The Worlds 30 Best Amps ... Really?

[Mr Steve]

It was interesting to note that the "reference" pre/power used by WHF didn't even feature in the 30 amps listed.

Does this mean that it doesn't actually make the grade or are WHF keeping its "light under a bushel"

More seriously, how were the listed amps selected from all the myriad of possibilities and what was considered but not included (and why).

 

[ID.]

It was interesting to note that the "reference" pre/power used by WHF didn't even feature in the 30 amps listed.

Does this mean that it doesn't actually make the grade or are WHF keeping its "light under a bushel"

More seriously, how were the listed amps selected from all the myriad of possibilities and what was considered but not included (and why).

LOL. Trolled

I think this is the reaction they were looking for. Or trying to stimulate thought and debate...like those harmless threads about how an cables make a difference, etc.

 

[NHL]

Compiled by summer worker.

 

[nopiano]

Ducking your direct question, I would only say that being a reference is not the same as being the best. It is simply something to compare other things with.

Hence some reviewers might choose something like a BBC LS3/5a speaker as a reference, even though it can easily be beaten in most respects. THe WHF team prefer to reach a team consensus which helps eliminate biases, though I guess that might result in an outcome no single person would choose.

 

[Anonymous]

It is pure marketing. Makes people curious. Every audiophile can make his own list. And every outcome will be different.

 

[plastic penguin]

It was interesting to note that the "reference" pre/power used by WHF didn't even feature in the 30 amps listed.

Does this mean that it doesn't actually make the grade or are WHF keeping its "light under a bushel"

More seriously, how were the listed amps selected from all the myriad of possibilities and what was considered but not included (and why).

Where does one find this listing?

 

[nopiano]

Where does one find this listing?

In the latest copy of the mag, pp!

http://www.whathifi.com/news/august-issue-on-sale-today-in-print-and-online

 

[amcluesent]

Well, at least they have an Audio Analogue amp in the hit-parade, but it's not the one I expected!

 

[CnoEvil]

There must be a mistake somewhere....it can only be the top 29 amps, as mine isn't listed! :? :shifty:

 

[plastic penguin]

Where does one find this listing?

In the latest copy of the mag, pp!

http://www.whathifi.com/news/august-issue-on-sale-today-in-print-and-online

S'okay, fine. Didn't realise the 'August' edition was out.

 

[tino]

S'okay, fine. Didn't realise the 'August' edition was out.

Neither would I have done since it is still June according to my calendar :O

 

[tino]

Is the list just a collection of 5* WHF reviews done over the past few months of amps that are still on sale? Yawn.

 

[tino]

Well, at least they have an Audio Analogue amp in the hit-parade, but it's not the one I expected!

Is it the new Fortissimo?

 

[CnoEvil]

Is the list just a collection of 5* WHF reviews done over the past few months of amps that are still on sale? Yawn.

Not quite.

There is the Aesthetix lo Eclipse, Pathos Adrenalin and a £52.7k Burmester (pre/monos)

 

[tino]

Is the list just a collection of 5* WHF reviews done over the past few months of amps that are still on sale? Yawn.

Not quite.

There is the Aesthetix lo Eclipse, Pathos Adrenalin and a £52.7k Burmester (pre/monos)

Looks like all of them were tested in the past few issues ... but couldn't find yours in the WHF archives :?

http://www.whathifi.com/review/aesthetix-io-eclipsehttp://www.whathifi.com/review/pathos-adrenalin-monobloc/http://www.whathifi.com/review/077http://www.whathifi.com/review/911-mk-iii-monoblocs

http://www.whathifi.com/review/aesthetix-io-eclipse

http://www.whathifi.com/review/pathos-adrenalin-monobloc/

http://www.whathifi.com/review/077

http://www.whathifi.com/review/911-mk-iii-monoblocs

 

[CnoEvil]

Looks like all of them were tested in the past few issues ... but couldn't find yours in the WHF archives :?

http://www.whathifi.com/review/aesthetix-io-eclipsehttp://www.whathifi.com/review/pathos-adrenalin-monobloc/http://www.whathifi.com/review/077http://www.whathifi.com/review/911-mk-iii-monoblocs

Looks like you're right....Oh Well!

 

[tino]

Looks like all of them were tested in the past few issues ... but couldn't find yours in the WHF archives :?

http://www.whathifi.com/review/aesthetix-io-eclipsehttp://www.whathifi.com/review/pathos-adrenalin-monobloc/http://www.whathifi.com/review/077http://www.whathifi.com/review/911-mk-iii-monoblocs

Looks like you're right....Oh Well!

Just an observation that's all ... I'm sure you're right that the AMS35i should be in that list

 

[CnoEvil]

Just an observation that's all ... I'm sure you're right that the AMS35i should be in that list

Your observation was spot on, and if I wasn't so knackered (code for tipsy), I would have checked properly.

Re the 35i....at least HFW gave it their award for the best integrated amp.

 

[plastic penguin]

Very disappointed! Just grabbed a copy from the garage and after breezing thru the so-called '30 best amps', and it's mainly made up of current award winners - or potential award winners.

All those pages taken up... and for what? only to duplicate, in the main, what's listed in the classified section. Immensely predictable.

What are the most 'groundbreaking amps'? Which amps really pushed the sonic envelope?

 

[chebby]

Very disappointed! Just grabbed a copy from the garage and after breezing thru the so-called '30 best amps', and it's mainly made up of current award winners - or potential award winners.

Yes, giving awards to amps the review team think are the best is so predictable.

 

[BenLaw]

Very disappointed! Just grabbed a copy from the garage and after breezing thru the so-called '30 best amps', and it's mainly made up of current award winners - or potential award winners.

Yes, giving awards to amps the review team think are the best is so predictable.

I think the point being made is that 'the last 30 amps that manufacturers sent to us that we gave five stars to' is not the same as 'the best 30 amps in the world'. At the end of the day tho it's just a bit of hyperbole.

 

[plastic penguin]

Very disappointed! Just grabbed a copy from the garage and after breezing thru the so-called '30 best amps', and it's mainly made up of current award winners - or potential award winners.

Yes, giving awards to amps the review team think are the best is so predictable.

Not really. I was hoping to see a 'smoking gun' of the hi-fi world. Never materialized.

 

[steve_1979]

Is the list just a collection of 5* WHF reviews done over the past few months of amps that are still on sale? Yawn.

More likely a collection of 5* WHF reviews done over the past few years. The '50 best speakers' artical in last months magazine was very good though. Nothing new but all of the reviews had been reworded so they were still an interesting and enjoyable read.

Hopefully this will be similar. Although this does have that Pathos amp on the front cover...

 

[chebby]

Very disappointed! Just grabbed a copy from the garage and after breezing thru the so-called '30 best amps', and it's mainly made up of current award winners - or potential award winners.

Yes, giving awards to amps the review team think are the best is so predictable.

Not really. I was hoping to see a 'smoking gun' of the hi-fi world. Never materialized.

Which additions to/subtractions from the list would have left you less disappointed?

How would it serve the regular readership if a significant proportion of the "Best 30 amplifiers" had been previously unknown/un-reviewed?

People who may have used the reviews/group test winners/award winners as a guide - to make up shortlists when selecting their own systems - would have found their choices 'flapping in the wind' and could have grumbled "Where did those come from? Why wasn't I told that was the best amp at the time of the review/group-test/awards?"

It would make the magazine review staff look somewhat fickle if the 'Best Of' didn't consist of items they had found to the best in individual reviews, group tests and awards. It would also suggest they aren't respecting their own process. (First test, individual review, group comparison, awards selection etc.)

I reckon WHF? would get far more flack if the list had contained a lot of suprises. Readers could justifiably have said something like... "Where were you hiding that? And why wasn't it reviewed properly before springing it on us as "Best amp for £xxx ?".

 

[plastic penguin]

Very disappointed! Just grabbed a copy from the garage and after breezing thru the so-called '30 best amps', and it's mainly made up of current award winners - or potential award winners.

Yes, giving awards to amps the review team think are the best is so predictable.

Not really. I was hoping to see a 'smoking gun' of the hi-fi world. Never materialized.

Which additions to/subtractions from the list would have left you less disappointed?

How would it serve the regular readership if a significant proportion of the "Best 30 amplifiers" had been previously unknown/un-reviewed?

People who may have used the reviews/group test winners/award winners as a guide - to make up shortlists when selecting their own systems - would have found their choices 'flapping in the wind' and could have grumbled "Where did those come from? Why wasn't I told that was the best amp at the time of the review/group-test/awards?"

It would make the magazine review staff look somewhat fickle if the 'Best Of' didn't consist of items they had found to the best in individual reviews, group tests and awards. It would also suggest they aren't respecting their own process. (First test, individual review, group comparison, awards selection etc.)

I reckon WHF? would get far more flack if the list had contained a lot of suprises. Readers could justifiably have said something like... "Where were you hiding that? And why wasn't it reviewed properly before springing it on us as "Best amp for £xxx ?".

Don't have a gripe with a 'best of', but when they claim 'The WORLD'S 30 best', that's a pretty hefty claim considering the brands or models they haven't tested. Don't get me wrong, I've always been a supporter of WHFI? and their testing methods, and nothing will change in that direction.

Anyway, what's the point of having 'the best of' when they issue the 'Ultimate Guide' every year. I just feel those pages could've used more effectively for other products or ranges, whether it's hi-fi, AV or phones etc etc.