Is WHF becomming too much like Stuff?

[Sliced Bread]

Is What Hi-Fi becoming watered down?

With so many technologies in today’s market that are capable of delivering sound and vision, we are seeing far more diversity in the range of products reviewed by What Hi-Fi.

In many ways this is a good thing as the sound and picture quality of these devices should be reviewed, however with reviews placing more focus on other areas such as smart features and web-browsing are we losing what has traditionally been the heart of What HiFi’s reviews; sound & vision.

I’m not trying to slate the magazine, I think it’s fantastic but it recently feels like it’s moving closer to Stuff magazine.

 

[The_Lhc]

As long as they don't start reviewing bloody football boots I won't mind, that's when I stopped buying Stuff...

 

[Sliced Bread]

Ha ha . Yeah I think that'd be too much for me to swallow too

 

[Hi-FiOutlaw]

+ 1 !

To mutch smart phones reviews... :?

 

[Andy Madden]

Hi Sliced Bread,

thanks for your comments. I understand why you might think this, but the diverse spread of products we cover just reflects the marketplace and how people are consuming their video and audio content. Phones for example are multi-functional devices, and many people (including myself) probably spend more time watching video and listening to music on these devices (and I include tablets in this category too) than they do on their TVs. We have to cover functionality, ease of use etc but sound and picture quality will still be at the forefront of our minds when we're deciding on verdicts.

And talking of TVs, this is another device that has evolved over the years, and now boasts such impressive functionality that we can't stick purely to judging on sound and picture performance. Of course, this does feature heavily in our reviews, and rightfully so, but we also have to take into account all the extra functionality that comes with a TV. Sometimes this can make or break a users experience. And, we wouldn't be doing our job correctly if we ignored all the other aspects.

We try to bring a balanced look at the market and this is reflected in our choice of tests, both standalone and group. Eg, if there's scope to do a supertest of budget stereo speakers, then rest assured we'll do it! I hope this has helped to explain our position a little more. Rest assured we're only trying to help you, the consumer! And we promise, no football boots! (unless one of them doubles as a wireless speaker)

 

[The_Lhc]

And we promise, no football boots! (unless one of them doubles as a wireless speaker)

I'm only surprised it hasn't been done already!

 

[Andrew Everard]

I'm only surprised it hasn't been done already!

Only a matter of time...

 

[Andy Clough]

We're a broad church, and however hard we try, we won't please all our readers all of the time. But there's huge interest in smartphones and tablets, so we'll continue to cover them. Yes, sound and vision remain at the heart of what we do, but as Andy M says we can't just ignore their other functionality.

 

[Paul.]

So no bikini clad lady struggling to pose with a 30kg subwoofer then?

 

[BenLaw]

When did you become Paul. Paul?

 

[Paul.]

About a month ago I think? Had it mentioned in my sig for two weeks. Not self employed anymore so don't fancy using my real name!

 

[BenLaw]

Oh right, I missed that then. Congrats on the new job

 

[Sliced Bread]

Thanks for the reply.

It is not the reviewing of phones and tablets per se that I disagree on, rather the proportion of the reviews dedicated to features over picture and sound quality, which I feel is not quite right for this magazines traditional core focus.

For instance; the current magazine reviews a number of phones, now if I take one at random (sayXperia), there is a whole page dedicated to the review (which is fine), but of that page there are two sentences dedicated to sound quality and two sentences dedicated to picture quality.

This is similar across all the phone reviews.

As this is a sound and vision magazine, I think it would be great to spend more time discussing these areas of quality including partnering headphones etc. In terms of features, this secrion should imo be included but take a back seat, though discussions on how each particular model can integrate into a home cinema / hifi as a source or remote control would be good.

I agree the world is changing, but it would be nice for WHF reviews to stand out in its area of expertise and let What Mobile (et al) focus on generic phone functionality.

I think What WiFi could have the best of both worlds

 

[KiwiMoto]

Please no in-car audio :shame:

 

[DandyCobalt]

Please no in-car audio :shame:

I thought the B&W (Maserati), Meridian (Range Rover?) and Burmeister (Porsche?) reviews were quite interesting -

Made me certain that putting great/loud/distracting surround sound in a 2.5 tonne killing machine (which should have undivided driver attention) could be a problem.

 

[Anonymous]

I agree wholeheartedly with the OP. Tablets, smartphones etc leave me cold, I have no interest in watching video on a tiny screen. As for the the other capabilities of this kit, they are just computers in a skirt, and computers are business tools, not a leisure activity.

It is interesting that the "other" magazine doesn't feel the need to go down down this path, but concentrates on "core" AV kit - it is a much better read because of it , tobe honest. Sorry WHF, but I feel you are going in the wrong direction, and should concentrate on AV kit,, not computers.

 

[FunkyMonkey]

I don't normally support what hifi, but they are right. High fidelity is available more widely than ever.

Arguably, a movie looks better in an iPad than it did on a CRT tv and DVD, 10 years ago.

Music sounds better on flac files played through a 200 quid DAC and amp than an old cd player and amp. Possibly.

 

[DandyCobalt]

Given that the WHO rank mobile phones as class 2 carcinogens, and the Italian court has just ruled that they do cause brain abnormalities, perhaps WHFSV shouldn't be supporting the mobile phone industry.

Oh, there are some studies that say they are safe...guess who paid for them?

 

[Paul.]

To be fair, didn't the Italian court also send seismologists to prison for not predicting an earthquake?

 

[BenLaw]

 

[DandyCobalt]

I think they reassuringly predicted no earthquake ( so that people didn't evacuate) rather than just not predicting an earthquake? Subtle difference, but people died.

Hurricanes and weathermen spring to mind...

 

[The_Lhc]

I think they reassuringly predicted no earthquake ( so that people didn't evacuate) rather than just not predicting an earthquake?

No, they said they had no data that would indicate a significantly increased risk of a major earthquake, which was absolutely correct, they had no data to make any predictions with, it didn't mean there was no risk of an earthquake. The problem was that a non-scientist local government representative took that as meaning "There won't be an earthquake" and went public with it, when what the scientists had said meant nothing of the sort.

Despite that the court decide the scientists were at fault. It's a total travesty of justice, complete nonsense.

 

[marantz211]

I really enjoyed reading the magazine but had a break from it around the end of 2011. I bought the April 2013 copy and was disappointed that there was a big tablet ultimate guide, a big double page spread on the Sony Xperia Z smartphone, plenty of things on DACs and it felt like the mag was drifting away from what I enjoyed reading about.

I know everyone's different and you have to cater for many differing tastes but if I wanted to read about smartphones (which I don't) I'd buy a smartphone mag. The same goes for tablets and dac's.

Sorry but I want pages of AV receivers/processors/bluray players/TV's/cables/CD players/HIFI amps/and lots of speakers, etc.

 

[The_Lhc]

I really enjoyed reading the magazine but had a break from it around the end of 2011. I bought the April 2013 copy and was disappointed that there was a big tablet ultimate guide, a big double page spread on the Sony Xperia Z smartphone, plenty of things on DACs and it felt like the mag was drifting away from what I enjoyed reading about.

I know everyone's different and you have to cater for many differing tastes but if I wanted to read about smartphones (which I don't) I'd buy a smartphone mag. The same goes for tablets and dac's.

Sorry but I want pages of AV receivers/processors/bluray players/TV's/cables/CD players/HIFI amps/and lots of speakers, etc.

I don't think you're going to get very far suggesting DACs aren't part of hi-fi. Tablets and phones, sure you'll get some support there but your DAC gripe is misguided.

 

[lexloofah]

I miss the reviews of the high end av receivers, I remember the first year when the awards only went up to the 1500 pioneer lx81. Bring back the high end pre and power combos.