This subject has been mentioned on a lot of the posts, regarding the mag favouring sponsors and manufacturers, this suggestion is absurd. I recently have lots of trial memberships of other home cimema and hi-fi magazines and i have to say that What Hi-Fi sound and Vision is easily the most impartial of all and only ever has the interests of the potential end user at heart. I wont mention names but spome seem to be so far in the HDTV camp or Microsoft camp its unreal- a five star rating of the xbox 360 HD drive as an example!!! now its not a bad product but no 5 star product. I have followed the advice of the team on the Panasonic set and the cables and DVD player and for the money i had the reviews are fully justified and its the one and only magazine that doesnt assume every reader has meda bucks and always scales reviews in order of value for money. So well done guys and i just hope no one can accuse you guys of favouritism, just because you present the facts that some people dont seem to want to comprehend.
In Defense of What Hi-FI
- Thread starter admin_exported
- Start date
Thanks for the back-up, JB. I think it's one of the problems the guys on WHFSV have - being the market-leader by such a huge margin (ie outselling the nearest rival several times over) gives you massive influence and also makes you very well-lit target for the suspicious, malevolent and those with an axe to grind.
I've been involved with What Hi-Fi?, What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision, the Ultimate Guides and various other Haymarket titles for pushing on for two decades, and I can say hand on heart I've never had any hint of commercial pressure being brought to bear on reviews or reviewers. It's a hanging offence around these parts, and something on which we pride ourselves.
Can't speak for other magazines (I avoid the use of the term 'competitors' quite deliberately) in this respect.
I've been involved with What Hi-Fi?, What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision, the Ultimate Guides and various other Haymarket titles for pushing on for two decades, and I can say hand on heart I've never had any hint of commercial pressure being brought to bear on reviews or reviewers. It's a hanging offence around these parts, and something on which we pride ourselves.
Can't speak for other magazines (I avoid the use of the term 'competitors' quite deliberately) in this respect.
Thanks JB.
We're not perfect. People may not always agree with us. But - to paraphrase Elvis Costello - our aim is true: to help people draw up a shortlist of the very best home entertainment products for their budget.
Our dedicated team of testers and unique suite of reviewing rooms test hundreds of products every year, all comparatively - no-one else does that, and we're proud of our in-depth, independent approach.
But keep all feedback - positive and negative - coming, because we always want to know how/where we could be doing a better job.
We're not perfect. People may not always agree with us. But - to paraphrase Elvis Costello - our aim is true: to help people draw up a shortlist of the very best home entertainment products for their budget.
Our dedicated team of testers and unique suite of reviewing rooms test hundreds of products every year, all comparatively - no-one else does that, and we're proud of our in-depth, independent approach.
But keep all feedback - positive and negative - coming, because we always want to know how/where we could be doing a better job.
AMEN ( I Hope) I too Bought Cables for my HiFi and PX70 on advice here and I am very happy with the advice and subsequent purchases, keep up the good work guys.
Sorry that this is my first post and may seem so negative.
In theory posts like this should be removed, as they will only encourage posts of the opposite nature which are then likely to be removed; therefore creating a biased forum.
Just bigging someone up, because you think they do right by you, doesn't mean they do.
Over many years I have come to realise that the mag is techically poor and the unfortunate example if the 24 compatibility issues was a clear example.
The magazine carries such a high content of advertisers, that its must just be common sense that they don't upset them.
Within these constraints it must be difficult to review anything, as they have to rely on samples sent.
Jeremy Clarkson was never given a Toyota to test after he slagged one of their models off.
I do buy WHF for a 'holiday read' but it is, and I'm sure the Editorial staff would agree, very supperficial.
You cannot possible test and review to any depth, so many products per month, but as un occasional look at what is on the market, it has its place.
It's the News of the World and not the Times.
Matt
In theory posts like this should be removed, as they will only encourage posts of the opposite nature which are then likely to be removed; therefore creating a biased forum.
Just bigging someone up, because you think they do right by you, doesn't mean they do.
Over many years I have come to realise that the mag is techically poor and the unfortunate example if the 24 compatibility issues was a clear example.
The magazine carries such a high content of advertisers, that its must just be common sense that they don't upset them.
Within these constraints it must be difficult to review anything, as they have to rely on samples sent.
Jeremy Clarkson was never given a Toyota to test after he slagged one of their models off.
I do buy WHF for a 'holiday read' but it is, and I'm sure the Editorial staff would agree, very supperficial.
You cannot possible test and review to any depth, so many products per month, but as un occasional look at what is on the market, it has its place.
It's the News of the World and not the Times.
Matt
A little like your grammer, TECHNICALLY poor, and how do you know they can not possibly test and review in depth so many products. Do you know how many staff they have? Is this the return of one of our old freinds?
Deep breath...
[quote user="matt41"]
The magazine carries such a high content of advertisers, that its must just be common sense that they don't upset them.[/quote]
Why? The magazine carries so much advertising because its circulation and readership are so far ahead of any other rival that it makes common sense for companies to advertise in it to reach the maximum number of potential customers. The editorial staff doesn't, and never has, given any consideration to how much a company advertises.
If we upset an advertiser, that's the advertising department's problem - fortunately the reach of the magazine is such that they are able to sell on that, not on specific reviews.
[quote user="matt41"]
Within these constraints it must be difficult to review anything, as they have to rely on samples sent.
Jeremy Clarkson was never given a Toyota to test after he slagged one of their models off.[/quote]
Poor him. If we can't get hold of a product we want to test, we will buy it if we think it's of sufficient interest to our readers.
[quote user="matt41"]
I do buy WHF for a 'holiday read' but it is, and I'm sure the Editorial staff would agree, very supperficial. [/quote]
The Editorial staff would beg to differ - and most of them can spell superficial, too.
[quote user="matt41"]
You cannot possible test and review to any depth, so many products
per month[/quote]
But we do...
[quote user="matt41"]
It's the News of the World and not the Times.[/quote]
UK newspaper circulations: The Times 612,193, News of the World 3,263,631. Which is the more successful?
[quote user="matt41"]
The magazine carries such a high content of advertisers, that its must just be common sense that they don't upset them.[/quote]
Why? The magazine carries so much advertising because its circulation and readership are so far ahead of any other rival that it makes common sense for companies to advertise in it to reach the maximum number of potential customers. The editorial staff doesn't, and never has, given any consideration to how much a company advertises.
If we upset an advertiser, that's the advertising department's problem - fortunately the reach of the magazine is such that they are able to sell on that, not on specific reviews.
[quote user="matt41"]
Within these constraints it must be difficult to review anything, as they have to rely on samples sent.
Jeremy Clarkson was never given a Toyota to test after he slagged one of their models off.[/quote]
Poor him. If we can't get hold of a product we want to test, we will buy it if we think it's of sufficient interest to our readers.
[quote user="matt41"]
I do buy WHF for a 'holiday read' but it is, and I'm sure the Editorial staff would agree, very supperficial. [/quote]
The Editorial staff would beg to differ - and most of them can spell superficial, too.
[quote user="matt41"]
You cannot possible test and review to any depth, so many products
per month[/quote]
But we do...
[quote user="matt41"]
It's the News of the World and not the Times.[/quote]
UK newspaper circulations: The Times 612,193, News of the World 3,263,631. Which is the more successful?
I have personally found the mag useful in pointing me in the direction of something I am thinking of purchasing,and I respect your independance.
I will still make a judgement based on other factors as well,your recommendations are just one factor in the equation. To the moaners I say no-one is forcing you to buy the magazine.
I will still make a judgement based on other factors as well,your recommendations are just one factor in the equation. To the moaners I say no-one is forcing you to buy the magazine.
All very interesting. I've always found WHFSAV to be impartial, however in common with many other magazines, and just like us, reviewers have their favourites. I personally am a big Arcam fan, others are Linn fans etc etc.
WHFSAV is a completely different magazine to other 'competitors' (forgive me Andrew as I know your readers and the magazine with the freelancers readers have some overlap), they target different bullseye audiences. I don't agree on the NOTW/Times comment because they too have different audiences, and advertising rates in The Times are pretty decent because of the ABC1 circulation, NOTW likewise has high ABC1 penetration but it also has a lot of wastage and some companies don't want to be seen in that environment.
