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 _