What Hi-Fi has been using 5 stars to rank “comparable” equipment for as long as I can remember but have you ever considered any other ways to sort the good from the mediocre?
The current system has the advantage of being simple but it also has some serious drawbacks. It does not allow a direct comparison of a budget item with a mid-range item for example. Nor does it allow distinction between competing products that all get 5 stars. Finally it does not allow comparison over time as the best of the best today is still only 5 stars but no doubt much better than the best of the best 5 years ago (that I might be considering second hand).
All of this makes compiling a short list for audition harder work than could reasonably be expected when buying the mag.
Here is my straw man: keep the stars (at least for the time being) but add a relative score (compared to your reference kit) out of 100, at the foot of the review text (& new column in the tables). That should provide a good way determine the relative value for money across the range
The current system has the advantage of being simple but it also has some serious drawbacks. It does not allow a direct comparison of a budget item with a mid-range item for example. Nor does it allow distinction between competing products that all get 5 stars. Finally it does not allow comparison over time as the best of the best today is still only 5 stars but no doubt much better than the best of the best 5 years ago (that I might be considering second hand).
All of this makes compiling a short list for audition harder work than could reasonably be expected when buying the mag.
Here is my straw man: keep the stars (at least for the time being) but add a relative score (compared to your reference kit) out of 100, at the foot of the review text (& new column in the tables). That should provide a good way determine the relative value for money across the range