Is this forum pointless?

[John Duncan]

I am not suggesting to necessarily increase the amount of technical data published in the mag. I am suggesting to increase the level of tech competence behind the testing, writing, blogging, editing and moderating. For a gear-focussed publication this is a must IMO.

So you're actually suggesting that WHF should moderate forum posts for technical accuracy and competence? Good luck with that...

I look forward to other forums being moderated by people who know what they're talking about...

 

[John Duncan]

"An interest in technology and/or football not required but an ability to transfer this enthusiasm to the business is an advantage."

If you don't have an interest in technology or football, presumably you are going to have to be good at making up this enthusiasm?

 

[BenLaw]

I pretty much agree with ID, especially his first sentence.

I believe the shorthand for that is ' + 0.9 '.

 

[matt49]

I am not suggesting to necessarily increase the amount of technical data published in the mag. I am suggesting to increase the level of tech competence behind the testing, writing, blogging, editing and moderating. For a gear-focussed publication this is a must IMO.

I imagine it's hard to find journalists with the required technical knowledge.

For example, in recruitment ads for their Stuff, FourFourTwo and What Hi-fi? Sound and Vision publishing interns, Haymarket have specified ...

"An interest in technology and/or football not required but an ability to transfer this enthusiasm to the business is an advantage."

(It also states that "What Hi-Fi will be the primary role".)

I actually find the style of writing in WHF more annoying than any supposed or actual lack of technical knowledge. But Haymarket is a successful business, and I wouldn't presume to tell them how to write their mags. In any case, I don't see why they'd take any notice.

Matt

 

[Andy Clough]

I am not suggesting to necessarily increase the amount of technical data published in the mag. I am suggesting to increase the level of tech competence behind the testing, writing, blogging, editing and moderating. For a gear-focussed publication this is a must IMO.

With regard to the editorial team (the permanent ones, we don't have any interns at the mo), our technical editor Ketan has been with the magazine 16 years, I've been at Haymarket for 20+ years and worked on several AV/tech magazines here, including VTV, Home Cinema and WHF?SV, our web ed Joe has been with us for a decade, managing ed Jonny Evans nearly seven, while magazine ed Simon Lucas and our reviews editor Andy Madden have been here since 2006.

They've worked their way up through the ranks and amassed a massive amount of reviewing experience during that time, testing literally hundreds (if not thousands) of products. They have, therefore, a very clear understanding of all the products we test and how they've improved (or otherwise) over the years. I think that counts for something

 

[michael hoy]

No, thats a television program.

 

[Alec]

I pretty much agree with ID, especially his first sentence.

I believe the shorthand for that is ' + 0.9 '.

You learn something every day.

 

[Alec]

I am not suggesting to necessarily increase the amount of technical data published in the mag. I am suggesting to increase the level of tech competence behind the testing, writing, blogging, editing and moderating. For a gear-focussed publication this is a must IMO.

So you're actually suggesting that WHF should moderate forum posts for technical accuracy and competence? Good luck with that...

I look forward to other forums being moderated by people who know what they're talking about...

Not as rare as unicorns, [EDITED BY MODS - please do not insult other members].

 

[chebby]

"An interest in technology and/or football not required but an ability to transfer this enthusiasm to the business is an advantage."

If you don't have an interest in technology or football, presumably you are going to have to be good at making up this enthusiasm?

A journalist should be good at making up everything.

 

[Broner]

I am not suggesting to necessarily increase the amount of technical data published in the mag. I am suggesting to increase the level of tech competence behind the testing, writing, blogging, editing and moderating. For a gear-focussed publication this is a must IMO.

With regard to the editorial team (the permanent ones, we don't have any interns at the mo), our technical editor Ketan has been with the magazine 16 years, I've been at Haymarket for 20+ years and worked on several AV/tech magazines here, including VTV, Home Cinema and WHF?SV, our web ed Joe has been with us for a decade, managing ed Jonny Evans nearly seven, while magazine ed Simon Lucas and our reviews editor Andy Madden have been here since 2006.

They've worked their way up through the ranks and amassed a massive amount of reviewing experience during that time, testing literally hundreds (if not thousands) of products. They have, therefore, a very clear understanding of all the products we test and how they've improved (or otherwise) over the years. I think that counts for something

Although I have no real opinion about this debate, I don't believe the type of experience you mention necessarily relates to level of ‘tech competence’ that AlmaataKZ mentioned.

 

[The_Lhc]

I am not suggesting to necessarily increase the amount of technical data published in the mag. I am suggesting to increase the level of tech competence behind the testing, writing, blogging, editing and moderating. For a gear-focussed publication this is a must IMO.

With regard to the editorial team (the permanent ones, we don't have any interns at the mo), our technical editor Ketan has been with the magazine 16 years, I've been at Haymarket for 20+ years and worked on several AV/tech magazines here, including VTV, Home Cinema and WHF?SV, our web ed Joe has been with us for a decade, managing ed Jonny Evans nearly seven, while magazine ed Simon Lucas and our reviews editor Andy Madden have been here since 2006.

They've worked their way up through the ranks and amassed a massive amount of reviewing experience during that time, testing literally hundreds (if not thousands) of products. They have, therefore, a very clear understanding of all the products we test and how they've improved (or otherwise) over the years. I think that counts for something

Although I have no real opinion about this debate, I don't believe the type of experience you mention necessarily relates to level of ‘tech competence’ that AlmaataKZ mentioned.

