Native_bon]

Its really sad that reviews still control so much.

 

[tin ear]

What do you mean by that?

 

[plastic penguin]

Its really sad that reviews still control so much.

The OP is only asking whether WHFI have ever reviewed Harbeth. I still quite like looking, on occasions, at the 'first test' of my old MA RS6s, but that doesn't mean that reviews control my choices, otherwise I wouldn't have PMC TB2is, would I?

 

[tin ear]

I read Stereophile too but they do go on at times.

True, they do seem overly verbose at times.

*lol* This is quite the pot calling the kettle black

Now that you mention it...

 

[tin ear]

I assume that Native_bon hasn't read the entire thread. Like plastic penguin, I enjoy reading reviews of audio gear but they don't determine my purchasing decisions. However, if a review piques my interest then it might lead to an in-store audition. Having said that, I may have to make an exception for Harbeth speakers because they are not available for audition here. It doesn't feel like a risky proposition though from what I've been reading about them in reviews and forums.

 

[Vladimir]

I enjoy reading reviews of audio gear but they don't determine my purchasing decisions.

Riiiight...

 

[Tzutzu]

I enjoy reading reviews of audio gear but they don't determine my purchasing decisions.

Riiiight...

And what do you mean by that 4 iiii Mr. Vladimir?

 

[chebby]

And what do you mean by that 4 iiii Mr Vladimir ...

cliiiicky

 

[chebby]

duplicate

 

[Vladimir]

And what do you mean by that 4 iiii Mr Vladimir ...

cliiiicky

 

[BigH]

Well I WAS TALKING ABOUT RECENTLY. I think Creek have probably given up with WHF reviews why bother when other mags give them great reviews. Too much emplhasis is placed on how many stars a product gets and of course sales generated on 5 stars reviews.

 

[BigH]

Probably because Harbeth don't want WHF to review them. Also WHF reliy on manufacturers to send them products to review which I think is a rather dubious practice.

And what do you base this on?

One if they did they would have send WHF some to review. Also if you read the Harbeth forum you will soon see their views on hifi products are somewhat different from WHF views. Read some of Alan Shaw's comments on speaker cables for instance.

If you are referring to sending in products they are several reasons for that view, one you only get what manufacturers choose to send in, 2 how do you know its a standard product and not some tweeked for review one? Also you get this problem no Harbeth reviews, no Creek reviews etc.

Anyway I would not rely on one mags review, some of WHF reviews have been well out of line with other reviews. Also most the reviews get 4 or 5 stars.

What I understand Harbeth sells far more speakers outside the UK than within, just look how many UK dealers they have, from memory it was about 7, so I dont think they are bothered about WHF, they get good reviews in other mags.

If it's simply a matter of Harbeth not submitting review samples or not wanting WHF to review their speakers then so be it, but that is just conjecture in the absence of confirmation from WHF and/or Harbeth. I have been reading the Harbeth User Group forum and fail to see how what is written there would have any bearing on why I'm yet to see a Harbeth review here. I would think that Alan Shaw's views on amplifiers and cables would be at odds with most, if not all hi fi publications, but that has not dissuaded the likes of Stereophile and The Absolute Sound from giving his speakers glowing reviews. So I very much doubt that WHF would be particularly precious about that.

As I've said, my understanding is that hi fi publications are approached by hi fi manufacturers to review their products, and they also request product samples from hi fi manufacturers for review. WHF may operate differently as Vladimir opined earlier in this thread, but we would need WHF to confirm that. To suggest that manufacturers are sending in "doped" versions of their products for review sounds like a conspiracy theory without any basis in fact to me. And WHF has reviewed Creek products by the way.

I do read other hi fi publications which means that I don't soley rely on WHF as a source of information. As I've said repeatedly now, it just so happens that WHF's reviews have aligned with my own impressions of audio gear that I've auditioned. So I have found them to be quite reliable. I'm sure there are others who have had very different experiences. This is an inherently subjective pursuit after all. And WHF does give three star ratings by the way.

Andy Clough is more than welcome to chime in.

Well this was answered by WHF in an previous post about why they had not reviewed the Creek 50A, they said Creek did not send them the amp. I think they asked them for one but it was not forth coming. The Creek 50A in 2 other Hifi mags beat the Arcam A19 which was WHF amp of the year. Yes they have reviewed Creek products in the past but the reviews were not very favourable, I believe non got 5 stars. Some got 3 stars.

So WHF has reviewed Creek products and they gave them less than four or five stars, which is contrary to what you asserted earlier. It seems likely that WHF would review their products again if Creek were prepared to submit them.

Well I WAS TALKING ABOUT RECENTLY. I think Creek have probably given up with WHF reviews why bother when other mags give them great reviews. Too much emplhasis is placed on how many stars a product gets and of course sales generated on 5 stars reviews.

 

[plastic penguin]

Probably because Harbeth don't want WHF to review them. Also WHF reliy on manufacturers to send them products to review which I think is a rather dubious practice.

And what do you base this on?

One if they did they would have send WHF some to review. Also if you read the Harbeth forum you will soon see their views on hifi products are somewhat different from WHF views. Read some of Alan Shaw's comments on speaker cables for instance.

If you are referring to sending in products they are several reasons for that view, one you only get what manufacturers choose to send in, 2 how do you know its a standard product and not some tweeked for review one? Also you get this problem no Harbeth reviews, no Creek reviews etc.

Anyway I would not rely on one mags review, some of WHF reviews have been well out of line with other reviews. Also most the reviews get 4 or 5 stars.

What I understand Harbeth sells far more speakers outside the UK than within, just look how many UK dealers they have, from memory it was about 7, so I dont think they are bothered about WHF, they get good reviews in other mags.

If it's simply a matter of Harbeth not submitting review samples or not wanting WHF to review their speakers then so be it, but that is just conjecture in the absence of confirmation from WHF and/or Harbeth. I have been reading the Harbeth User Group forum and fail to see how what is written there would have any bearing on why I'm yet to see a Harbeth review here. I would think that Alan Shaw's views on amplifiers and cables would be at odds with most, if not all hi fi publications, but that has not dissuaded the likes of Stereophile and The Absolute Sound from giving his speakers glowing reviews. So I very much doubt that WHF would be particularly precious about that.

As I've said, my understanding is that hi fi publications are approached by hi fi manufacturers to review their products, and they also request product samples from hi fi manufacturers for review. WHF may operate differently as Vladimir opined earlier in this thread, but we would need WHF to confirm that. To suggest that manufacturers are sending in "doped" versions of their products for review sounds like a conspiracy theory without any basis in fact to me. And WHF has reviewed Creek products by the way.

I do read other hi fi publications which means that I don't soley rely on WHF as a source of information. As I've said repeatedly now, it just so happens that WHF's reviews have aligned with my own impressions of audio gear that I've auditioned. So I have found them to be quite reliable. I'm sure there are others who have had very different experiences. This is an inherently subjective pursuit after all. And WHF does give three star ratings by the way.

Andy Clough is more than welcome to chime in.

Well this was answered by WHF in an previous post about why they had not reviewed the Creek 50A, they said Creek did not send them the amp. I think they asked them for one but it was not forth coming. The Creek 50A in 2 other Hifi mags beat the Arcam A19 which was WHF amp of the year. Yes they have reviewed Creek products in the past but the reviews were not very favourable, I believe non got 5 stars. Some got 3 stars.

So WHF has reviewed Creek products and they gave them less than four or five stars, which is contrary to what you asserted earlier. It seems likely that WHF would review their products again if Creek were prepared to submit them.

Well I WAS TALKING ABOUT RECENTLY. I think Creek have probably given up with WHF reviews why bother when other mags give them great reviews. Too much emplhasis is placed on how many stars a product gets and of course sales generated on 5 stars reviews.

It's true that many people buy blind, assuming that an all 5 star set-up will automatically work a treat.

Don't agree about Creek not wanting a WHFI review: If you look back through Creek's history, unlike Cyrus, Arcam, Roksan, Marantz and many of the other bigger names, Creek, by contrast, rarely upgrade their equipment. I have most WHFI mags since Jan 2004, and occasionally look on their website, and the amount of upgrades/new models (amps, CDPs) you can count on one hand.

 

[Vladimir]

WHF, Hi-Fi Choice, Hi-Fi World, Audioholics, Techradar, Audioreview etc. all use the 5 star system.

Google these words: Harbeth review.

The list of publications that reviewed Harbeth speakers all don't use any rating system. 6moons, Stereophile, Cnet, The Absolute Sound, The Ear, Hi-Fi Pig, InnerFidelity, Tone Publications, Stereo Times, Positive Feedback etc.

On page one of the google search list, the only forum thread (from the people, not the mags) is a WHF thread with a shootout Harbeth P3ESR vs Proac Tablette Anniversary.

 

[BigH]

WHF, Hi-Fi Choice, Hi-Fi World, Audioholics, Techradar, Audioreview etc. all use the 5 star system.

Google these word: Harbeth review.

The list of publications that reviewed Harbeth speakers all don't use any rating system. 6moons, Stereophile, Cnet, The Absolute Sound, The Ear, Hi-Fi Pig, InnerFidelity, Tone Publications, Stereo Times, Positive Feedback etc.

