John Duncan
Well-known member
professorhat:
On sale tomorrow - have sub copies gone out then?
There's one on my desk. I'll tell you what it contains for a small fee*
*joke
On sale tomorrow - have sub copies gone out then?
There's one on my desk. I'll tell you what it contains for a small fee*
*joke
professorhat
Well-known member
Andrew Everard:professorhat:On sale tomorrow - have sub copies gone out then?Yup.
Damn you Royal Mail!
JohnDuncan:professorhat:On sale tomorrow - have sub copies gone out then?
There's one on my desk. I'll tell you what it contains for a small fee*
*joke
Large fee?
Damn you Royal Mail!
JohnDuncan:professorhat:On sale tomorrow - have sub copies gone out then?
There's one on my desk. I'll tell you what it contains for a small fee*
*joke
Large fee?
I think that the WHF have been somewhat brainwashed on the subject of expensive cables. Recently in reponse to a readers problem with signal strength from his Freeview aerial, a cable costing £15 per metre was recommended. Bearing in mind that the distance from the masthead to the TV can be as much as 20 metres, asking some one to fork out £300 for a piece of wire is way over the top. A good quality double screened satellite lead at £1 per metre would give excellent results. Providing the signal strength at the TV end is sufficient for a picture free from blocking and other artifacts, no amount of tweaking with the downlead can make any difference.
TBH I just bought 3 HDMI cables from thatcable, and I was always the one that said how can you see a difference.
I know I saw a difference, becuase I changed the cheap 2 year old 99p one to the new one and the sky menu went from light dull blue to dark vibrant blue.
But I am sticking to my guns, I would not spend 100.00 for a cable. But if I have millions, maybe, just to say I did.
I know I saw a difference, becuase I changed the cheap 2 year old 99p one to the new one and the sky menu went from light dull blue to dark vibrant blue.
But I am sticking to my guns, I would not spend 100.00 for a cable. But if I have millions, maybe, just to say I did.
chudleighpaul:The reason someone is a millionaire is because he wouldn't pay £100 for a short piece of wire!
Or of course because lots of people would.
Or of course because lots of people would.
sonycentre
Well-known member
Well i might just add that other forums/sites may call what-hifi.But as i found out last friday,there is real team spirit/passion for the jobs that these guys n girls do,And if other sites cant get to grips with that then so be it.I had a fantastic time last friday met some really nice people,had some great conversations......we even got to see john duncan eat...lol.....like the scene from robo cop....tastes like baby food lol.
professorhat
Well-known member
plastic penguin
Well-known member
professorhat:
Is this an exclusive scoop that JD eats baby food for lunch?
He dunks his HobNobs in it....lol
Is this an exclusive scoop that JD eats baby food for lunch?
He dunks his HobNobs in it....lol
Readers must believe in the editorial and review independence of a product review magazine. If the reviews are perceived to be biased they are worthless and no one will buy the magazine. Unfortunately advertising revenue makes magazines viable, not the cover price the readers pay. So publishers are selling a product the readership to a customer the advertisers. Publisher are also paid to produce house magazines. Haymarket publishes Sony magazine and some What Hifi staff work on both magazines. So you get phrases like you do not bite the hand that feeds you and he who pays the piper.
Readers are interested in how products look and sound, they are not buying them to measure with test equipment. They also do not want a course in test measuring and how various test results relate to each other and reflect product performance. So What Hifi reviews give expert opinions of product performance but no measured results, facts to validate the opinions given. Unlike facts that need to be disproved, opinions are easy to disagree with.
Reviews and scores are a value for money ratting, they are comparative and change to reflect changes in the market because most readers are shopping with a budget, looking for what products are the best value for money. They do not want to be doing a cost benefit analysis. To further help readers group tests are performed to give readers an idea of how product performance directly compares. Not using a score system purely based on performance but value for money so a five star product can be out performed by a four star product that is worse value for money gives the opportunity for critics. The choice of what products to directly compare in a group test enables some people to complain that product A was excluded so product B could win, or that it was just another opportunity to promote product B. Changing scores as the market changes, so a five star product someone bought drops to a four star, or a product the magazine only gave four stars to goes up to five stars, gives some people more things to complain about.
People buy power cords and hdmi cables and want to know reviewers opinions. If the magazine does not review certain types of products, casual readers looking to buy said products are not going to buy the magazine. Some people believe all digital inter connectors perform the same, some that all speaker cables of adequate gauge perform the same, some that all amplifiers when not clipping perform the same, a few that CD players when level matched perform the same. If you only reviewed products everyone agrees make a difference to performance you could rapidly end up with a very thin magazine. But reviewer credibility is destroyed when they see and hear improvements people think are impossible. If someone thinks it is impossible for power cords or hdmi cables to produce the effects seen and heard by the reviewers then they conclude the reviewers are deluded, incompetent or corrupt
Readers are interested in how products look and sound, they are not buying them to measure with test equipment. They also do not want a course in test measuring and how various test results relate to each other and reflect product performance. So What Hifi reviews give expert opinions of product performance but no measured results, facts to validate the opinions given. Unlike facts that need to be disproved, opinions are easy to disagree with.
Reviews and scores are a value for money ratting, they are comparative and change to reflect changes in the market because most readers are shopping with a budget, looking for what products are the best value for money. They do not want to be doing a cost benefit analysis. To further help readers group tests are performed to give readers an idea of how product performance directly compares. Not using a score system purely based on performance but value for money so a five star product can be out performed by a four star product that is worse value for money gives the opportunity for critics. The choice of what products to directly compare in a group test enables some people to complain that product A was excluded so product B could win, or that it was just another opportunity to promote product B. Changing scores as the market changes, so a five star product someone bought drops to a four star, or a product the magazine only gave four stars to goes up to five stars, gives some people more things to complain about.
People buy power cords and hdmi cables and want to know reviewers opinions. If the magazine does not review certain types of products, casual readers looking to buy said products are not going to buy the magazine. Some people believe all digital inter connectors perform the same, some that all speaker cables of adequate gauge perform the same, some that all amplifiers when not clipping perform the same, a few that CD players when level matched perform the same. If you only reviewed products everyone agrees make a difference to performance you could rapidly end up with a very thin magazine. But reviewer credibility is destroyed when they see and hear improvements people think are impossible. If someone thinks it is impossible for power cords or hdmi cables to produce the effects seen and heard by the reviewers then they conclude the reviewers are deluded, incompetent or corrupt
knightout:Haymarket publishes Sony magazine and some What Hifi staff work on both magazines.
Incorrect on both counts. Sony magazine, which was produced by a different division of the company, also responsible for customer magazines for car companies, the army, a lot of material supporting the London 2012 Olympic bid, Manchester United matchday programmes, etc., ceased publication some time ago.
And as far as I know, Clare contributed a couple of columns, on the state of the market, in its short life, and I contributed an interview with Sony's Chief Distinguished Engineer, about making soba noodles. Neither of us got paid a farthing for the pieces, and neither of us is directly involved in any reviewing of Sony products for WHFSV.
By the way, Sony remains one of the most exasperating companies we have to deal with on a day to day basis when it comes to getting information and/or review samples, despite having both an in-house PR team and a rather expensive celebrity PR company working for it.
Incorrect on both counts. Sony magazine, which was produced by a different division of the company, also responsible for customer magazines for car companies, the army, a lot of material supporting the London 2012 Olympic bid, Manchester United matchday programmes, etc., ceased publication some time ago.
And as far as I know, Clare contributed a couple of columns, on the state of the market, in its short life, and I contributed an interview with Sony's Chief Distinguished Engineer, about making soba noodles. Neither of us got paid a farthing for the pieces, and neither of us is directly involved in any reviewing of Sony products for WHFSV.
By the way, Sony remains one of the most exasperating companies we have to deal with on a day to day basis when it comes to getting information and/or review samples, despite having both an in-house PR team and a rather expensive celebrity PR company working for it.
John Duncan
Well-known member
John Duncan
Well-known member
Well there aren't any Sony ones, as far as I can tell. So dunno how those five-star reviews were all paid for...
We don't have a staff canteen, we have a coffee counter, which also does sandwiches, soup, wraps, stuff like that. And its sushi is rubbish, not to mention more in the California roll style you illustrated above than anything a Japanese would recognise as sushi.
Its all tosh. When you are popular people are jealous, these same small minded people invent hob *** stories to make themselves feel better.
Well done WHF on producing an informed, well rounded and unbiased publication.
Well done WHF on producing an informed, well rounded and unbiased publication.
Well as far as i am concerned i have always referred to WHF for all my AV and Hifi gear and up to now its all paid off, everything i have purchased is excellent and i am very happy.
Well Done WHF keep up the GOOD WORK i wouldnt know what i would have done without your Honest advise ;-)
Well Done WHF keep up the GOOD WORK i wouldnt know what i would have done without your Honest advise ;-)
John Duncan
Well-known member
True Blue:these same small minded people invent hob *** stories to make themselves feel better.
Hob Nobs make me feel better, certainly.
Hob Nobs make me feel better, certainly.
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Integrated amplifier with HDMI arc and self turning on on Optical input
- Started by sirfabio
- Replies: 2
-
-
Is hi-fi really getting better? Our technical editor ponders its progression- Started by What Hi-Fi?
- Replies: 16
-
-
Remote Control not able to access alpha letters only numbers Help please?
- Started by AntH
- Replies: 3
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram