Class D - heaven or hell ?
- Thread starter estreeter
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2001
- Posts
- 4,111
- Likes
- 1,336
Quote:
Atkinson has more journalistic integrity than just about anyone I can think of, and I hold him in the highest regard. Speaking as some one who is familiar with the internal dynamics between sales and editorial, I can tell you there is none. Seriously, I've experienced zero pressure from the sales folks, in fact, they all seem VERY sensitive to the issue and go out of their way not to communicate anything re: advertiser's desires. So much so, in fact, that I sometimes wish the wall between editorial and sales were a little lower so that they'd send folks my way when they've got a product to review. JA has trained the team well.
One of the problems with relating measurements of electronics gear to the subjective listening experience is that the level of distortion and departure from flat response is orders of magnitude lower than they are with headphones, so it's much harder to identify measured artifacts with subjective experience. Speakers do have measured artifacts that are closer in magnitude to headphones, and are more likely to have a strong enough effect that a relationship with subjective experience might be drawn, but there are room interactions that make those conclusions less universal.
While we all have different shaped ears, it seems to me that we're quite lucky in that headphone measurements are, at least in my experience, quite strongly related to subjective experience.
Um ... I like class-D amps. I think they're generally a bargain when well executed.
Atkinson has more journalistic integrity than just about anyone I can think of, and I hold him in the highest regard. Speaking as some one who is familiar with the internal dynamics between sales and editorial, I can tell you there is none. Seriously, I've experienced zero pressure from the sales folks, in fact, they all seem VERY sensitive to the issue and go out of their way not to communicate anything re: advertiser's desires. So much so, in fact, that I sometimes wish the wall between editorial and sales were a little lower so that they'd send folks my way when they've got a product to review. JA has trained the team well.
One of the problems with relating measurements of electronics gear to the subjective listening experience is that the level of distortion and departure from flat response is orders of magnitude lower than they are with headphones, so it's much harder to identify measured artifacts with subjective experience. Speakers do have measured artifacts that are closer in magnitude to headphones, and are more likely to have a strong enough effect that a relationship with subjective experience might be drawn, but there are room interactions that make those conclusions less universal.
While we all have different shaped ears, it seems to me that we're quite lucky in that headphone measurements are, at least in my experience, quite strongly related to subjective experience.
Um ... I like class-D amps. I think they're generally a bargain when well executed.
Steve Eddy
Member of the Trade: The Audio Guild
Aka: TempAccount555
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 6,609
- Likes
- 554
Quote:
I've known John for some 20 years now and can only echo your sentiments and would add that he's also one of the most unflappable people I've ever known.
se
I've known John for some 20 years now and can only echo your sentiments and would add that he's also one of the most unflappable people I've ever known.
se
estreeter
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Posts
- 8,336
- Likes
- 480
All I can suggest is that Mikey Fremer hasnt done Stereophile or JA any favors by making sworn enemies of nutters like Arthur Salvatore, Tyll, I'm sure you've had to ignore email from mentally unbalanced people (and threads like this !)but Fremer took the Salvatore bait hook-line-and-sinker. From his prose, he'd be much happier writing the Letters section for Penthouse than pretending to be an audio journo.
I dont have your insider view of Stereophile, but Martin Colloms might know a thing or two about the industry. Again, you probably have more personal knowledge of the man and his motivations, but I find it interesting that he can be every bit as critical of reviews as Salvatore (without the bile) and still have his submissions accepted by a number of magazines.
http://www.colloms.com/pages/magazine.aspx
The second outcome is a perceived increase in the influence of advertisers on content. Editors will protest that they are well aware of the dangers, that they can resist the pressure, that their advertising department is entirely separated from the editor’s office, but the content of many journals would suggest otherwise. Major advertisers appear to extract undue editorial attention, more news copy, a greater number of reviews and these at more depth. After a third of a century in the business I personally know of a number of occasions where the power of a major advertiser has been brought to bear on freedom of editorial expression. This can take many forms from threats to withdraw advertising revenue, to injunctions to halt the printing, and even lawsuits for claimed damages. Business is business and magazine editorial departments have to tread a fine line. This is where great editors can show their worth. It seems that many editors and contributors are under a tacit agreement not to rock the boat, either that of the audio business in general, and in specific not to imperil their journal. Other more subtle influences may occur.
Contributors, this author included, may enjoy foreign ‘fact finding‘ trips, others may find their attendance at shows, including Japan and the States are paid for by advertisers and show organisers, in return for some report of their sponsor’s activities. Audio journals are by no means alone in this respect.
A very few magazines have made it public policy to try and avoid such influences, though the tendency to play safe in review generally holds while that strong financial dependence on audio manufacturer advertising remains in place.
We do not have to look very far to see the effects on much published review opinion. There is frequently a depressing sameness to the review writing and descriptions, a uniformity of approval for nearly everything, a clear lack of committed discrimination for variations in product character, build quality and objective performance.
I dont have your insider view of Stereophile, but Martin Colloms might know a thing or two about the industry. Again, you probably have more personal knowledge of the man and his motivations, but I find it interesting that he can be every bit as critical of reviews as Salvatore (without the bile) and still have his submissions accepted by a number of magazines.
http://www.colloms.com/pages/magazine.aspx
The second outcome is a perceived increase in the influence of advertisers on content. Editors will protest that they are well aware of the dangers, that they can resist the pressure, that their advertising department is entirely separated from the editor’s office, but the content of many journals would suggest otherwise. Major advertisers appear to extract undue editorial attention, more news copy, a greater number of reviews and these at more depth. After a third of a century in the business I personally know of a number of occasions where the power of a major advertiser has been brought to bear on freedom of editorial expression. This can take many forms from threats to withdraw advertising revenue, to injunctions to halt the printing, and even lawsuits for claimed damages. Business is business and magazine editorial departments have to tread a fine line. This is where great editors can show their worth. It seems that many editors and contributors are under a tacit agreement not to rock the boat, either that of the audio business in general, and in specific not to imperil their journal. Other more subtle influences may occur.
Contributors, this author included, may enjoy foreign ‘fact finding‘ trips, others may find their attendance at shows, including Japan and the States are paid for by advertisers and show organisers, in return for some report of their sponsor’s activities. Audio journals are by no means alone in this respect.
A very few magazines have made it public policy to try and avoid such influences, though the tendency to play safe in review generally holds while that strong financial dependence on audio manufacturer advertising remains in place.
We do not have to look very far to see the effects on much published review opinion. There is frequently a depressing sameness to the review writing and descriptions, a uniformity of approval for nearly everything, a clear lack of committed discrimination for variations in product character, build quality and objective performance.
estreeter
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Posts
- 8,336
- Likes
- 480
Tyll and Steve,
I apologise if that post comes across as inflammatory to either your good selves or the people you know and trust. My point is that the damage is done - we see the high ratio of advertising content to editorial in the magazines and most of us arent completely stupid.
Even if the sole penalty for 'low balling' gear was that the distributors never sent you review samples (as Mike at Headfonia and our own Skylab rapidly discovered), how many could afford the 'cold shoulder' from big name audio ?: You guys hang together, you go to meets together and you chat on the phone together - I get that. No-one wants to see the Michelin Star system where someone can make or break your business overnight - I'd just like to see a little more critical thought displayed in some of the reviews I'm reading. So many sound like exactly the kind of 'advertorial' that Colloms refers to in the link above.
Whether Colloms and Salvatore are irrelevant burnouts or whatever isnt the question here - its whether there really is enough cash in various advertising budgets to support the ever-increasing number of publications, print and online, vying for a slice of the pie. When Srajan admits that his sole source of income is the advertising on various 6Mooons pages, I know its got to have a flow-on effect. You'll forgive me if I check with someone other than the guy out the front before I start drinking the Kool-Aid
estreeter
I apologise if that post comes across as inflammatory to either your good selves or the people you know and trust. My point is that the damage is done - we see the high ratio of advertising content to editorial in the magazines and most of us arent completely stupid.
Even if the sole penalty for 'low balling' gear was that the distributors never sent you review samples (as Mike at Headfonia and our own Skylab rapidly discovered), how many could afford the 'cold shoulder' from big name audio ?: You guys hang together, you go to meets together and you chat on the phone together - I get that. No-one wants to see the Michelin Star system where someone can make or break your business overnight - I'd just like to see a little more critical thought displayed in some of the reviews I'm reading. So many sound like exactly the kind of 'advertorial' that Colloms refers to in the link above.
Whether Colloms and Salvatore are irrelevant burnouts or whatever isnt the question here - its whether there really is enough cash in various advertising budgets to support the ever-increasing number of publications, print and online, vying for a slice of the pie. When Srajan admits that his sole source of income is the advertising on various 6Mooons pages, I know its got to have a flow-on effect. You'll forgive me if I check with someone other than the guy out the front before I start drinking the Kool-Aid
estreeter
estreeter
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Posts
- 8,336
- Likes
- 480
CI is using 5-year old designs - this is the amp that will part the Red Sea ...
http://www.audiophilejournal.com/hypex-ncore-monoblock-amplifiers-mola-mola/
Hmm, about that Kool-Aid, Jim ....
http://www.audiophilejournal.com/hypex-ncore-monoblock-amplifiers-mola-mola/
Hmm, about that Kool-Aid, Jim ....
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2007
- Posts
- 1,944
- Likes
- 40
Quote:
ahem... yeah right. we also see the high ratio of advertising minutes to other "content" on our favorite tv channels (6 to 8 minutes per half hour now, and still rising), and yet we don't seem to dismiss all tv as corrupt, do we? you realize that google searches and gmail are free because they take your information and monetize it - which has not made a lot of people conclude that search is corrupt, that gmail should be avoided?
ahem... yeah right. we also see the high ratio of advertising minutes to other "content" on our favorite tv channels (6 to 8 minutes per half hour now, and still rising), and yet we don't seem to dismiss all tv as corrupt, do we? you realize that google searches and gmail are free because they take your information and monetize it - which has not made a lot of people conclude that search is corrupt, that gmail should be avoided?
DaveBSC
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2009
- Posts
- 3,038
- Likes
- 60
Quote:
Advertising is in everything. Bulgari sponsored a book, under the condition that Bulgari be mentioned at least 12 times inside. You just don't see negative reviews in American Hifi mags anymore. Whenever this is brought up, the editors usually respond that they simply choose not to review products that don't meet their standards, but this "we only review the good" policy has the negative effect of leaving the consumer uninformed.
Further, Stereophile's "Recommended Components" list is basically a joke.
Advertising is in everything. Bulgari sponsored a book, under the condition that Bulgari be mentioned at least 12 times inside. You just don't see negative reviews in American Hifi mags anymore. Whenever this is brought up, the editors usually respond that they simply choose not to review products that don't meet their standards, but this "we only review the good" policy has the negative effect of leaving the consumer uninformed.
Further, Stereophile's "Recommended Components" list is basically a joke.
Steve Eddy
Member of the Trade: The Audio Guild
Aka: TempAccount555
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2003
- Posts
- 6,609
- Likes
- 554
Quote:
Not sure what magazines you're referring to, but when John came on as Stereophile's editor lo these many years ago, he set the editorial/ad ratio to 50/50. I believe that still holds true today.
se
Not sure what magazines you're referring to, but when John came on as Stereophile's editor lo these many years ago, he set the editorial/ad ratio to 50/50. I believe that still holds true today.
se
khaos974
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2008
- Posts
- 2,085
- Likes
- 120
It's also going to be freaking expansive, 6,500€ for the preamp and 10,000€ for the pair of monoblocks.
estreeter: Maybe it hasn't occurred to you, but a reviewer, upon receiving a crap product, can simply tell the maker it was crap and send it back. Noting that I don't generally do reviews (and even now cross-check with others before posting impressions) I wouldn't write a review that trashed a product that was sent to me free by a manufacturer. If it was that bad, I'd tell them and send it back. Even then, I'd be more likely to choose to review something that I suspect to be good, or have heard at least briefly and had positive impressions. Why would anyone want to even write about something that was crap unless it was to say "buyer beware"?
From my experience, meeting with manufacturers encourages people to review their products because those people are interested in what the manufacturer is doing.
I can see how it is easy to believe there is a conspiracy -- the same accusations levelled towards Stereophile are also made towards Head-Fi, but my feeling is that the issue is what I've brought up before -- a greater need, especially among reviewers, to understand how technology works and the reasons for their impressions. However, what many want, which is people to make difinitive judgements on value, is in itself difficult as value is subjective too. Making them just against measurements, which some people think is best, doesn't relate enough to our impressions and level of enjoyment, and we're going around in circles again.
From my experience, meeting with manufacturers encourages people to review their products because those people are interested in what the manufacturer is doing.
I can see how it is easy to believe there is a conspiracy -- the same accusations levelled towards Stereophile are also made towards Head-Fi, but my feeling is that the issue is what I've brought up before -- a greater need, especially among reviewers, to understand how technology works and the reasons for their impressions. However, what many want, which is people to make difinitive judgements on value, is in itself difficult as value is subjective too. Making them just against measurements, which some people think is best, doesn't relate enough to our impressions and level of enjoyment, and we're going around in circles again.
DaveBSC
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2009
- Posts
- 3,038
- Likes
- 60
Quote:
Isn't that sort of the point? How is the buyer to know that a product is complete crap if crap products are simply sent back with no negative words ever appearing on a page? One of the reasons I like IF so much is that Tyll doesn't follow that sort of policy. You'd never see Stereophile slamming something like Edition 10 for example. They'd either not review it, or find some way to praise any good point they can find, and gloss over the rest.
The British Hifi mags are not without fault, but they are definitely better in that regard.
Isn't that sort of the point? How is the buyer to know that a product is complete crap if crap products are simply sent back with no negative words ever appearing on a page? One of the reasons I like IF so much is that Tyll doesn't follow that sort of policy. You'd never see Stereophile slamming something like Edition 10 for example. They'd either not review it, or find some way to praise any good point they can find, and gloss over the rest.
The British Hifi mags are not without fault, but they are definitely better in that regard.
obobskivich
Headphoneus Supremus
I'm not trying to say consumers are mindless, but there's certainly something to the FOTM mentality. When you start to break out of it, you usually step on toes.
estreeter
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Posts
- 8,336
- Likes
- 480
Quote:
I agree with everything up to the part about the Brit Hi-Fi mages. WHF is a joke - other than a few pretty pics, why bother ? - and Colloms is happy to dish the dirt on the others.
Stereophile, for those who dont know, was owned by Petersen Publishing for a large chunk of the 90s, the decade which Salvatore claims the rot really set in. Back in the 80s, I have the displeasure of watching Petersen fill Hot Rod with ads (many of which had nothing to do with hot rodding or even motor vehicles ..) to the point where every second letter to the Editor was a complaint about the ratio of ads to copy. I havent bought a copy of Hot Rod in a very long time, but I expect that its still the same - nice, glossy covers around a mountain of ads.
Petersen owned a swathe of car mags and gradually absorbed other titles - ask yourself if this is the kind of 'stable' thar promotes objectivity and integrity:
Petersen was born in East Los Angeles, California and served in the Army Air Corps in World War II. Starting with Hot Rod Magazine in 1948, he built his publishing empire on automotive-themed publications, including Car Craft, Sports Car Graphic and Motor Trend.[2] He also published CARtoons, Guns & Ammo, Sport, Motorcyclist, Motor Life, Hunting, Mountain Biker, Photographic,Teen, Tiger Beat, and Sassy Magazine.
I know I like to take home a copy of 'Guns and Ammo' with my Tiger Beat and Stereophile subscriptions waiting for me in the postbox. Unless 'Sassy' magazine contains nekkid ladies, I wont be subscribing,
I agree with everything up to the part about the Brit Hi-Fi mages. WHF is a joke - other than a few pretty pics, why bother ? - and Colloms is happy to dish the dirt on the others.
Stereophile, for those who dont know, was owned by Petersen Publishing for a large chunk of the 90s, the decade which Salvatore claims the rot really set in. Back in the 80s, I have the displeasure of watching Petersen fill Hot Rod with ads (many of which had nothing to do with hot rodding or even motor vehicles ..) to the point where every second letter to the Editor was a complaint about the ratio of ads to copy. I havent bought a copy of Hot Rod in a very long time, but I expect that its still the same - nice, glossy covers around a mountain of ads.
Petersen owned a swathe of car mags and gradually absorbed other titles - ask yourself if this is the kind of 'stable' thar promotes objectivity and integrity:
Petersen was born in East Los Angeles, California and served in the Army Air Corps in World War II. Starting with Hot Rod Magazine in 1948, he built his publishing empire on automotive-themed publications, including Car Craft, Sports Car Graphic and Motor Trend.[2] He also published CARtoons, Guns & Ammo, Sport, Motorcyclist, Motor Life, Hunting, Mountain Biker, Photographic,Teen, Tiger Beat, and Sassy Magazine.
I know I like to take home a copy of 'Guns and Ammo' with my Tiger Beat and Stereophile subscriptions waiting for me in the postbox. Unless 'Sassy' magazine contains nekkid ladies, I wont be subscribing,
estreeter
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Posts
- 8,336
- Likes
- 480
Quote:
Interesting - saw a post from a DiYer claiming the modules are basically 'ready to go' out of the box - wire them up and find yourself a case. Given that I cant solder to save myself, this might be an oversimplification.....
2K USD per module - not sure if we are talking identical part numbers though. If that is the case, its less than 5K for two monoblocks you have to assemble yourself - not exactly cheap, but definitely cheaper than the numbers you have listed.
Interesting - saw a post from a DiYer claiming the modules are basically 'ready to go' out of the box - wire them up and find yourself a case. Given that I cant solder to save myself, this might be an oversimplification.....
2K USD per module - not sure if we are talking identical part numbers though. If that is the case, its less than 5K for two monoblocks you have to assemble yourself - not exactly cheap, but definitely cheaper than the numbers you have listed.
Users who are viewing this thread