Are you suggesting that only official qualifications are proof of competence? If that was the case I'd never get a job, I have years of experience but almost no relevant qualifications for my job and yet I'm doing it quite adequately.

 

[John Duncan]

Whereas I have loads of relevant qualifications, and yet...

 

[professorhat]

Are you suggesting that only official qualifications are proof of competence? If that was the case I'd never get a job, I have years of experience but almost no relevant qualifications for my job and yet I'm doing it quite adequately.

Ditto.

 

[Broner]

I am not suggesting to necessarily increase the amount of technical data published in the mag. I am suggesting to increase the level of tech competence behind the testing, writing, blogging, editing and moderating. For a gear-focussed publication this is a must IMO.

With regard to the editorial team (the permanent ones, we don't have any interns at the mo), our technical editor Ketan has been with the magazine 16 years, I've been at Haymarket for 20+ years and worked on several AV/tech magazines here, including VTV, Home Cinema and WHF?SV, our web ed Joe has been with us for a decade, managing ed Jonny Evans nearly seven, while magazine ed Simon Lucas and our reviews editor Andy Madden have been here since 2006.

They've worked their way up through the ranks and amassed a massive amount of reviewing experience during that time, testing literally hundreds (if not thousands) of products. They have, therefore, a very clear understanding of all the products we test and how they've improved (or otherwise) over the years. I think that counts for something

Although I have no real opinion about this debate, I don't believe the type of experience you mention necessarily relates to level of ‘tech competence’ that AlmaataKZ mentioned.

Are you suggesting that only official qualifications are proof of competence? If that was the case I'd never get a job, I have years of experience but almost no relevant qualifications for my job and yet I'm doing it quite adequately.

Ehmm, no. I am saying that years of experience in the business of making hifi-magazines does not necessarily mean that there is also sufficient technical compentence among the staff. That might be the case, but it really is a poor indicator of it.

 

[AlmaataKZ]

I am not suggesting to necessarily increase the amount of technical data published in the mag. I am suggesting to increase the level of tech competence behind the testing, writing, blogging, editing and moderating. For a gear-focussed publication this is a must IMO.

With regard to the editorial team (the permanent ones, we don't have any interns at the mo), our technical editor Ketan has been with the magazine 16 years, I've been at Haymarket for 20+ years and worked on several AV/tech magazines here, including VTV, Home Cinema and WHF?SV, our web ed Joe has been with us for a decade, managing ed Jonny Evans nearly seven, while magazine ed Simon Lucas and our reviews editor Andy Madden have been here since 2006.

They've worked their way up through the ranks and amassed a massive amount of reviewing experience during that time, testing literally hundreds (if not thousands) of products. They have, therefore, a very clear understanding of all the products we test and how they've improved (or otherwise) over the years. I think that counts for something

Absolutely, Andy. And this is not what I am challenging. What I mean is none of the WHF staff seem to ever write or post definitive technical statements on any of the subjects debated. And I don't mean it individual competence wise, I mean policy-wise. The mag is gear-based but has no visible technical back-up or authority.

 

[SpursGator]

So what did WHF spend their £1Million on for their 'test labs' - the sofas?

One of the key tenets of good writing is that you can't just write about a subject - you need The Slant. And - same idea - in the words of Prof. Michael Porter, a leading expert on competition, you can't compete to be the best, you must compete to be unique. In a nutshell, if you set out to make the best furniture shop ever, you might succeed and make a nice living. If you set out to be a unique kind of furniture shop, you could become Ikea and bring in more than £20 billion per year.

WHF is no different. High volume short reviews, human impressions, and a bit of credibility covering the industry. 1-to-5 star ratings...sorry, 2-to-5 star ratings for complex products that are difficult to describe with pages of numbers. It's a mag that arms people with a shopping list, rather than makes a serious attempt to dig into a product.

This is what they do. And it's compelling not because it's the best way to do it, but rather that nobody else really does it this way. I would also argue that it isn't a bad approach. I like measurements but there are other places to get them - sometimes they help, but rarely. People come here looking for a shopping list. WHFSV gives it to them and so does the forum...then they go out and listen. A few of them (us) come back and want to analyse or defend their purchase. Why not?

As for the pointless forum, my first instinct was to say sure it is pointless, but I like it. But it isn't pointless. I'm a hifi nut, completely obsessed and heavily researched, and I learn/consider new things from people on here all the time, even as I argue. My wife certainly would think it's pointless and I could survive without it. But it isn't completely pointless.

 

[Gusboll]

I'm not a regular contributor recently but this thread and some of the bizarre associated posts on the forum have made me laugh. Long may it continue. Seconds Out....!

 

[Messiah]

My personal opinion (for what it is worth!) is that sadly this forum took a nose dive. A big nose dive.

The amount of bickering that went on (and this is going back a couple of years ago now) made the forum a miserable place to be. I would check in from time-to-time (last time being November) and would still see the same bickering by the same individuals, some of them supposedly Mods.

It is a real shame.

Bring back Mr E to get the forum in check!

 

[Jim-W]

Far from being pointless, this forum is very important in a 'Waiting For Godot' kind of way. Similarly, when people get cross and pompous I see Francis Bacon portraits. Some of us like futility and chaos.