How do you rate Stereophile's reviews and ratings of headphones & headphone amplifiers?

[AdamCalifornia]

Your confidentiality is guaranteed - when you vote your name will not be displayed.
The lowest mark is 0.5 and the highest 5.0

What do you think about Stereophile's
(a) reviews
(b) ratings
of headphones, headphone amplifiers and headphones accessories (PSUs, etc.).

Where is a better place on this planet than Head-Fi.org to ask this question?

*************************************************

Here are their current ratings.


Stereophile April 2007

Recommended Components
Headphones & Headphone Accessories

A
AKG K-701
Benchmark Media System DAC1, DAC1 USB
Grace Design m902
HeadRoom Desktop
Ray Samuels Audio Emmeline II The Raptor
RudiStor RPX-33 mk2
Sennheiser HD 650
Sennheiser HD 600
Shure SE530
Stax SRS-007II Omega II System
Ultimate Ears UE 10
Ultimate Ears UE 5
Ultrasone Edition 9

B
Cayin HA-1A
Channel Islands Audio VHP-2
Future Sonic Atrio Series
Grado SR325i
Grado SR125
Ray Samuels Audio Emmeline SR-71
Ray Samuels Audio Emmeline The Hornet
Ultrasone PROline 2500

C
Goldring DR 100
Goldring DR 150
Grado SR60
HeadRoom Total BitHead

No class distinction: Westone UM56 custom earmolds

Deletions:
Musical Fidelity X-Can V.3 replaced by a new model.
Sugden HeadMaster not auditioned in a long time

*************************************************

Description
(From Stereophile)

Components listed here have been formally reviewed in Stereophile and have been found to be
among the best available in each of four or five quality classes. Whether a component is listed
in Class A or Class E, we highly recommend its purchase.
....
Class A
Best attainable sound for a component of its kind, almost without practical considerations;
"the least musical compromise". A Class A system is one for which you don't have to make
a leap of faith to believe that you're hearing the real thing. ....

Class B
The next best thing to the very best sound reproduction; Class B components generally cost
less than those in Class A, but most class B components are still quite expensive.

Class C
Somewhat lower-fi sound, but far more musically natural than average home-component high fidelity;
products in this class are of high quality but still affordable.

Class D
Satisfying musical sound, but these components are either of significantly lower fidelity than
the best available, or exhibit major compromises in performance - limited dynamic range, for example. ...

Class E
Applying only to loudspeakers, this "Entry Level" classification ...

Class K
"Keep your eye on this product." Class K is for components that we have not reviewed
(or have not finished testing), but that we have reason to believe may be excellent performers...

*************************************************


Have Fun!

P.S.

For comparison

October 2007
A
.....
Musical Fidelity X-Can V.3
Sugden HeadMaster
........

Deletions:
Sennheiser HD 580, Shure E3c, E4, E5c all "no longer available".


April 2007
.....
B
Sennheiser HD 580
Shure E4
......


October 2006

headphones and headphone apms

.....
Deletions: AKG K-1000 discontinued


April 2006

A
AKG K-1000
....

 

[ecclesand]

Look, Ma! It's another AdamCalifornia poll!!!

I like reading stereophile. As for the reviews and ratings, it's just like here...take it with a grain of salt.

 

[PITTM]

I always feel like these places are only going to keep receiving products to review if they give good reviews and therefore give better reviews than they should. That being said, that is a really spot on list imo.

1 question: wheres the beyers? dt880s are like my 2nd or 3rd favorite phone ever.

 

[AdamCalifornia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PITTM /img/forum/go_quote.gif I always feel like these places are only going to keep receiving products to review if they give good reviews and therefore give better reviews than they should. That being said, that is a really spot on list imo. 1 question: wheres the beyers? dt880s are like my 2nd or 3rd favorite phone ever.

Regarding your question:

Quote:

"wheres the beyers? dt880s are like my 2nd or 3rd favorite phone ever."

I have already (implicitly) mentioned this in my original post in the P.S. :

Stereophile 500 Recommended Components: Headphones (New DT880s/DT990s Are Missing!)

By the way, I own Beyerdynamics's DT 880s.

 

[Duggeh]

Where's the poll option for not giving a crap?

 

[dgbiker1]

I be only reading certain reviews, but it seems as if every time I read a review on stereophile the product is the best thing since sliced bread. The only ratings that have any meaning now are their year's best lists, otherwise the site is worthless to me.

 

[AdamCalifornia]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgbiker1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I be only reading certain reviews, but it seems as if every time I read a review on stereophile the product is the best thing since sliced bread. The only ratings that have any meaning now are their year's best lists, otherwise the site is worthless to me.

I agree with you.

For those of you who don't read (or browse through) Stereophile here are their reviews.

I hope that this link will be useful to some of you.

 

[ethebull]

Headphones are a serious afterthought for Stereophile. How many HP amps have they reviewed in the last five years? Three maybe? Kinda like going by a food critic who's eaten in 6 restaurants.

 

[Uncle Erik]

A very large grain of salt is needed.

They overrate some gear I think is garbage (I'm not saying which) and have tons of wonderful gear completely missing. Where is the DT880 or RS-1? They don't merit even a C rating?

In defense, however, I am glad they pay attention to the headphone market. And I do subscribe to Stereophile and plan to continue. I think their editorial policy is to only print reviews of gear they like. That's why the reviews are always positive, though people don't realize that plenty of gear is evaluated and doesn't make the cut. I agree with the policy - if you can't say something nice....

Also, I value Stereophile's music reviews. The staff has good taste (IMHO) and they've turned me on to some great music.

 

[Lazarus Short]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think their editorial policy is to only print reviews of gear they like. That's why the reviews are always positive, though people don't realize that plenty of gear is evaluated and doesn't make the cut.

On the other hand, Consumer Reports accepts no advertising, and that gives them the latitude to decry the bad stuff. In their auto issue, they even go so far as to post a list of used cars to avoid, at least they used to. Very refreshing. I stopped reading Stereophile a long time ago. Can you even picture an "Audio Products to Avoid" list in that magazine?

Laz

 

[krmathis]

Don't trust them at all...

 

[audiomagnate]

I think their reviews have great pace and rhythm. But seriously, it was a great rag before they started taking ads and before JGH threw in the towel.

 

[AdamCalifornia]

It's interesting to see what is the weighted mean of the points:
0.5, 1.0, .... , 4.5, 5.0

I calculated it yesterday for 38 votes. Today I see that there's only one more vote at "1.5".
The weights here are (were) the percentages: 2.63%, 2.63%, ... 1.42%, 13.16%.

As of yesterday (38 votes) the weighted mean was:
(5.0 * 2.63 + 4.5 * 2.63 + 4.0 * 15.79 + 3.5 * 2.63 + 3.0 * 13.16 + .... + 0.5 * 13.16) / 100 = 2.32

So average (more precisely: the weighted mean) score was: 2.32

Today, having 39 votes and one extra mark "1.5" the weighted mean must be
a little lower, say, about "2.28".

P.S.
For the formula of the weighted mean see
here