recent WHF cable tests

[spiny norman]

I'm struggling to decipher several posts on this thread, but clarification is needed on this remark in particular, including the importance of the lower case "e."

Of the 16 in the expression, it's the least significant bit.

 

[matthewpiano]

There needs to be some balance here.

First and foremost, Haymarket are a highly successful (and polished) marketing machine. They're magazines (and websites) cater for people new to the respective industries, or those who like to follow fashion to a degree. (Let's face it advances in audio engineering knowledge/development does not leap forward every year - convenience features, headline specs and functionality do)

There is not enough man hours in a month for them to review products fully (in terms of running in, proper system matching/optimistaion) considering the sheer number of products readers will expect to be covered. Arguably the majority of the readers will have not have the patience, nor inclination to wade through paragraphs of technical analysis or system configuration detailing if such reviews were that thorough.

Plus first and foremost, the staff are journalists. For many of them WHF is one of many steps up the hierachy of Haymarket publications. This hobby/passion of ours is a niche market compared to other pursuits (fishing, motoring, photography, caravaning etc).

Good post. Haymarket are excellent at what they do, in the case of WHFS&V producing as mainstream a title as possible in the audio/home electronics market whilst still bringing some expertise to the table. This is Haymarket's raison d'etre. When they become too specialist things don't go quite as well. Case in point, Gramophone has suddenly started getting back some of its rigour since departing Haymarket. I never felt this was a great fit and I think it is probably better for publisher and magazine that they have parted ways.

 

[Covenanter]

There needs to be some balance here.

First and foremost, Haymarket are a highly successful (and polished) marketing machine. They're magazines (and websites) cater for people new to the respective industries, or those who like to follow fashion to a degree. (Let's face it advances in audio engineering knowledge/development does not leap forward every year - convenience features, headline specs and functionality do)

There is not enough man hours in a month for them to review products fully (in terms of running in, proper system matching/optimistaion) considering the sheer number of products readers will expect to be covered. Arguably the majority of the readers will have not have the patience, nor inclination to wade through paragraphs of technical analysis or system configuration detailing if such reviews were that thorough.

Plus first and foremost, the staff are journalists. For many of them WHF is one of many steps up the hierachy of Haymarket publications. This hobby/passion of ours is a niche market compared to other pursuits (fishing, motoring, photography, caravaning etc).

Good post. Haymarket are excellent at what they do, in the case of WHFS&V producing as mainstream a title as possible in the audio/home electronics market whilst still bringing some expertise to the table. This is Haymarket's raison d'etre. When they become too specialist things don't go quite as well. Case in point, Gramophone has suddenly started getting back some of its rigour since departing Haymarket. I never felt this was a great fit and I think it is probably better for publisher and magazine that they have parted ways.

Gramophone is already 100% better!

Chris

 

[matthewpiano]

There needs to be some balance here.

First and foremost, Haymarket are a highly successful (and polished) marketing machine. They're magazines (and websites) cater for people new to the respective industries, or those who like to follow fashion to a degree. (Let's face it advances in audio engineering knowledge/development does not leap forward every year - convenience features, headline specs and functionality do)

There is not enough man hours in a month for them to review products fully (in terms of running in, proper system matching/optimistaion) considering the sheer number of products readers will expect to be covered. Arguably the majority of the readers will have not have the patience, nor inclination to wade through paragraphs of technical analysis or system configuration detailing if such reviews were that thorough.

Plus first and foremost, the staff are journalists. For many of them WHF is one of many steps up the hierachy of Haymarket publications. This hobby/passion of ours is a niche market compared to other pursuits (fishing, motoring, photography, caravaning etc).

Good post. Haymarket are excellent at what they do, in the case of WHFS&V producing as mainstream a title as possible in the audio/home electronics market whilst still bringing some expertise to the table. This is Haymarket's raison d'etre. When they become too specialist things don't go quite as well. Case in point, Gramophone has suddenly started getting back some of its rigour since departing Haymarket. I never felt this was a great fit and I think it is probably better for publisher and magazine that they have parted ways.

Gramophone is already 100% better!

Chris

Fully agree. I was getting close to cancelling my subscription after many years but now things have improved so dramatically I'll be sticking with it.

 

[matthewpiano]

I hope that Andrew Everard continues to write their equipment reviews and blogs. Any news on that?

Yes, he is still Audio Editor, but then he has also left Haymarket as far as I know.

 

[CJSF]

Things aint what they used to be?

CJSF

I agree. On the whole they are far better now

Mmm . . . do you mean that Chebby or is it just bait?

Not at all. I always try to temper reminiscence and nostalgia with a good dose of reality.

Sticking to audio though, it is phenomenal what quality (and choice of content) you can get for the outlay of an average weekly wage today compared to the equivalent some 40 or more years ago.

The problem is that many older people - maybe yourself included - are always comparing the 'finest' of that era with the average or 'typical' systems in use now.

Few seem to remember that the 'norm' actually used to be something like a cheap, resonant, plastic music-centre with hardboard backed speakers, bell-wire, a defective cassette deck (no Dolby) and a ceramic stylus (almost certainly worn out) held down with a coin and some BluTack to play a bunch of scabby K-Tel compilations!

"No, no. We all had Radford and Armstrongs and Linn and Thorens and Rogers LS3/5As and Quads and humungous Tannoy concentrics" I hear them cry

Well, most people didn't. But the rose-tinted specs are very powerful and it helps to remove them once in a while. Nostalgia for the past should not be allowed to become romanticism of the past.

Quite rightly the Swiss army once considered nostalgia to be a disease.

I agree with you Chebby, modern hifi is beter £ for £ than it was, in my case, 25 years ago. My nostagia takes in the first Gyro Deck, EAR 509 Mono block, valve amps, SME arm, MF 64 arm, LS35a speakers that actualy has bass, having worked on a proper speaker suport. My other living room system was Linn based, verious amps, all transistor types, many different speakers, giving the option of 'real life comparison' with mainstream thinking and my own 'swimming against the flow', sidways mind thoughts.

I to remember before that time the type of system you describe,. Uncle Jim loved his HMV set up, as you described, hardboard, bell wire and ceramic cartrige in1965, that was my introduction to 'hifi'. Uncle Cid had the quality stuff, Quad, Garrad, SME, Lowther groved cabinets.

So I have well founded nostalgic momories. Today, Cids sytem would be fairly basic 'with potential', generaly out performed by avarage modern hifi. My EAR system is probably equaled by my curent system which has feet in both modern and the nostagic camp . . . Trying to think back, I now have better and more extended base, but the sound stage was better from the 35a's. Detail is certainly better from the TT . . . CD's, I'm no more or less impressed now than then, although the gap probably appeard less at the time? We were being sold the idea of digital. IMHO retrospectivly, analogue of the time had not reached its full potential, compared to the offereings of today, (or perhaps what can be done?) comparing £ for £ of course. There you go, I'm still a vinyl man, in truth half dinasour . . .

Two channel hifi, can/could have been more refined . . . although looking at it, it looks like it has stalled. However, when one looks under the skin, at what can be done to release real SQ? . . . You can pay a lot of dosh to move on, the potential was/is still there . . . Alternativly, DIY upgrades are practical, or, as can be seen from Rega and Michel Gyro, they are stil the same basic designs, even Linn looks the same as it did 25 years ago, although it has kept up with the financial times :O

What is nostalgia . . . ???? The potential is there, was there to move on, so I am in agreement, with one foot firmly on the other side of the fence . . . 8)

CJSF

 

[chebby]

.

 

[chebby]

.

 

[chebby]

.

 

[chebby]

.