What happened to What HiFi & are longer articles unfashionable?

[laserman16]

angelface59: 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?

Of course some people don't have the space or the finances for both options so an A.V. amp for some people is the best option that they have available for their needs.

 

[Clare Newsome]

All feedback, as ever, gratefully received (and I genuinely mean that - for example, we added in more features in the new look as a direct response to Forum requests for them).

Just a couple of comments re Will's post. You have to remember that it's not just the magazine that's changed over the years, but your own knowledge and needs.

What Hi-fi? Sound and Vision (What Hi-fi? that was, pre-2001) has always been a mainstream buyer's guide designed to help people pick the best-value products for their set-up, and to put those products in context.

However, as your knowledge and budget increases, and you head to ever-more specialist, ever-pricier kit, the number of products available to you - and us, to review - decrease. Yes, there's still plenty - maybe more! - to talk about, but not disproportionately within the bounds of a magazine designed to appeal to as many people as possible.

That's what we try to offer both within dedicated publications such as our Ultimate Guides, plus of course this website - as well as being first, for example, to review high-end gear such as the Arcam AVR-600 in the main magazine.

We'd love - and plan - to offer longer reviews, but at the moment would rather spend more time testing and less time writing, and in these recessionary times are unlikely to get the extra resources needed to change that in the short-term.

However, that commercial bent you mention - by which, I hope, you merely mean our mass-market appeal; there's no other agenda - means we're in much better shape than our rivals to have the team and testing resources needed to produce a guaranteed level of reviews, news and website presence.

Hope all of this helps - always happy to talk about where we're at!

 

[Anonymous]

Very well said Clare. Nice post. And yes, you pretty much got the right end of the stick. On mass market / commercialism, I was referring equally to the majority of the kit that's reviewed being fairly mainstream and equally the appeal of the mag being fairly mainstream - where the biggest readership sits. You are all things to all people so will naturally be subject to limitations as you said so clearly.

Thanks for a balanced and welcoming post. As usual from you! (With the odd exception, where doubtless I'd been a bit unfair and hence took a bullet!) LOL.

 

[Andrew Everard]

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.

Let's try one minute the magazine is full of 'cheap tat' you hardly read it, next minute the reviews are quite good. No change in attitude there then...

Oh and Will?

Will Harris:
It's important that criticism doesn't simply result in great Cambridge minds going on the immediate defensive.

Good to see you've still not lost the ability when it comes to the sneering cheap shot. But congrats on not mentioning the word Oppo for one entire post...

 

[Craig M.]

Andrew Everard: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.

Let's try one minute the magazine is full of 'cheap tat' you hardly read it, next minute the reviews are quite good. No change in attitude there then...

Oh and Will?

Will Harris:
It's important that criticism doesn't simply result in great Cambridge minds going on the immediate defensive.

Good to see you've still not lost the ability when it comes to the sneering cheap shot. But congrats on not mentioning the word Oppo for one entire post...

no, i haven't changed my attitude. i don't see what is so hard to understand about my post, i like the way the mag reviews products - you know, the team of the same reviewers and dedicated facilities, what i don't often like is the products you review.

 

[Alec]

All of that does help.

Cheers Clare.

And a perfectly fair point about the financial times. not, like, the paper, the economic climate, i mean.

The point about commerciality (admitedly very useful to you and us in the ways you mention) is a bit of a rock and a hard place scenario isnt it?

 

[Alec]

Craig M.:

no, i haven't changed my attitude. i don't see what is so hard to understand about my post, i like the way the mag reviews products - you know, the team of the same reviewers and dedicated facilities, what i don't often like is the products you review.

Simples!

 

[Anonymous]

.