New Stereophile Headphone Amp Review! - Page 4

Claude,

I have read the threads and simply put if people do not like something in a magazine they should say it once - or twice - and simply move on. The rantings and ravings in those threads tell me far more of the mental balance - or lack of - in the case of a few of the posters - than any alleged incestuous relationship that Stereophile may or may not have with Musical Fidelity.

One thing having a hobby but this obsessive continual posting on the same thread over and over again appears to me to be a sign of some clinical problem. If someone does not like something? Fine, don't buy the damn magazine which is apparently a source of huge mental pain!

Peter

A fair question would be "Can you find fault with the actual reviews?" Have you read a review of a Musical Fidelity product that you've spent substantial time with in a quality system that made you say "No way, that review was *way* too positive"?

The gear Musical Fidelity has been releasing over the past few years has been pretty impressive. Have they released a bad product recently?

Not to mention that I can think of a few manufacturers that spend as much or more more money on Stereophile ads that aren't reviewed as often, or as favorably.


But more to the point, the editor of Stereophile responded a few months ago to these very accusations. He said that most of the stuff Stereophile reviews gets very good reviews because they don't want to waste pages on bad stuff. He also said that the nature of reviewing products is that you review (a) what equipment you can get; (b) what gear is "known" to you; (c) what gear your reviewers want to review; and (d) what gear your readers want to read about. Musical Fidelity is a *big* name in high-end audio, people want to know about their stuff, reviewers want to listen to it, etc.

I think the whole "good reviews for ads" theory is way overblown.

You are right, Musical Fidelity is a big name in the industry and readers want to see their products reviewed. But MF is not the only important maker of electronics and the extremely favourable treatment they get from Stereophile seems WAY OVER THE TOP for many.

A new MF product gets reviewed instantly by Stereophile, like computer magazines wanting to be the first to report on a new Windows version.

In the Stereophile classifications, Musical Fidelity amplifiers receive sensational rankings. All other "Class A" amps cost at least twice the price.

The uninformed Stereophile reader will think that Musical Fidelity is the undisputed leader of the highend electronics market. Of course the reality is different. MF makes excellent products, but they are facing tough competition and their products are not always the best for the price.

So my recommendation is: read the Stereophile review of the X-Cans v3, but keep in mind that when it comes to Musical Fidelity Stereophile is biased, so don't take your buying decisions based on their reviews only.

I know John Atkinson and he is meticulous about being fair. (It was something we touched on when discussing a job offer he had made to me; I turned it down, and the position went to Robert Harley several months later). He asked how I would deal with the prospect of giving a bad review on a product if i were friends with the manufacturer. This is what bothered him about the job -- he had lost friends after giving honest reviews that were somewhat negative. This perplexed and hurt him, but he was undeterred, and wanted to make sure that I would be able to handle it. We agreed that the truth is the truth, and friends who cut you off for such reasons weren't really friends anyway.

I don't think advertisers have any influence over the magazine's contents, other than the fact that the magazine's size each month is determined by the total number of advertising pages. More advertising means they can afford to make a thicker issue.

John wrote on Audio Asylum that Musical Fidelity sends them units for review without being asked, and that they introduce new models frequently even though older ones are still selling well. This results in lots of MF reviews. Also, reviewers find the products enjoyable for the most part, so the products are high on their short list of items to write about. But if you count the number of reviews over the period during which they are accused of favoring MF, it is something like a 3 percent of the total reviews. Hardly scandalous.

As for the X-Can "review," it is a short mention by Tom Gillette in his rambling column, with barely a whole sentence on sound quality. Hardly worth mentioning.

Noticed some UK audio mag detractors in this thread, but I thought this might be informative to say the least. Today in the local Barnes&Noble store I got the January 2004 issue of What HiFi (I should mention I do like this magazine). In this issue they have a short review of the XCan v3 and another head amp which I had never heard of before, the Pro-Ject Head Box. Both ended up with 4 stars. According to What Hi Fi, the 5 stars "Leading Rivals" of the reviewed amps are the Creek OBH-21SE, and the Sudgen Headmaster.

Cheers,
Raul