On page one of the google search list, the only forum thread (from the people, not the mags) is a WHF thread with a shootout Harbeth P3ESR vs Proac Tablette Anniversary.

If that was in response to me I was not referring to Harbeth when I said about 5 stars reviews, it seems Harbeth dont support the star rating system either. I believe several of those mags buy in the products for reviews rather than rely on manufacturers suplying them. What I meant about 5 stars was national chains hifi shops in the UK often promoting products on the back of 5 stars which I dont think is such a good idea, hence people coming to forums with problems with system matching.

 

[BigH]

Probably because Harbeth don't want WHF to review them. Also WHF reliy on manufacturers to send them products to review which I think is a rather dubious practice.

And what do you base this on?

One if they did they would have send WHF some to review. Also if you read the Harbeth forum you will soon see their views on hifi products are somewhat different from WHF views. Read some of Alan Shaw's comments on speaker cables for instance.

If you are referring to sending in products they are several reasons for that view, one you only get what manufacturers choose to send in, 2 how do you know its a standard product and not some tweeked for review one? Also you get this problem no Harbeth reviews, no Creek reviews etc.

Anyway I would not rely on one mags review, some of WHF reviews have been well out of line with other reviews. Also most the reviews get 4 or 5 stars.

What I understand Harbeth sells far more speakers outside the UK than within, just look how many UK dealers they have, from memory it was about 7, so I dont think they are bothered about WHF, they get good reviews in other mags.

If it's simply a matter of Harbeth not submitting review samples or not wanting WHF to review their speakers then so be it, but that is just conjecture in the absence of confirmation from WHF and/or Harbeth. I have been reading the Harbeth User Group forum and fail to see how what is written there would have any bearing on why I'm yet to see a Harbeth review here. I would think that Alan Shaw's views on amplifiers and cables would be at odds with most, if not all hi fi publications, but that has not dissuaded the likes of Stereophile and The Absolute Sound from giving his speakers glowing reviews. So I very much doubt that WHF would be particularly precious about that.

As I've said, my understanding is that hi fi publications are approached by hi fi manufacturers to review their products, and they also request product samples from hi fi manufacturers for review. WHF may operate differently as Vladimir opined earlier in this thread, but we would need WHF to confirm that. To suggest that manufacturers are sending in "doped" versions of their products for review sounds like a conspiracy theory without any basis in fact to me. And WHF has reviewed Creek products by the way.

I do read other hi fi publications which means that I don't soley rely on WHF as a source of information. As I've said repeatedly now, it just so happens that WHF's reviews have aligned with my own impressions of audio gear that I've auditioned. So I have found them to be quite reliable. I'm sure there are others who have had very different experiences. This is an inherently subjective pursuit after all. And WHF does give three star ratings by the way.

Andy Clough is more than welcome to chime in.

Well this was answered by WHF in an previous post about why they had not reviewed the Creek 50A, they said Creek did not send them the amp. I think they asked them for one but it was not forth coming. The Creek 50A in 2 other Hifi mags beat the Arcam A19 which was WHF amp of the year. Yes they have reviewed Creek products in the past but the reviews were not very favourable, I believe non got 5 stars. Some got 3 stars.

So WHF has reviewed Creek products and they gave them less than four or five stars, which is contrary to what you asserted earlier. It seems likely that WHF would review their products again if Creek were prepared to submit them.

Well I WAS TALKING ABOUT RECENTLY. I think Creek have probably given up with WHF reviews why bother when other mags give them great reviews. Too much emplhasis is placed on how many stars a product gets and of course sales generated on 5 stars reviews.

It's true that many people buy blind, assuming that an all 5 star set-up will automatically work a treat.

Don't agree about Creek not wanting a WHFI review: If you look back through Creek's history, unlike Cyrus, Arcam, Roksan, Marantz and many of the other bigger names, Creek, by contrast, rarely upgrade their equipment. I have most WHFI mags since Jan 2004, and occasionally look on their website, and the amount of upgrades/new models (amps, CDPs) you can count on one hand.

So why did Creek not send WHF the 50A for review then? I know Andrew Everard had a job to get hold of one from them.

 

[Vladimir]

So the conclusion of this thread would be: Harbeth will not send gear for review in publications with a rating system, it's not WHF boycoting their products.

 

[plastic penguin]

Probably because Harbeth don't want WHF to review them. Also WHF reliy on manufacturers to send them products to review which I think is a rather dubious practice.

And what do you base this on?

