What happened to What HiFi & are longer articles unfashionable?

[rbantges]

I've had a quick scan through the forums and haven't found anyone complaining about what seems to have happened to What HiFi over the years. I've recently re-subscribed to the magazine after not really paying much attention to hifi for about a decade. My old copies of What HiFi were dominated by reviews of hifi (tape decks, turntables, speakers, etc.), yet now it seems that the majority of reviews are focussed on AV / cinema kit.

I appreciate that What HiFi is now "What Hifi (Sound and Vision)", and has to appeal to a wider audience to keep circulation numbers up, but have things got that bad that there are very few reviews of good pure hifi equipment? I'm also aware that hifi and home cinema are closely linked, but come on please, let's have more content dedicated to hifi.

Instead of adding a "gaming section" that someone's talking about in the forum, how about sections looking at:
- Portable hifi (e.g. are there any iPod-like players that can actually play music at a very low volume without loads of hiss?)
- Hifi technologies - SACD, CD, DVD audio, new emerging technology?

I don't want to be all moan, moan, moan, as I enjoyed the article on the effect of changing the cabling in this issue on sound quality. It seems that article could have been much more in depth. Surely most readers are capable of contentrating on an article that's more than a 100 words or so?

I used to subscribe to the technology magazine T3, but got so annoyed that the review articles were 99% pictures and 1% kiddy words, that I gave up.

Please, please, please, come on What HiFi remember that there are many words in the English language and plenty of us like to read, and are happy to read thorough in depth articles. "News in brief" style articles are fine also, especially if they're just updates to previous more detailed reviews / articles. I'm not a quick reader, but it would be good to have more than an hours worth of reading in the magazine.

Rich

 

[Messiah]

There have been threads like THIS

 

[Andrew Everard]

And of course we also have daily news here, longer articles such as the NaimUniti review in our blogs channel, and the Ultimate Guides series, which has some major features, such as the in-car piece in the new What Hi-Fi? Sound and Vision Ultimate Guide to High-End Entertainment, along with plenty of reviews of high-end audio and home cinema equipment.

 

[John Duncan]

rbantges:are there any iPod-like players that can actually play music at a very low volume without loads of hiss?

Like an iPod you mean?

 

[GetCarter]

Couldn't agree more about the longer articles, it would seem that writing more than 3-4 short paragraphs on something is beyond most magazines nowadays, it would appear that current culture is for everything to be in bite size, apparently we are all unable to digest more than this or we might get bored! Agree that What Hifi used to be a much better read, there is so little in it nowadays that it barely takes a couple of hours to read the whole lot! That also has to be said of many other magazines, such as T3 you mention, Stuff, FHM and many more, lots of big pictures and little text seem to be the order of the day.

It has to be said that TV is no better, watching something like 5th Gear, Gadget show, Various Property Programmes, we get very little actual programme, but loads of "coming up after the break/later.." and "just before the break/earlier we showed you..." This all means it is cheaper to make the programmes because you need less content for them, which in turns leads to less creativity.

Andrews comment on What Hifi having longer content on the web doesn't do it for me either, on the whole I can't be bothered to read everything online often actually print off online content to read at leisure, I like printed matter, it feels and looks right, and there can be nothing better, and is far more convenient to use/pick up/put down than online content.

Oh dear, seem to be turning into a right old grumpy man on this one!! Bring back the good old days!!!

 

[Anonymous]

Ah, the good old days! When Smash Hits was alive and printed lyrics on paper!

Between WHF, The Ultimate Guide and this site, we write more words about products than ever before. And not just words either - videos and podcasts which shed further light on group tests. Then we're on hand (in person) at Bristol and Manchester shows and online pretty much 24/7.

The articles themselves may initially appear shorter per product, but that's down to the wealth of products and reviews we do - around 60 per issue, compared to an average of 15 elsewhere - ahem. Key products get extra coverage online too. The recent redesign cut out a lot of dead space and does mean you get more copy but we aren't into the idea of 8 page articles on a product you'll never buy or see in the flesh. We'd rather write a feature about the future of hi-fi or how to get the best out of digital music and your hi-fi.

Anyway, it's good to know your thoughts and we do listen - 7,000 of you completed the reader survey and we're always striving to make the magazine and site the best they can be.

 

[simonlewis]

I like it the way it is if articles were longer & there was more words per product there would be less reviews.

 

[Anonymous]

slewis:I like it the way it is if articles were longer & there was more words per product there would be less reviews.

Or there could be more pages to compensate

 

[Anonymous]

Byte:

slewis:I like it the way it is if articles were longer & there was more words per product there would be less reviews.

Or there could be more pages to compensate

And the mag and subscriptions would cost more. Or there'd be more advertising displays. Which in 2009 is kinda hard to achieve I guess. Therefore we just have to accept that it's unlikely to happen. I do, overall, like the revamped layout and new features. Shame there are always a few typos and mistakes here and there (in pretty much every issue unfortunately).

 

[Craig M.]

or they could stop reviewing so much rubbish tat, and do better reviews on decent kit. i hardly ever buy the mag any more as it is usually full of the sort of kit i could buy in argos. and tv's.

 

[Andrew Everard]

But still almost 600 posts? Obviously we have less rubbish tat on the website, then...

 

[Craig M.]

well someones got to try to help the hifi fan....

 

[Andrew Everard]

Which is what we do each and every day on these Forums.

But thanks for slumming it with those who seem to enjoy the magazine - poor Argos-buying, TV-watching wretches that they are...

 

[JamesPianoman]

The mag's great for me; plenty of variety and well backed up by the forums where there're any number of opinions ranging from in-depth and technical to out-of-depth ranting, and loads of people willing to help

 

[Andrew Everard]

Thanks James, good to hear.

 

[Craig M.]

i think the website is great. and i like and trust the reviews. i just wish there was more proper hifi in it. i know it's a well covered topic and i understand the mags desire to reach a wide audience through varied content. i imagine most people know there are other, more hifi orientated mags out there, but i wish whf would cover more because i think you have better facilities to do it then the others, so the moaning is really just a bit of frustration on this topic.

 

[Andrew Everard]

Don't you hate those drivers who don't signal before making a really sharp turn...?

 

[JoelSim]

I'd like more hifi but that's not news.ÿ

I'd also like a 4pp article covering the Unison Research Unico 100 amp, and legal tips on splitting up with the missus as a consequence...

ÿ

 

[Alec]

Richard Melville:

The articles themselves may initially appear shorter per product, but that's down to the wealth of products and reviews we do...

This is hilarious. No, they do not just initially sem shorter. The fact that one then realises they're shorter due to the sheer amount of products being covered doesnt mean they havent got shorter. You're hinting that its some king of optical illusion - it isnt.

Now, the mag did improve in its recent revamp, especially as there are generally a couple things each month i sit and read and chew on before swallowing and burping disinterstedly (faint praise, but still praise). For me, you could still cull a portion of coverage of each or most types of product to make room for even bigger articles; To those of you worrying about losing reviews - do you really care? Is it really true you cant think of anything you'd happily see the back of, even if your not a 2 channel extremist? And im not even suggesting getting rid of entire types of product, just some of each, with maybe the proportions changing a bit.

Finally, the forum is great, and some of the ultimate guides are pretty good (tho im less loyal to them; believe me, i have no need for the ultimate guide to high end), but the OP was talking about the physical, paper magazine.

 

[Alec]

Andrew Everard:Don't you hate those drivers who don't signal before making a really sharp turn...?

Yes but thats irrelevant to Craig's post. His core message is still very much there.

 

[Andrew Everard]

al7478:His core message is still very much there.

Oh, you mean he still thinks the magazine is full of

Craig M.:rubbish tat... the sort of kit i could buy in argos. and tv's.

so he hardly ever buys it any more? But he's still happy to make full use of this website and forum which he doesn't support by doing so?

 

[Anonymous]

There are a few magazines for high end stuff but What Hi-Fi has always been about getting people past the 50 quid music centre.

Too much AV - welcome to the 21st Century. Most people are not interested in anything that plays music that can't be carried in your pocket and anything costing more than 500 quid that is not HD ready and doesn't have built in freeview! Even budget hi-fi shops don't stock hi-fi amps anymore as everyone wants a home cinema. After all it can play music as well can't it?

Still buy an occasional copy for stuff that I can't demo (Cables etc) or to build up a demo list for a change in direction. That said specialised forums (cyrusunofficial for example) are more helpful and of course nothing beats a specialised hi-fi shop where my ears can write the review!

 

[Alec]

Andrew Everard:

al7478:His core message is still very much there.

Oh, you mean he still thinks the magazine is full of

Craig M.:rubbish tat... the sort of kit i could buy in argos. and tv's.

so he hardly ever buys it any more? But he's still happy to make full use of this website and forum which he doesn't support by doing so?

Ive no idea how you think you're making sense now. He made a post slagging of the mags product coverage. He did this in his second post too, albeit in softer terms. Thats consistent - no turn there.

Many people prefer the site to the mag, and they vary in the extent to which they buy the mag. You'll be able to get a pretty good idea of my habbits from one of my above posts - i consider them different animals in many ways but buy the core mag each month - are you going to tell me i shouldnt because ive made some criticisms of it above?.

It isnt a strange turn to read the site but not the mag if you consider one much better than the other; you just consider it morally dubious. Nothing to do with mixed signals.

 

[Craig M.]

cheers al, nice to know some can read without putting their own skewed view on things.

maybe you can point out this sharp turn to me mr e? as i said i think the website and forum are great, why wouldn't i use them? and as for not supporting it, well, if you charged for this website i might pay 'cos it has things that interest me. don't see why i should buy the mag as it usually has very little to interest me. sheesh.

 

[Anonymous]

Al7478 nicely put.

It's important that criticism doesn't simply result in great Cambridge minds going on the immediate defensive. Eloquent and witty put downs don't change the fact that at the start of this thread, a really heart-felt post was made harking back to the days when enthusiast publications went out with less commercialism and noting how the mag has changed. And it has changed. It takes me between 60 and 90 minutes to read the whole thing now. I often wonder whether I've actually learned anything at the end of it. I'm still a fan, but that's not to say I'm a fan of everything you do, today. I've read WHF for years, so you'll have to accept that my affection for the mag, goes back through the years.

Some things have improved, this website for instance, but some things have been dumbed down. I like the mag, but I think it's fair to say, that it could be better. It could be more critical, more in depth and a little less commercially driven. These are only small tweaks, rather than huge direction changes.

Most of the posts in this thread have been constructive and I think we should praise the OP for having the courage to post as he did after a decade away from What Hi-Fi, there's something to celebrate whenever someone picks it up again. I'd concentrate on that and not get all hot and bothered that someone thinks things could be improved upon. Things can always be improved upon! (But in different ways for different readers, which naturally makes it a tough one to respond to).