Test results

[admin_exported]

This may be a subject touched on before but here I go anyway.

Why cannot the magazine have an absolute technical quality testing score. It would probably mean extending the star ratings up to ten. This would then allow readers to compare cheap items with expensive items instead of just comparing within a price range. I know standards change over time, but if say an item had a ten score you would know it was the best available ( at the time of testing) at any price. I bet the manufacturers wouldn't like it but it could save readers a lot of money. I know features and design are important too but these can be assessed more easily by the reader.

Any comments?

 

[Andrew Everard]

Only that we've been round this track many many times on these Forums...

 

[Clare Newsome]

And to summarise, it's because it's both elitist and unworkable: where do you set '10'? A £33,000 CD player that's the best we've heard? Would that make an otherwise best-in-class budget CD player a two- or three-star? (Or even 1!)

We have both Awards and Best Buy listings that try and clearly show where the next step up in quality occurs (eg Best CD player under £500; Best CD player £500-£1000 etc), which I hope people use to get a sense of the best product for their budget (or how much extra they'd need to spend to gain a decent upgrade).

 

[D.J.KRIME]

I for one have allways prefered the way WHSAV rate products rather than a rating based mainly on bench-testing etc rather than how the product actually proforms at its price point rather than against one of 10 times the price which would have no real relivance to me in making a new purchase.

 

[Anonymous]

The only reason i dont like the 5star rating system that doesnt use half stars is basically because the difference between a 5 star product and a 4 star product becomes huge..in the real world that would basically mean something that is a 100% which would be perfect against something which has got 80% which is really good, but still 20% short of being perfect which is quite alot. Something that got 90% or 4.5 stars may well be what the consumer goes for instead of the 4 star product...

To answer Clare's post, i would say there is nothing wrong with a £33,000 item getting a 10 star if that product is truely flawless..it would set it as a reference product to which all products can be compared to, plus as technology advances cheaper items are surely going to catch up to that reference quality...

As to your example of Best CD player under £500; Best CD player £500-£1000 can be really confusing as does this mean the budget cd player that got 5 stars is worse than premium product that got 2 or 3 stars or even 1 star?

As technology advances and becomes cheaper price points start to blur and you cant really base star rating based on that...at some point a techical rating must be considered which doesnt take price into account..The Kuro is still the best looking tv which other tv's are compared to even though it is a premium product, if a tv is built which can look as good as the kuro but is half the price how will the reader know as he may think that its 5 star award is still nowhere near as good as the premium kuro according to the current price based rating system...

Also it doesnt make sense for a product to drop a star just because something better is out later down the line..a 5 star item should remain that because at the time of testing it was justified the 5 stars..makes more sense to base product reviews on date and year rather than price as products usually get better year on year...

 

[Anonymous]

I do like What Hifi Sound & Vision, I bougth my first copy as a teenager (and that's some years ago ;-). The magazine has a specific approuch towards testing gear, which I liked. I remember comparing all 5 star ratings within a certain price range very intense before buying my first piece of gear.

I also like the German magazines like Stereoplay and Audio: they are able to compare one type of device (eg CD player) throughout the whole pricerange (some cheaper gear can actually be better than more expensive gear) even regardless the moment it comes on the market. They even have a list (Bestenliste) where you can compare gear from years ago with the latest arrivals. I only assume they have more resources to do that (eg people, money, time...). On the other hand, they tend to be a little slower to test new gear.

Every magazine has it's own merits. I read both, the English and German magazines (though my mother tongue is yet another languange, as you might notice in my writing).

So if you want to have a list with ratings wich are more detailed, brush up your German ;-) If you want to be the first to read some tests of a specific device, excercise your English ;-)

Greetz

 

[Alec]

Ginder:makes more sense to base product reviews on date and year rather than price as products usually get better year on year...

Tomayto tomato. Makes less sense to me.

 

[Anonymous]

al7478:Ginder:makes more sense to base product reviews on date and year rather than price as products usually get better year on year...

Tomayto tomato. Makes less sense to me.

Really? So id guess theres no point in reviewing new tech then as surely when flat screens first came out costing 8-9k they must surely be better than the kuro as it only cost 2-3k when that was released..

By the way tomato is spelt the same across the board, its the pronunciations that differ, as do our opinions on rating systems

 

[Alec]

Ginder:al7478:Ginder:makes more sense to base product reviews on date and year rather than price as products usually get better year on year...

Tomayto tomato. Makes less sense to me.

Really? So id guess theres no point in reviewing new tech then as surely when flat screens first came out costing 8-9k they must surely be better than the kuro as it only cost 2-3k when that was released..

By the way tomato is spelt the same across the board, its the pronunciations that differ, as do our opinions on rating systems

If they were reviewed at that price (which, yes, id have a problem with but i have a problem with inadequate technology being foisted on us full stop), im sure the start rating would be reviewed over time; there are certainly examples of that happening.

 

[Anonymous]

would be pointless redoing the rating of the start product again as in time not many people would not be interested in it as it would be old, or it may even be discontinued, however keeping it at the star it achieved would show the progress year upon year of top quality products..rather than deducting star ratings from it..

 

[Anonymous]

What about letting everyone have their say!!!!

[Edited by mods - please do not discuss moderation]

I standby my previous remarks that the Oppo is an awesome unit, and that whathifi is the only review that I have come across that has brought up these negative remarks about the unit. Plenty of other respected 5 star reviews on the net from many other magazines and sites from around the world . Make up your own mind. My previous 5 star Pioneer BDP51fd was far from a 5 star performer in my view. Slow, clumsy, painful in use. Make sure you try the Oppo unit yourself, and make up your own mind. Disappointing whathifi. (How long until this is removed, or will it even be printed!!)

 

[Anonymous]

i agree about the german mags they are exhaustive and comprehensive more so than the british equivalent but their not so much fun to read

must admit i tend to look at them first if im about to buy something

mind you if i had the money id also buy german gear imagine a system with a clearaudio turntable t+a cd bluray and amplifier plus top range canton or elac speakers with loewe tv to cap it all off

thatd be pretty hard to beat

 

[Cofnchtr]

Ginder:...however keeping it at the star it achieved would show the progress year upon year of top quality products..rather than deducting star ratings from it..

Hi,

This would mean that a product tested last year and given 5 stars would, on the star rating, be directly comparable with the latest product with 5 stars (which may be justified) - but it wouldn't show any progress as both were 5 star products? If the newer product was better than the older one, then a star should be deducted from the older product, showing progress. The mag tests the latest products and ratings should be relative to these. To do it by date could show a 5* 4 year old CDP as being up there with the 5* product of today when in reality it probably wouldn't. It may be more of a 3* or 4* product taking into account a yearly progression.

When you buy something, there's usually a budget involved (however big or small) and for the magazine to compare products within this bracket and to award ratings accordingly makes perfect sense to me as it's the way we decide what to buy. You can then compare within your price range knowing the products you can afford have been rated accordingly.

Cheers,

Cofnchtr.

 

[d4v3pum4]

I disagree. I would prefer it if the marks stood, no matter what. I'm more than capable of working out that one product is older than another. Personally I think that by re-marking kit, it's basically deliberately steering us towards the new product and just saying, "buy it". It seems to me that at present one product is given a 5 star review to make it look better than everything else which is not exactly true. Reviews are an opinion and ultimately one set of speakers will go better with one amp etc. so I would prefer a marks for various categories etc. Far too many people are too lazy to demo these days, so perhaps that is why the reviews are the way they are.

I would prefer to see more technical data and less flowery language. Yes, the reviews are short and sweet and simplistic which is fine if you're new to the AV game and just want a simple 'Product A is better than Product B' approach but the majority of us that read the forums and magazines, class it is as a hobby and I for one, would prefer more substance.

 

[Anonymous]

Cofnchtr:Ginder:...however keeping it at the star it achieved would show the progress year upon year of top quality products..rather than deducting star ratings from it.. Hi, This would mean that a product tested last year and given 5 stars would, on the star rating, be directly comparable with the latest product with 5 stars (which may be justified) - but it wouldn't show any progress as both were 5 star products? If the newer product was better than the older one, then a star should be deducted from the older product, showing progress. The mag tests the latest products and ratings should be relative to these. To do it by date could show a 5* 4 year old CDP as being up there with the 5* product of today when in reality it probably wouldn't. It may be more of a 3* or 4* product taking into account a yearly progression. When you buy something, there's usually a budget involved (however big or small) and for the magazine to compare products within this bracket and to award ratings accordingly makes perfect sense to me as it's the way we decide what to buy. You can then compare within your price range knowing the products you can afford have been rated accordingly. Cheers, Cofnchtr.

Ah but prices change dramatically over time (1 yr ), so a high end player which may seem overpriced and un-affordable at the time i.e Denon 2500 at £950 for a transport ,can now be bought for £499.00 ,far more affordable ,and now in direct competition with say a Pioneer LX52 which is now at exactly the same price .which to me changes the whole ball game.

I use this for comparison , not saying one player is better than the other.

 

[Andrew Everard]

Were the price to change, as opposed to just retailers discounting it hard, we'd take another look at the star rating. But as it is the review does show the price at which it was reviewed, so you should be able to draw some conclusions should you be able to buy it half that price now.

And yes, before anyone says it, we know that having the date prominently displayed on every review would be handy - we're working on it...

 

[Anonymous]

Andrew Everard:

Were the price to change, as opposed to just retailers discounting it hard, we'd take another look at the star rating. But as it is the review does show the price at which it was reviewed, so you should be able to draw some conclusions should you be able to buy it half that price now.

And yes, before anyone says it, we know that having the date prominently displayed on every review would be handy - we're working on it...

Point taken Andrew ,the comment was directed to the poster not WHF, it would be impossible for any Magazine to cover every permutation presented over time.

But the proposed star system if flawed

As it does take the passage of time into account , therefore the discounted pricing should also come into play , this would require a complete review of all the products ,in my view, its never going to happen