Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › What Hifi Magazine - The Big Question, blind testing.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What Hifi Magazine - The Big Question, blind testing. - Page 3

post #31 of 39
The problem for me is that the WHF reviews are too sketchy. Personally, I want to see some proper lab measurements of the equipment as well as an in-depth review, not just a quick listen. Also, they tend to focus on the budget end of hi-fi which isn't where my interest lies.

Agree that they are no more susceptible to bias arising from advertising revenues than others since they are a big publication (perhaps the only obvious case I've detected was with Hi-Fi+ magazine and Nordost). Nevertheless, I don't really understand why Grado and Apple for example continue to sweep the boards at all levels given the strength of competition elsewhere. Regards Sony and the AV area, I have seen a lot of comments on AVforums complaining about a perceived bias so rightly or wrongly there is some feeling it exists.

Anyways, just my 2c. Cheers.
post #32 of 39
This review in particular really bugs me.

NAD C326BEE amplifier review Hi-fi amplifier review - from the experts at whathifi.com

For
Good build and value; nice remote; dynamic and musical performance
Against
Will get found out if you try partnering it with higher-end kit

The more I think about it, the more the statement 'Will get found out if you try partnering it with higher-end kit' is just garbage. An oxymoron statement with not much oxy and plenty of moron. And I also really hate the way they consistently use the word 'kit' in the context of a Hi Fi system.
post #33 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shark_Jump View Post
This review in particular really bugs me.

NAD C326BEE amplifier review Hi-fi amplifier review - from the experts at whathifi.com

For
Good build and value; nice remote; dynamic and musical performance
Against
Will get found out if you try partnering it with higher-end kit

The more I think about it, the more the statement 'Will get found out if you try partnering it with higher-end kit' is just garbage. An oxymoron statement with not much oxy and plenty of moron.
Just standard issue hifi mag magical thinking I am afraid..

Some deconstruction from their review...


Quote:
Instantly engaging
What exactly does this mean ? What electrical property is responsible for this ?

Quote:
Fluidity and timing
What exactly does this mean ?

Quote:
Our first instinct is to praise the NAD's excellent timing. Drums hit with punch and precision, while bass notes are fluent and articulate.
Fluent ? Articulate ?

Quote:
the NAD knows instinctively when to keep the reigns tight and when to give a little more slack, allowing for dynamic power and excitement while at the same time delivering a solid, cohesive, flowing yet controlled sound.
Clever little amp !

Quote:
the midrange is solid, revealing and muscular when required.
Muscular ?

Quote:
the NAD is perfectly capable of delivering depth and weight without sacrificing agility or speed.
.

Agility ? Speed ?

Quote:
But if you keep your partnering speakers below the £500 mark you'll find this amp to be nigh-on faultless
So somehow if you tried to use a pair of £800 speakers it would all fall apart, there is no explanation for how this could be , what electrical property a pair of £800 speakers might have that a £500 pair must lack.

I have no gripe with NAD, I still have an old NAD amp.
post #34 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shark_Jump View Post
And I also really hate the way they consistently use the word 'kit' in the context of a Hi Fi system.
I always thought that was a British thing. Like buggery.
post #35 of 39
Thread Starter 
In the UK going to your dealer to buy more kit means you are an audiophile or a heroin addict.
post #36 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_charles View Post
Just standard issue hifi mag magical thinking I am afraid..

Some deconstruction from their review...




What exactly does this mean ? What electrical property is responsible for this ?



What exactly does this mean ?



Fluent ? Articulate ?



Clever little amp !



Muscular ?

.

Agility ? Speed ?



So somehow if you tried to use a pair of £800 speakers it would all fall apart, there is no explanation for how this could be , what electrical property a pair of £800 speakers might have that a £500 pair must lack.

I have no gripe with NAD, I still have an old NAD amp.
As you say typical hifi mag speak, or the same as you find on hifi forums, or even the attempts to describe taste when tasting wine. I am sorry but you being deliberately obtuse here. There is a very good thread on definitions somewhere on this forum.
post #37 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post
As you say typical hifi mag speak, or the same as you find on hifi forums, or even the attempts to describe taste when tasting wine. I am sorry but you being deliberately obtuse here. There is a very good thread on definitions somewhere on this forum.
Deliberately difficult I grant you , but there was a serious point about questioning the utility of metaphorical thinking, for instance what is a "muscular midrange" ?
post #38 of 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_charles View Post
Deliberately difficult I grant you , but there was a serious point about questioning the utility of metaphorical thinking, for instance what is a "muscular midrange" ?
I'm guessing one with a forward quality that produces good texture and micro-detail. Y'know, one that growls with the right guitar distortion. Sometimes hearing a midrange like that makes me think "authoritative", "sinewy", or even "muscular".

Though when I read them describe it like that, I couldn't help but imagine a Grado with beefy flesh-colored arms protruding from the backside of the cups.
post #39 of 39
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nick_charles View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man View Post
As you say typical hifi mag speak, or the same as you find on hifi forums, or even the attempts to describe taste when tasting wine. I am sorry but you being deliberately obtuse here. There is a very good thread on definitions somewhere on this forum.
Deliberately difficult I grant you , but there was a serious point about questioning the utility of metaphorical thinking, for instance what is a "muscular midrange" ?


That the midrange is dynamic and has an emphasis to it.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › What Hifi Magazine - The Big Question, blind testing.