Is it possible to improve on the best - ie WHAT HI*FI SOUND AND VISION MAGAZINE?

[admin_exported]

I have been a reader of the magazine for many, many years, and whilst this sounds REALLY crawly, I think your publication is the best available, and I am thrilled with the response from the magazine on a couple of issues I have raised recently. I would not purchase it regularly join your forums or return questionnaires otherwise, and I think that of all the features in the mag, probably the most useful, helpful and influential is your buyers guide. It compares products, gives basic technical spec, recommendations and observations of products you have actually tested and anyone would be foolhardy to not utilise this facility and even get a back issue to fully appreciate this on a prospective purchase.. I do have a proposition however that I feel may make this section even BETTER. I would like to see an additional column in the section, as unobtrusive as the £ column, that gave a product an OVERALL percentage rating, irrelevant of price, based on your current reference model which would hold the 100% title. This would allow the selection of a product based on performance, not performance dependant on cost, and would also allow a result in excess of 100% for new or exotic ultra high level products. At the moment, I find it difficult to select a product if it has a 5 star rating in an "up to £100" catagory, against a 4 star product in a "£100 - 200) catagory, because the 4 star product may be better, and only slightly more expensive, but have less value for money. An "ULTIMATE" rating would make this choice far easier. An example if I may, and one very relevant to myself recently is a comparison between the 5 star B&W 805 and XT4's at the same price or the £1000 more expensive B&W 804's. Are the 804's worth the extra £1000? There is nothing to gauge this and nothing to say catagorically they are in fact better anyway! I hope you see my point. Keep up the great work and good luck with the mag. Gerry, (Oldskool)

 

[Anonymous]

Any comments Claire or Andrew? My posts on Hi-Fi and Home Cinema forums seem to have had an excellent response and lively discussions too.

 

[Thaiman]

[quote user="Oldskool"]I would like to see an additional column in the section, as unobtrusive as the £
column, that gave a product an OVERALL percentage rating, irrelevant of price,
based on your current reference model which would hold the 100% title. [/quote]

That would be the same as, what Andrew would all, other mags (or there is no other mags!)

 

[Anonymous]

Heavens above, an objective rating that isn't simply price comparable, but overall performance comparison only? Asked many a time. They won't do it. They are convinced that you get what you pay for and it would upset the manufacturers apple cart if once in a while a product for half the money performed twice as well as it's price would suggest it should. Sometimes I wonder whether manufacturers intentionally keep a product's performance back, because of the ticket price, when for the money, they should be able to construct the finest sounding gear. You do get what you pay for, but you should get better for less in 2007 and nearly 2008.

If PC capability moved at the pace of Hi-Fi fidelity improvement we'd still be using abacus's.

 

[Thaiman]

[quote user="Will Harris"]

If PC capability moved at the pace of Hi-Fi fidelity improvement we'd still
be using abacus's.
[/quote]

I still do!

 

[mjs]

so what is the apostrophe for ?

 

[mjs]

In abucus`s that is.

 

[Anonymous]

Quite right. Anyone fancy conjugating the plural be my guest. May be abacuses but I can't be sure.

Merry Christmas y'all.

 

[mjs]

u 2

 

[Gwyndy]

"I would like to see an additional column in the section, as unobtrusive as the £ column, that gave a product an OVERALL percentage rating, irrelevant of price, based on your current reference model which would hold the 100% title. This would allow the selection of a product based on performance, not performance dependant on cost, and would also allow a result in excess of 100% for new or exotic ultra high level products".

Unfortunately I can see one major and one minor stumbling block in the way of this, What Hi-Fi's reference system was not picked because it is "the best", it was picked because it is fairly neutral and allows them to easily identify changes to the way it behaves, therefore any comparison would of necessarily be anywhere near accurate. Hence the fact they often say this product on test times better than that one or has better bass response etc., they rarely say it has half as good a bass response as the reference system, and surely any comparison within a reference system would not necessarily marry to an items performace with price comparible equipment?

 

[mjs]

How about blind testing.I.e the reviewers of the sound/picture don`t get to see the manufacturer or price tag until after evaluation.Somebody else ,not involved in the actual audtion ,could organise the samples for testing,only revealing the identity of teh hardware after scoring?