WHFSAV has a larger target than some of the others as it;s not just audio, but video too. I personally like WHFSAV as it's unpretentious, honest and easily accessible to many, I also like HFC as it gives me another perspective on audio, which to me is more of a passion. Having said that I feel that WHFSAV is possibly a little more down to earth, a spade's a spade, HFC is a little more esoteric.
Whatever, there's plenty of room in the matket for a number of magazines, there aren't many passions like music (although I do find myself listening to hifi rather than music sometimes), maybe sex, maybe football, maybe food, maybe wine, I can't think of much else that can compare. Once you're in, you're in for life!
My tuppence worth, although WHFSAV forum is a leader, the editors obviously have embraced the launch with much vigour ;-)
And long may it continue.
WHFSAV is a completely different magazine to other 'competitors' (forgive me Andrew as I know your readers and the magazine with the freelancers readers have some overlap), they target different bullseye audiences. I don't agree on the NOTW/Times comment because they too have different audiences, and advertising rates in The Times are pretty decent because of the ABC1 circulation, NOTW likewise has high ABC1 penetration but it also has a lot of wastage and some companies don't want to be seen in that environment.
WHFSAV has a larger target than some of the others as it;s not just audio, but video too. I personally like WHFSAV as it's unpretentious, honest and easily accessible to many, I also like HFC as it gives me another perspective on audio, which to me is more of a passion. Having said that I feel that WHFSAV is possibly a little more down to earth, a spade's a spade, HFC is a little more esoteric.
Whatever, there's plenty of room in the matket for a number of magazines, there aren't many passions like music (although I do find myself listening to hifi rather than music sometimes), maybe sex, maybe football, maybe food, maybe wine, I can't think of much else that can compare. Once you're in, you're in for life!
My tuppence worth, although WHFSAV forum is a leader, the editors obviously have embraced the launch with much vigour ;-)
And long may it continue.
I've always liked WHF because they don't talk about frequency response curves or other technical stuff, they just say whether the product sounds great or not. They also seem to be in touch with what people are actually listening to such as pop, rock, classical music etc.
I don't think WHF is at all biased either - look at the Mission adverts, many in each edition. Then compare the low ratings WHF have recently given to most Mission products........
jules.
I don't think WHF is at all biased either - look at the Mission adverts, many in each edition. Then compare the low ratings WHF have recently given to most Mission products........
jules.
Interesting stuff ! A number of things spring to mind (other than the spelling & grammar capabilities of the authors):
1) Clarkson doesn't test drive cars he drives them spectacularly, but poorly, around tracks. His test reports (in the Sunday Times ironically enough) are 85% waffle & 15% comment relating to whether the car under steers at 80mph around a hairpin - not something most of us are particularly interested in. Tests by WHFSV generally inform at the level that a potential purchaser is interested in IE: What does it sound / look like ?, Is it good value for money ?, Is the build quality up to scratch etc etc.
This leads me to point 2):
While I have the greatest of respect for the people who innovate & move industry forward, I have no interest whatsoever in the internal mechanicals of an amp, cd player or any other piece of kit. Graphs & bar charts relating to dynamic power, output impedance or frequency response mean absolutely nothing to me. I, as I imagine most others do, judge using my ears & eyes. If you want the technical information there are magazines (& clinics) who cater for you.
Finally to the original point regarding commercial impartiality. Leaving aside the integrity of the testers & journalists, which generally is the natural driver of impartiality. Very simply, commercial pressure can be applied by the dominant partner in a relationship. The balance of power between a hugely dominant magazine & the manufacturers is clearly with the magazine - impact of a poor review to the manufacturer -v- loss of advertising revenue to Haymarket ????
Ultimately of course it's about opinions. If you want to buy WHFSV for a holiday read that's fine, there are many of us however, who buy it each month because we enjoy it.
1) Clarkson doesn't test drive cars he drives them spectacularly, but poorly, around tracks. His test reports (in the Sunday Times ironically enough) are 85% waffle & 15% comment relating to whether the car under steers at 80mph around a hairpin - not something most of us are particularly interested in. Tests by WHFSV generally inform at the level that a potential purchaser is interested in IE: What does it sound / look like ?, Is it good value for money ?, Is the build quality up to scratch etc etc.
This leads me to point 2):
While I have the greatest of respect for the people who innovate & move industry forward, I have no interest whatsoever in the internal mechanicals of an amp, cd player or any other piece of kit. Graphs & bar charts relating to dynamic power, output impedance or frequency response mean absolutely nothing to me. I, as I imagine most others do, judge using my ears & eyes. If you want the technical information there are magazines (& clinics) who cater for you.
Finally to the original point regarding commercial impartiality. Leaving aside the integrity of the testers & journalists, which generally is the natural driver of impartiality. Very simply, commercial pressure can be applied by the dominant partner in a relationship. The balance of power between a hugely dominant magazine & the manufacturers is clearly with the magazine - impact of a poor review to the manufacturer -v- loss of advertising revenue to Haymarket ????
Ultimately of course it's about opinions. If you want to buy WHFSV for a holiday read that's fine, there are many of us however, who buy it each month because we enjoy it.
[quote user="JoelSim"].......... however in common with many other magazines, and just like us, reviewers have their favourites.
[/quote]
Agree....so why bother buying the Mag at all...............Everytime either Pioneer or Panasonic produce something.............just go our and buy them!
[/quote]
Agree....so why bother buying the Mag at all...............Everytime either Pioneer or Panasonic produce something.............just go our and buy them!
While you think that, and other people accuse us of favouring Sony, or Marantz, or Cyrus, or Roksan or whoever, or being pro-British or pro-Japanese, clearly we're getting the balance right
Absolutely right. I have to be honest, it sometimes gets me a bit mad when I hear some of those accusations. The fact, is, the entire team of reviewers at What Hi-Fi Sound & Vision is extremely insulated from the mag's ads department, and there has never, ever been the slightest bit of pressure on anyone for a review to be influenced by ANYTHING other than the honest perceptions of the reviewer and the rest of the team (all review verdicts are arrived at collectively and consensually, not just the opinion of a single reviewer).
As Clare rightly said, this doesn't mean that the team can't possibly make mistakes - it's possible, we are human after all - but when a manufacturer someone has accused us of favouring puts out a poor product, you will see it receive the critical mauling it rightly deserves. This, in fact, is what always happens. Which is why those accusations strike me as utterly ridiculous.
If there is one thing I know for sure, it's that WHF's reviews are 100% impartial and utterly honest. And that, above all else, I think, is why people buy and enjoy the magazine.
As Clare rightly said, this doesn't mean that the team can't possibly make mistakes - it's possible, we are human after all - but when a manufacturer someone has accused us of favouring puts out a poor product, you will see it receive the critical mauling it rightly deserves. This, in fact, is what always happens. Which is why those accusations strike me as utterly ridiculous.
If there is one thing I know for sure, it's that WHF's reviews are 100% impartial and utterly honest. And that, above all else, I think, is why people buy and enjoy the magazine.
Juzzie Wuzzie
Well-known member
I have always purchased on the recommendations of the What Hi-Fi team, everything. Never spent over £400 in one hit, never test drove in the store, and never gone wrong. Will continue to do so. Never been happier, thank you!
To me the WHS&V team seems to be honest in their reviews and even succeeds in making it an interesting reading too! I must say I too was amazed at how doubtful and sometimes cynical some posters get. Congratulations to Clare and the rest of the team for keeping cool.
Anyway, for technical measurement I read other hifi magazines.
Anyway, for technical measurement I read other hifi magazines.
There is no "better or worse" between NOTW and The Times. You can't compare a fiction and a non-fiction novel and say which is the better.
They are both worth the money and won't hurt anyone as long as you know what you are paying for.
But there would be harm if pepole read NOTW believing if as though it had the same journalistic authority and responsibility as the Times.
Indeed NOTW is an entertaining read if you read it that way.
They are both worth the money and won't hurt anyone as long as you know what you are paying for.
But there would be harm if pepole read NOTW believing if as though it had the same journalistic authority and responsibility as the Times.
Indeed NOTW is an entertaining read if you read it that way.
Similar threads
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram