so unscientific!

[woodbino]

I find some of these reviews a joke!

Why do what HiFi not do blinded equipment tests? That's the only real scientific way. I bet most people could be fooled into thinking they're listening to thousand pound systems by a cheap but decent system picked up from Tesco!

 

[simonlewis]

You are an expert are you and seen the reviews taking place. :quest:

 

[TrevC]

As well as listening tests they need to do some electronic testing. It's important to check that an amplifier meets its specification, how well it performs into low impedance loads, stuff like that. Loudspeakers measured for frequency response etc would be helpful too, something like the Stereophile tests.

 

[Dougal1331]

Well you always have the option of ignoring them, rather than coming onto their FREE website and demeaning them.

 

[professorhat]

Loudspeakers measured for frequency response etc would be helpful too, something like the Stereophile tests.

I believe Stereophile do those kinds of tests, so that might well be the magazine you're after...

 

[namefail]

I don’t normally feel the need to jump to the support of .coms/publishers and I’m not here, however, in the 20 odd years of on and off reading what Hi-Fi I’ve never felt their journalistic approach lacking. The reviews have always been short and sweet affairs, why don’t you direct your comment to the editor.

 

[Singslinger]

:wave: :wave:

 

[TrevC]

Loudspeakers measured for frequency response etc would be helpful too, something like the Stereophile tests.

I believe Stereophile do those kinds of tests, so that might well be the magazine you're after...

Silly sausage.

 

[namefail]

:wave: :wave:

Ah, the 1967 Christmas #1.

 

[Paul.]

probably because the writers don't get paid enough to be "blinded". How do you suggest we do it, hot pokers? Dog poo? Using lathe equipment without suitable protection?

 

[namefail]

To miss-quote Thomas Dolby, they should be blinded with Science.

 

[The_Lhc]

As well as listening tests they need to do some electronic testing. It's important to check that an amplifier meets its specification, how well it performs into low impedance loads, stuff like that. Loudspeakers measured for frequency response etc would be helpful too, something like the Stereophile tests.

There used to be any number of magazine that did tests exactly like that, nearly all of them have gone bust which tells you everything you need to know about the readership for that level of detail. The majority of people aren't interested, which is why WHF don't bother with it.

 

[professorhat]

Loudspeakers measured for frequency response etc would be helpful too, something like the Stereophile tests.

I believe Stereophile do those kinds of tests, so that might well be the magazine you're after...

Silly sausage.

Cheeky monkey.

 

[BenLaw]

Loudspeakers measured for frequency response etc would be helpful too, something like the Stereophile tests.

I believe Stereophile do those kinds of tests, so that might well be the magazine you're after...

Silly sausage.

Cheeky monkey.

Said in your best Johnny Vegas voice.

 

[Covenanter]

I think I've used the "Top gear " analogy before and I think it is valid. There are no tv programmes now that review cars seriously (that I am aware of) and the most popular one recommends stuff on the basis of things like they wouldn't buy a car you can fit golf clubs into. People want entertainment not information.
It's slightly different in hifi because IMO people want to have the mystique of hifi enhanced not knocked down by scientific analysis. They like reviews which use mystical language because that's the way they think about hifi and anyway who wants to read reviews which say "we've done the tests and those cables you spent £xxx on are no better then bell wire"? Journalists write stuff that sells magazines and newspapers. Why do you think the Daily Express keeps going on about Princess Diana when the poor woman has been dead for years and years? It's simply that it's what their readership want.
So it's our fault! They write what we want to read.
Chris

 

[TrevC]

As well as listening tests they need to do some electronic testing. It's important to check that an amplifier meets its specification, how well it performs into low impedance loads, stuff like that. Loudspeakers measured for frequency response etc would be helpful too, something like the Stereophile tests.

There used to be any number of magazine that did tests exactly like that, nearly all of them have gone bust which tells you everything you need to know about the readership for that level of detail. The majority of people aren't interested, which is why WHF don't bother with it.

Yet they do bother "listening" to mains leads and extension blocks, which removes all credibility.

 

[TrevC]

Well you always have the option of ignoring them, rather than coming onto their FREE website and demeaning them.

It's a suggestion for improvement. Just because you don't understand technical tests that doesn't mean they shouldn't be done.

 

[The_Lhc]

Well you always have the option of ignoring them, rather than coming onto their FREE website and demeaning them.

It's a suggestion for improvement. Just because you don't understand technical tests that doesn't mean they shouldn't be done.

You're right. They shouldn't be done because it would decimate the readership and cause the magazine to close down.

Just because you do understand technical tests that doesn't mean they should be done.

 

[bigboss]

Well you always have the option of ignoring them, rather than coming onto their FREE website and demeaning them.

It's a suggestion for improvement. Just because you don't understand technical tests that doesn't mean they shouldn't be done.

You're right. They shouldn't be done because it would decimate the readership and cause the magazine to close down.

Just because you do understand technical tests that doesn't mean they should be done.

 

[Alec]

Saw this thread in th ewee hours. Went to bed. I'd just liek to congratulate th egeniuses that made it reach the top of the list.

Yes, I see the irony.

 

[altruistic.lemon]

Well you always have the option of ignoring them, rather than coming onto their FREE website and demeaning them.

It's a suggestion for improvement. Just because you don't understand technical tests that doesn't mean they shouldn't be done.

You're right. They shouldn't be done because it would decimate the readership and cause the magazine to close down.

Just because you do understand technical tests that doesn't mean they should be done.

Yet they exist in HiFi mags in many other countries. Besides, Journos don't have to be passive, they can help make things change. A real defeatist attitude.

 

[TrevC]

Well you always have the option of ignoring them, rather than coming onto their FREE website and demeaning them.

It's a suggestion for improvement. Just because you don't understand technical tests that doesn't mean they shouldn't be done.

You're right. They shouldn't be done because it would decimate the readership and cause the magazine to close down.

Just because you do understand technical tests that doesn't mean they should be done.

Like the Sun would have to close it it had real news in it?

 

[TrevC]

I think I've used the "Top gear " analogy before and I think it is valid. There are no tv programmes now that review cars seriously (that I am aware of) and the most popular one recommends stuff on the basis of things like they wouldn't buy a car you can fit golf clubs into. People want entertainment not information. It's slightly different in hifi because IMO people want to have the mystique of hifi enhanced not knocked down by scientific analysis. They like reviews which use mystical language because that's the way they think about hifi and anyway who wants to read reviews which say "we've done the tests and those cables you spent £xxx on are no better then bell wire"? Journalists write stuff that sells magazines and newspapers. Why do you think the Daily Express keeps going on about Princess Diana when the poor woman has been dead for years and years? It's simply that it's what their readership want. So it's our fault! They write what we want to read. Chris

What Car does serious testing, mpg, performance against manufacturers figures and so on. That doesn't seem to knock sales figures. Why shouldn't What HiFi do serious testing too?

Imagine a What hifi car review. The timing of the Fiesta is excellent, and the vibrant colours of the paintwork shine through when the fuel is supplied via Russ Andrews own filtering petrol hose, the Travelator. Steering is light, but the driving experience shines through.

 

[professorhat]

Maybe this is because your average joe knows and understands what things like mpg and top speed mean, whereas if you start mentioning frequency response to them, they'll edge away from you slowly, smiling politely until they reach a safe distance.Also, even if you did patiently explain the term to them before they reached safe distance, they probably would just then say "but what does it sound like?" since that's all most people really care about when it comes to music playback.

 

[TrevC]

Maybe this is because your average joe knows and understands what things like mpg and top speed mean, whereas if you start mentioning frequency response to them, they'll edge away from you slowly, smiling politely until they reach a safe distance. Also, even if you did patiently explain the term to them before they reached safe distance, they probably would just then say "but what does it sound like?" since that's all most people really care about when it comes to music playback.

If you say so, Joe. Alternatively you could educate yourself about it.