One if they did they would have send WHF some to review. Also if you read the Harbeth forum you will soon see their views on hifi products are somewhat different from WHF views. Read some of Alan Shaw's comments on speaker cables for instance.

If you are referring to sending in products they are several reasons for that view, one you only get what manufacturers choose to send in, 2 how do you know its a standard product and not some tweeked for review one? Also you get this problem no Harbeth reviews, no Creek reviews etc.

Anyway I would not rely on one mags review, some of WHF reviews have been well out of line with other reviews. Also most the reviews get 4 or 5 stars.

What I understand Harbeth sells far more speakers outside the UK than within, just look how many UK dealers they have, from memory it was about 7, so I dont think they are bothered about WHF, they get good reviews in other mags.

If it's simply a matter of Harbeth not submitting review samples or not wanting WHF to review their speakers then so be it, but that is just conjecture in the absence of confirmation from WHF and/or Harbeth. I have been reading the Harbeth User Group forum and fail to see how what is written there would have any bearing on why I'm yet to see a Harbeth review here. I would think that Alan Shaw's views on amplifiers and cables would be at odds with most, if not all hi fi publications, but that has not dissuaded the likes of Stereophile and The Absolute Sound from giving his speakers glowing reviews. So I very much doubt that WHF would be particularly precious about that.

As I've said, my understanding is that hi fi publications are approached by hi fi manufacturers to review their products, and they also request product samples from hi fi manufacturers for review. WHF may operate differently as Vladimir opined earlier in this thread, but we would need WHF to confirm that. To suggest that manufacturers are sending in "doped" versions of their products for review sounds like a conspiracy theory without any basis in fact to me. And WHF has reviewed Creek products by the way.

I do read other hi fi publications which means that I don't soley rely on WHF as a source of information. As I've said repeatedly now, it just so happens that WHF's reviews have aligned with my own impressions of audio gear that I've auditioned. So I have found them to be quite reliable. I'm sure there are others who have had very different experiences. This is an inherently subjective pursuit after all. And WHF does give three star ratings by the way.

Andy Clough is more than welcome to chime in.

Well this was answered by WHF in an previous post about why they had not reviewed the Creek 50A, they said Creek did not send them the amp. I think they asked them for one but it was not forth coming. The Creek 50A in 2 other Hifi mags beat the Arcam A19 which was WHF amp of the year. Yes they have reviewed Creek products in the past but the reviews were not very favourable, I believe non got 5 stars. Some got 3 stars.

So WHF has reviewed Creek products and they gave them less than four or five stars, which is contrary to what you asserted earlier. It seems likely that WHF would review their products again if Creek were prepared to submit them.

Well I WAS TALKING ABOUT RECENTLY. I think Creek have probably given up with WHF reviews why bother when other mags give them great reviews. Too much emplhasis is placed on how many stars a product gets and of course sales generated on 5 stars reviews.

It's true that many people buy blind, assuming that an all 5 star set-up will automatically work a treat.

Don't agree about Creek not wanting a WHFI review: If you look back through Creek's history, unlike Cyrus, Arcam, Roksan, Marantz and many of the other bigger names, Creek, by contrast, rarely upgrade their equipment. I have most WHFI mags since Jan 2004, and occasionally look on their website, and the amount of upgrades/new models (amps, CDPs) you can count on one hand.

So why did Creek not send WHF the 50A for review then? I know Andrew Everard had a job to get hold of one from them.

Because WHFI don't have the divine right to audition all equipment. Many other companies work in a similar fashion: Why when WHFI have received countless Onkyo AV and stereo amps did they not receive a TX8050? Why did they not audition Arcam A75+? Why did they not review MF 35i? These are just three of many I could mention. That's the (hi-fi) nature of the beast.

 

[BigH]

Probably because Harbeth don't want WHF to review them. Also WHF reliy on manufacturers to send them products to review which I think is a rather dubious practice.

And what do you base this on?

One if they did they would have send WHF some to review. Also if you read the Harbeth forum you will soon see their views on hifi products are somewhat different from WHF views. Read some of Alan Shaw's comments on speaker cables for instance.

If you are referring to sending in products they are several reasons for that view, one you only get what manufacturers choose to send in, 2 how do you know its a standard product and not some tweeked for review one? Also you get this problem no Harbeth reviews, no Creek reviews etc.

Anyway I would not rely on one mags review, some of WHF reviews have been well out of line with other reviews. Also most the reviews get 4 or 5 stars.

What I understand Harbeth sells far more speakers outside the UK than within, just look how many UK dealers they have, from memory it was about 7, so I dont think they are bothered about WHF, they get good reviews in other mags.

If it's simply a matter of Harbeth not submitting review samples or not wanting WHF to review their speakers then so be it, but that is just conjecture in the absence of confirmation from WHF and/or Harbeth. I have been reading the Harbeth User Group forum and fail to see how what is written there would have any bearing on why I'm yet to see a Harbeth review here. I would think that Alan Shaw's views on amplifiers and cables would be at odds with most, if not all hi fi publications, but that has not dissuaded the likes of Stereophile and The Absolute Sound from giving his speakers glowing reviews. So I very much doubt that WHF would be particularly precious about that.

As I've said, my understanding is that hi fi publications are approached by hi fi manufacturers to review their products, and they also request product samples from hi fi manufacturers for review. WHF may operate differently as Vladimir opined earlier in this thread, but we would need WHF to confirm that. To suggest that manufacturers are sending in "doped" versions of their products for review sounds like a conspiracy theory without any basis in fact to me. And WHF has reviewed Creek products by the way.

I do read other hi fi publications which means that I don't soley rely on WHF as a source of information. As I've said repeatedly now, it just so happens that WHF's reviews have aligned with my own impressions of audio gear that I've auditioned. So I have found them to be quite reliable. I'm sure there are others who have had very different experiences. This is an inherently subjective pursuit after all. And WHF does give three star ratings by the way.

Andy Clough is more than welcome to chime in.

Well this was answered by WHF in an previous post about why they had not reviewed the Creek 50A, they said Creek did not send them the amp. I think they asked them for one but it was not forth coming. The Creek 50A in 2 other Hifi mags beat the Arcam A19 which was WHF amp of the year. Yes they have reviewed Creek products in the past but the reviews were not very favourable, I believe non got 5 stars. Some got 3 stars.

So WHF has reviewed Creek products and they gave them less than four or five stars, which is contrary to what you asserted earlier. It seems likely that WHF would review their products again if Creek were prepared to submit them.

Well I WAS TALKING ABOUT RECENTLY. I think Creek have probably given up with WHF reviews why bother when other mags give them great reviews. Too much emplhasis is placed on how many stars a product gets and of course sales generated on 5 stars reviews.

It's true that many people buy blind, assuming that an all 5 star set-up will automatically work a treat.

Don't agree about Creek not wanting a WHFI review: If you look back through Creek's history, unlike Cyrus, Arcam, Roksan, Marantz and many of the other bigger names, Creek, by contrast, rarely upgrade their equipment. I have most WHFI mags since Jan 2004, and occasionally look on their website, and the amount of upgrades/new models (amps, CDPs) you can count on one hand.

So why did Creek not send WHF the 50A for review then? I know Andrew Everard had a job to get hold of one from them.

Because WHFI don't have the divine right to audition all equipment. Many other companies work in a similar fashion: Why when WHFI have received countless Onkyo AV and stereo amps did they not receive a TX8050? Why did they not audition Arcam A75+? Why did they not review MF 35i? These are just three of many I could mention. That's the (hi-fi) nature of the beast.

But you said: "Don't agree about Creek not wanting a WHF review"

What has your answer got to do with that? I never said they had any rights? I said if they (Creek) wanted a review they would have sent them the amp. Interesting point was raised about paying for review space in the mag. not sure if that is true or not but if so could explain why some smaller companies don't want go down that route.

 

[BigH]

Tin ear do you have any ProAc dealers near you?

If so this review maybe of interest: http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/speaker-shoot-out-harbeth-p3esr-vs-proac-tablette-anniversary

 

[plastic penguin]

Probably because Harbeth don't want WHF to review them. Also WHF reliy on manufacturers to send them products to review which I think is a rather dubious practice.

And what do you base this on?

One if they did they would have send WHF some to review. Also if you read the Harbeth forum you will soon see their views on hifi products are somewhat different from WHF views. Read some of Alan Shaw's comments on speaker cables for instance.

If you are referring to sending in products they are several reasons for that view, one you only get what manufacturers choose to send in, 2 how do you know its a standard product and not some tweeked for review one? Also you get this problem no Harbeth reviews, no Creek reviews etc.

Anyway I would not rely on one mags review, some of WHF reviews have been well out of line with other reviews. Also most the reviews get 4 or 5 stars.

What I understand Harbeth sells far more speakers outside the UK than within, just look how many UK dealers they have, from memory it was about 7, so I dont think they are bothered about WHF, they get good reviews in other mags.

If it's simply a matter of Harbeth not submitting review samples or not wanting WHF to review their speakers then so be it, but that is just conjecture in the absence of confirmation from WHF and/or Harbeth. I have been reading the Harbeth User Group forum and fail to see how what is written there would have any bearing on why I'm yet to see a Harbeth review here. I would think that Alan Shaw's views on amplifiers and cables would be at odds with most, if not all hi fi publications, but that has not dissuaded the likes of Stereophile and The Absolute Sound from giving his speakers glowing reviews. So I very much doubt that WHF would be particularly precious about that.

As I've said, my understanding is that hi fi publications are approached by hi fi manufacturers to review their products, and they also request product samples from hi fi manufacturers for review. WHF may operate differently as Vladimir opined earlier in this thread, but we would need WHF to confirm that. To suggest that manufacturers are sending in "doped" versions of their products for review sounds like a conspiracy theory without any basis in fact to me. And WHF has reviewed Creek products by the way.

I do read other hi fi publications which means that I don't soley rely on WHF as a source of information. As I've said repeatedly now, it just so happens that WHF's reviews have aligned with my own impressions of audio gear that I've auditioned. So I have found them to be quite reliable. I'm sure there are others who have had very different experiences. This is an inherently subjective pursuit after all. And WHF does give three star ratings by the way.

Andy Clough is more than welcome to chime in.

Well this was answered by WHF in an previous post about why they had not reviewed the Creek 50A, they said Creek did not send them the amp. I think they asked them for one but it was not forth coming. The Creek 50A in 2 other Hifi mags beat the Arcam A19 which was WHF amp of the year. Yes they have reviewed Creek products in the past but the reviews were not very favourable, I believe non got 5 stars. Some got 3 stars.

So WHF has reviewed Creek products and they gave them less than four or five stars, which is contrary to what you asserted earlier. It seems likely that WHF would review their products again if Creek were prepared to submit them.

Well I WAS TALKING ABOUT RECENTLY. I think Creek have probably given up with WHF reviews why bother when other mags give them great reviews. Too much emplhasis is placed on how many stars a product gets and of course sales generated on 5 stars reviews.

It's true that many people buy blind, assuming that an all 5 star set-up will automatically work a treat.

Don't agree about Creek not wanting a WHFI review: If you look back through Creek's history, unlike Cyrus, Arcam, Roksan, Marantz and many of the other bigger names, Creek, by contrast, rarely upgrade their equipment. I have most WHFI mags since Jan 2004, and occasionally look on their website, and the amount of upgrades/new models (amps, CDPs) you can count on one hand.

So why did Creek not send WHF the 50A for review then? I know Andrew Everard had a job to get hold of one from them.

Because WHFI don't have the divine right to audition all equipment. Many other companies work in a similar fashion: Why when WHFI have received countless Onkyo AV and stereo amps did they not receive a TX8050? Why did they not audition Arcam A75+? Why did they not review MF 35i? These are just three of many I could mention. That's the (hi-fi) nature of the beast.

But you said: "Don't agree about Creek not wanting a WHF review"

What has your answer got to do with that? I never said they had any rights? I said if they (Creek) wanted a review they would have sent them the amp. Interesting point was raised about paying for review space in the mag. not sure if that is true or not but if so could explain why some smaller companies don't want go down that route.

That's pathetic to even begin to think that a company doesn't want a review. The reality is out of thousands of new products released, WHFI doesn't have the staffing to cope even get near reviewing anything other than a handful of stuff.

You don't know anymore than the hole in the ground, but WHFI may have refused the opportunity to review Creeks 50A, for the reason I gave above.

The reasons could be numerous, but only WHFI can clarify te situation.

 

[BigH]

Probably because Harbeth don't want WHF to review them. Also WHF reliy on manufacturers to send them products to review which I think is a rather dubious practice.

And what do you base this on?

One if they did they would have send WHF some to review. Also if you read the Harbeth forum you will soon see their views on hifi products are somewhat different from WHF views. Read some of Alan Shaw's comments on speaker cables for instance.

If you are referring to sending in products they are several reasons for that view, one you only get what manufacturers choose to send in, 2 how do you know its a standard product and not some tweeked for review one? Also you get this problem no Harbeth reviews, no Creek reviews etc.

Anyway I would not rely on one mags review, some of WHF reviews have been well out of line with other reviews. Also most the reviews get 4 or 5 stars.

What I understand Harbeth sells far more speakers outside the UK than within, just look how many UK dealers they have, from memory it was about 7, so I dont think they are bothered about WHF, they get good reviews in other mags.

If it's simply a matter of Harbeth not submitting review samples or not wanting WHF to review their speakers then so be it, but that is just conjecture in the absence of confirmation from WHF and/or Harbeth. I have been reading the Harbeth User Group forum and fail to see how what is written there would have any bearing on why I'm yet to see a Harbeth review here. I would think that Alan Shaw's views on amplifiers and cables would be at odds with most, if not all hi fi publications, but that has not dissuaded the likes of Stereophile and The Absolute Sound from giving his speakers glowing reviews. So I very much doubt that WHF would be particularly precious about that.

