I think the problem lies with the headline, which gives a certain expectation that there might have been a couple of surprises, which WHF had up their sleeve to give the article a little more spice .
Meh, so what if they've just listed the top rated, 5 Star amps?
I quite agree with WHF with their 5 star ratings on the whole and they've done a great job.
All ratings and reviews are opinions, and in this case it is WHF who are letting the world know what they think are the top 30. Obviously there is so much choice out there, but this is their countdown,
I quite agree with WHF with their 5 star ratings on the whole and they've done a great job.
All ratings and reviews are opinions, and in this case it is WHF who are letting the world know what they think are the top 30. Obviously there is so much choice out there, but this is their countdown,
Well in the past two months they have done the top # speakers and the top # amps, and in both editions my amp and speakers have been featured... Wonder if I can do the triple....
That must mean I'm a sheep, or just very average, or insane to have spent so much money on a passive set up ;-)
That must mean I'm a sheep, or just very average, or insane to have spent so much money on a passive set up ;-)
Al ears
Well-known member
- Nov 23, 2008
- 12,158
- 6,969
- 56,570
plastic penguin said:
I quite agree.
Perhaps it should have been headlined as "Some of the better amplifiers that What HiFi has reviewed"!
Not a single Tom Evans Audio amp listed I bet.
(I'm away at sea so haven't read the mag yet! - Don't think I'll bother now.
plastic penguin
Well-known member
- Apr 28, 2008
- 6,494
- 3,100
- 36,570
Another quick puzzle.
The Lavardin featured I believe, although could be wrong, was only reviewed in the 'Temptation' section about 18 months or so back. As far as I'm aware it has never been put in a supertest with other price compatible amps, yet WHFI? claim it is "one of the most musically compelling amp we've come across at the price". That's all well and good, but has it been tested against others? If it hasn't how have they come to this conclusion?
The Lavardin featured I believe, although could be wrong, was only reviewed in the 'Temptation' section about 18 months or so back. As far as I'm aware it has never been put in a supertest with other price compatible amps, yet WHFI? claim it is "one of the most musically compelling amp we've come across at the price". That's all well and good, but has it been tested against others? If it hasn't how have they come to this conclusion?
plastic penguin said:
Maybe because it's one of the most musically compelling amps they've come across at that price?
I get your frustration, there have been issues which I've felt haven't done what it said on the tin, but it's just the way of it. I had a notion for a packet of Skittles the other day and I didn't actually taste a Rainbow, mainly just sugar and chemicals, but hey ho!
They should atleast find a method of categorising which surves a purpose.
I understand its a consensus view, but its simply not detailed enough.
Its full of loaded words which dependent upon your understanding of what can be described as slang.
The only indication we get of its musical quality is through references of these words (if you understand them) besides an artist or hopefully even a track name.
How about categorising review content (hifi inparticular) by music genre's-which is much more rich then lets say type of visual input into a television review. So for example-music genre as a consensus, then judge it by price. This would also make your yearly awards more credible.
Just taking the issue of amplifiers, it cant be so simple.
What do you guys do over there I mean. It seems as though all that experience goes to waste in a few paragraphs of gobbledy-goop.
You guys are plain lazy.
Not to mention the fact that 5 star products of a bygone age (even after being almost childishly categorised) are all listed together.
I mean what do you do over there?
Ever heard of scientific isolation of parameters? Even if such issues are subjective to experience.
I'd like to hear your response to this.!!!!!!
I understand its a consensus view, but its simply not detailed enough.
Its full of loaded words which dependent upon your understanding of what can be described as slang.
The only indication we get of its musical quality is through references of these words (if you understand them) besides an artist or hopefully even a track name.
How about categorising review content (hifi inparticular) by music genre's-which is much more rich then lets say type of visual input into a television review. So for example-music genre as a consensus, then judge it by price. This would also make your yearly awards more credible.
Just taking the issue of amplifiers, it cant be so simple.
What do you guys do over there I mean. It seems as though all that experience goes to waste in a few paragraphs of gobbledy-goop.
You guys are plain lazy.
Not to mention the fact that 5 star products of a bygone age (even after being almost childishly categorised) are all listed together.
