Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxr.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!ihuxr!rayjay
From: rayjay@ihuxr.UUCP (john wray)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Audio Mags
Message-ID: <1118@ihuxr.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 14-Jun-84 10:48:38 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxr.1118
Posted: Thu Jun 14 10:48:38 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 15-Jun-84 00:45:33 EDT
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 30


Whereas I think the latest batch of complaints are legitimate concerning
Stereo Review and High Fidelity, I still have to chuckle abit. In High
Fidelity's case, they ceased to be a serious source of audio info about
five or six years ago when they had their last large formatting change.
Stereo Review, by featuring so much video crap, is now showing it's true
colors, ie. nothing more than an advertising vehicle for manufacturers.
Their so-called reviews of epquipment were nothing more than a four page review
of the manufacturers spec sheet and one paragraph of "listening" comments.
Since virtually all of the tested equipment met their published specs, it
was useless to read anything but the "listening" info, and one paragraph
is a woefully small amount of information.

Having been almost completely negative in my comments, I think I will
totally reverse myself and say that I will continue my subscription to
Stereo Review mainly because its only 5 bucks a year.  The cartoons &
the bulletin page are almost worth the subscription price alone.

If you want to read reviews of equipment written by people who are truly
concerned with the product and not with pleasing their advertisers, I 
would suggest reading:

1) Absolute Sound - These guys are sometimes too far out but NEVER dull

2) Senible Sound - Concerned about good audio for low bucks

3) Stereophile - G. Gordon Holt is a level-headed reviewer 

              
                                                   - Rayjay _