As I've said, my understanding is that hi fi publications are approached by hi fi manufacturers to review their products, and they also request product samples from hi fi manufacturers for review. WHF may operate differently as Vladimir opined earlier in this thread, but we would need WHF to confirm that. To suggest that manufacturers are sending in "doped" versions of their products for review sounds like a conspiracy theory without any basis in fact to me. And WHF has reviewed Creek products by the way.

I do read other hi fi publications which means that I don't soley rely on WHF as a source of information. As I've said repeatedly now, it just so happens that WHF's reviews have aligned with my own impressions of audio gear that I've auditioned. So I have found them to be quite reliable. I'm sure there are others who have had very different experiences. This is an inherently subjective pursuit after all. And WHF does give three star ratings by the way.

Andy Clough is more than welcome to chime in.

Well this was answered by WHF in an previous post about why they had not reviewed the Creek 50A, they said Creek did not send them the amp. I think they asked them for one but it was not forth coming. The Creek 50A in 2 other Hifi mags beat the Arcam A19 which was WHF amp of the year. Yes they have reviewed Creek products in the past but the reviews were not very favourable, I believe non got 5 stars. Some got 3 stars.

So WHF has reviewed Creek products and they gave them less than four or five stars, which is contrary to what you asserted earlier. It seems likely that WHF would review their products again if Creek were prepared to submit them.

Well I WAS TALKING ABOUT RECENTLY. I think Creek have probably given up with WHF reviews why bother when other mags give them great reviews. Too much emplhasis is placed on how many stars a product gets and of course sales generated on 5 stars reviews.

It's true that many people buy blind, assuming that an all 5 star set-up will automatically work a treat.

Don't agree about Creek not wanting a WHFI review: If you look back through Creek's history, unlike Cyrus, Arcam, Roksan, Marantz and many of the other bigger names, Creek, by contrast, rarely upgrade their equipment. I have most WHFI mags since Jan 2004, and occasionally look on their website, and the amount of upgrades/new models (amps, CDPs) you can count on one hand.

So why did Creek not send WHF the 50A for review then? I know Andrew Everard had a job to get hold of one from them.

Because WHFI don't have the divine right to audition all equipment. Many other companies work in a similar fashion: Why when WHFI have received countless Onkyo AV and stereo amps did they not receive a TX8050? Why did they not audition Arcam A75+? Why did they not review MF 35i? These are just three of many I could mention. That's the (hi-fi) nature of the beast.

But you said: "Don't agree about Creek not wanting a WHF review"

What has your answer got to do with that? I never said they had any rights? I said if they (Creek) wanted a review they would have sent them the amp. Interesting point was raised about paying for review space in the mag. not sure if that is true or not but if so could explain why some smaller companies don't want go down that route.

That's pathetic to even begin to think that a company doesn't want a review. The reality is out of thousands of new products released, WHFI doesn't have the staffing to cope even get near reviewing anything other than a handful of stuff.

You don't know anymore than the hole in the ground, but WHFI may have refused the opportunity to review Creeks 50A, for the reason I gave above.

The reasons could be numerous, but only WHFI can clarify te situation.

Depends on the review, surely they don't want poor or average reviews, so there. Well I believe they did state in post previously that they did not received the amp to review.

 

[plastic penguin]

Probably because Harbeth don't want WHF to review them. Also WHF reliy on manufacturers to send them products to review which I think is a rather dubious practice.

And what do you base this on?

One if they did they would have send WHF some to review. Also if you read the Harbeth forum you will soon see their views on hifi products are somewhat different from WHF views. Read some of Alan Shaw's comments on speaker cables for instance.

If you are referring to sending in products they are several reasons for that view, one you only get what manufacturers choose to send in, 2 how do you know its a standard product and not some tweeked for review one? Also you get this problem no Harbeth reviews, no Creek reviews etc.

Anyway I would not rely on one mags review, some of WHF reviews have been well out of line with other reviews. Also most the reviews get 4 or 5 stars.

What I understand Harbeth sells far more speakers outside the UK than within, just look how many UK dealers they have, from memory it was about 7, so I dont think they are bothered about WHF, they get good reviews in other mags.

If it's simply a matter of Harbeth not submitting review samples or not wanting WHF to review their speakers then so be it, but that is just conjecture in the absence of confirmation from WHF and/or Harbeth. I have been reading the Harbeth User Group forum and fail to see how what is written there would have any bearing on why I'm yet to see a Harbeth review here. I would think that Alan Shaw's views on amplifiers and cables would be at odds with most, if not all hi fi publications, but that has not dissuaded the likes of Stereophile and The Absolute Sound from giving his speakers glowing reviews. So I very much doubt that WHF would be particularly precious about that.

As I've said, my understanding is that hi fi publications are approached by hi fi manufacturers to review their products, and they also request product samples from hi fi manufacturers for review. WHF may operate differently as Vladimir opined earlier in this thread, but we would need WHF to confirm that. To suggest that manufacturers are sending in "doped" versions of their products for review sounds like a conspiracy theory without any basis in fact to me. And WHF has reviewed Creek products by the way.

I do read other hi fi publications which means that I don't soley rely on WHF as a source of information. As I've said repeatedly now, it just so happens that WHF's reviews have aligned with my own impressions of audio gear that I've auditioned. So I have found them to be quite reliable. I'm sure there are others who have had very different experiences. This is an inherently subjective pursuit after all. And WHF does give three star ratings by the way.

Andy Clough is more than welcome to chime in.

Well this was answered by WHF in an previous post about why they had not reviewed the Creek 50A, they said Creek did not send them the amp. I think they asked them for one but it was not forth coming. The Creek 50A in 2 other Hifi mags beat the Arcam A19 which was WHF amp of the year. Yes they have reviewed Creek products in the past but the reviews were not very favourable, I believe non got 5 stars. Some got 3 stars.

So WHF has reviewed Creek products and they gave them less than four or five stars, which is contrary to what you asserted earlier. It seems likely that WHF would review their products again if Creek were prepared to submit them.

Well I WAS TALKING ABOUT RECENTLY. I think Creek have probably given up with WHF reviews why bother when other mags give them great reviews. Too much emplhasis is placed on how many stars a product gets and of course sales generated on 5 stars reviews.

It's true that many people buy blind, assuming that an all 5 star set-up will automatically work a treat.

Don't agree about Creek not wanting a WHFI review: If you look back through Creek's history, unlike Cyrus, Arcam, Roksan, Marantz and many of the other bigger names, Creek, by contrast, rarely upgrade their equipment. I have most WHFI mags since Jan 2004, and occasionally look on their website, and the amount of upgrades/new models (amps, CDPs) you can count on one hand.

So why did Creek not send WHF the 50A for review then? I know Andrew Everard had a job to get hold of one from them.

Because WHFI don't have the divine right to audition all equipment. Many other companies work in a similar fashion: Why when WHFI have received countless Onkyo AV and stereo amps did they not receive a TX8050? Why did they not audition Arcam A75+? Why did they not review MF 35i? These are just three of many I could mention. That's the (hi-fi) nature of the beast.

But you said: "Don't agree about Creek not wanting a WHF review"

What has your answer got to do with that? I never said they had any rights? I said if they (Creek) wanted a review they would have sent them the amp. Interesting point was raised about paying for review space in the mag. not sure if that is true or not but if so could explain why some smaller companies don't want go down that route.

That's pathetic to even begin to think that a company doesn't want a review. The reality is out of thousands of new products released, WHFI doesn't have the staffing to cope even get near reviewing anything other than a handful of stuff.

You don't know anymore than the hole in the ground, but WHFI may have refused the opportunity to review Creeks 50A, for the reason I gave above.

The reasons could be numerous, but only WHFI can clarify te situation.

Depends on the review, surely they don't want poor or average reviews, so there. Well I believe they did state in post previously that they did not received the amp to review.

They produce the best product they can for the money, but after that it's a lottery whether they get a good or duff review. That's the risk all companies run... so there.

It is very possible they didn't receive the amp, but WHFI or any other mag aren't under contract, so not obliged to pressure the company. This isn't exclusive to Creek. All hi-fi/AV business have the right to send a dem example, and likewise all mags have the same choice.

Not sure why you're stressing over it. That's the way it's always been, can't see why that should change.

 

[davedotco]

I feel that some people are making far more of this than is the case.

WHF is a commercial enterprise, they have suppliers clammering to get their product in their magazine, the supplier will provide the equipment FOC, have it delivered and collected at their own expense and do pretty much whatever WHF asks of them. Why would WHF go out of their way to aquire product for themselves, the cost alone would be prohibitive, why on earth would they bother, any additional expence is just going to hit the bottom line.

 

[tin ear]

So the conclusion of this thread would be: Harbeth will not send gear for review in publications with a rating system, it's not WHF boycoting their products.

Nope. What we have concluded is that WHF? hasn't reviewed a pair of Harbeth speakers for about 10 years. Everything else is just conjecture.