I mean what do you do over there?
Ever heard of scientific isolation of parameters? Even if such issues are subjective to experience.
I'd like to hear your response to this.!!!!!!
Also, dont you understand the market for reviews is going to get more competitive with the internet.
I mean when the reader picks it up, they want to know detail, there are few places to audition items yourselves nowadays as it is.
They (ideally) want to know what the item is going to be like when setup in there environment. I know you cant provide this level of detail, Im not asking you to have philosophies of mind embedded in your reviews.
But putting (just a little I think) thought into your reviews and categorising the experience somewhat better, and yes with more detail saves the reader much time. Otherwise whats the point except the adverts in the magazine.
This shouldnt be something groundbreaking in suggestion to you.
People dont have the time (or even money) to experiment with vast amounts of equipment as you do. So eliminating certain products is a must. There is no point claiming that your articles are artistic talent which justifies lack of quantity when you should have certain or minimum guidelines to go by.
I agree its all marketing.
Hey maybe with the internet, there may come about certain sites which actually achieve what I have outlined.
I think there is much demand for this...
I mean when the reader picks it up, they want to know detail, there are few places to audition items yourselves nowadays as it is.
They (ideally) want to know what the item is going to be like when setup in there environment. I know you cant provide this level of detail, Im not asking you to have philosophies of mind embedded in your reviews.
But putting (just a little I think) thought into your reviews and categorising the experience somewhat better, and yes with more detail saves the reader much time. Otherwise whats the point except the adverts in the magazine.
This shouldnt be something groundbreaking in suggestion to you.
People dont have the time (or even money) to experiment with vast amounts of equipment as you do. So eliminating certain products is a must. There is no point claiming that your articles are artistic talent which justifies lack of quantity when you should have certain or minimum guidelines to go by.
I agree its all marketing.
Hey maybe with the internet, there may come about certain sites which actually achieve what I have outlined.
I think there is much demand for this...
Why are you here? Why are any of you lot here? You hate the mag so much, yet you spend all your time on this forum? That's beyond hypocritical, it's just odd, makes no sense whatsoever!
I don't like carrots, I know, I'll spend 12 hours a day on the carrot forum, there's a good idea!
Idiots.
I don't like carrots, I know, I'll spend 12 hours a day on the carrot forum, there's a good idea!
Idiots.
The Worlds 30 best Amps without the pioneer a300x getting a mention in despatches ? it's flawed i'm telling you.
matthewpiano
Well-known member
- Nov 23, 2007
- 494
- 332
- 19,270
Andrew Everard said:
...and I would imagine the A400 would probably beat the A300X to it anyway...
Was said tongue in cheek andrew, my first post probably best my last if that is what happens ;-)
Have you heard the a400 vs a300x ? I only had the a300x but i'm sure there were some who viewed the a300x quite capable o ver the a400 ? all a matter of personal taste really.;-)
billh1 said:
Sorry, I was merely clarifying...
billh1 said:
Certainly the A-300R Precision model, which took on board some of the aftermarket 'tweaks' Tom Evans was doing to standard A-400 and A-300 models of the time, was IMO a rather good amplifier for the money.
If you can find one of those, or an A-400GTE – which occasionally crop up sold at bargain prices by owners who don't know what they're all about – it'd be a good buy.
Native_bon
Well-known member
- Nov 26, 2008
- 182
- 5
- 18,595
I wish Whathifi would allow the pulic to some of thier review processes, & conditions under which these reviews take place.
I think that would help & satisfy a lot of people. Do a draw or something, & whoever wins gets to see & hear what the reviewers hear.. That would tell a lot. May be then people may have more faith..?.. or not... What do you think?
I think that would help & satisfy a lot of people. Do a draw or something, & whoever wins gets to see & hear what the reviewers hear.. That would tell a lot. May be then people may have more faith..?.. or not... What do you think?
The_Lhc said:
Someone in the government please give this person a job in the diplomatic corps. Then it could be posted to a world 'hot spot' so we could have another world war. Unemployment cut at a stroke and much more to worry about than some list of amplifiers.
:help:
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram