[leofahrer]

Today I was once again sitting in the bathroom and happened to compare an older copy of "stereoplay" - a german hifi magazin - with a current one. Stereoplay is one of the more serious magazins, I have to say, but I always had the feeling that they naturally had to rate newer products better than older ones, just to give people a reason and kind of a "stimulation" to buy new stuff. But I guess I should better come to the point: I found that back in 1994 they gave the good old Grado HP-1 the same rating (48 points) that today the SR325 has (NOT the 325i, but the old version!). The RS-2 gets 51 points and the RS-1 52.

Well, I've never had the honor to try a HP-1, but from reading all the posts down here, I guess it should maybe just be the other way around: The HP-1 should have at least as many points as the RS-1, maybe even a few more.

So: What do you say? Isn't that a proof that the ratings kind of "drift" over the years? It's an experience I also made with speakers - even not considering different tastes in sound, older speakers with quite a bad rating (like mine

) do not have to sound worse than newer ones with a good rating.

All HP-1 owners who also heard RS-1 and SR325: Now it's your turn

 

[EdipisReks]

well, i think the HP1000s are significantly better than the RS-1 (though not necessarily as fun), and i think the RS-1s are way better than the SR-325. with anything as subjective as audio, numerical ratings don't mean a whole hell of a lot.

 

[leofahrer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdipisReks with anything as subjective as audio, numerical ratings don't mean a whole hell of a lot.

...that's so true!! But I never happened to recognize such a clear evidence! I mean: This just can't be! And so many people rely on those numbers...

 

[VR6ofpain]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leofahrer ...that's so true!! But I never happened to recognize such a clear evidence! I mean: This just can't be! And so many people rely on those numbers...

I think that is the reason why Stereophile hated the linkes of Stereo Review, since they used the numbers game to rate products...though I liked it quite a bit....more helpful then the Stereophile rating system. Though all of this is only necessary when you absolutely have to buy some type of stereo product and cannot audition it.

 

[mattigol]

Any rating system must inherently rely on some points of reference, which obviously change in the course of 10 years, even within a year or two. Therefore I never liked the Stereoplay attitude, because their table of best components doesn't seem take that into account at all. When testing arbitrary components they do make brief comparisons to their editorial office "reference" machines, but IMHO not enough.

I like the UK's Hifi-Choice 5-star rating that takes into account performance/price and is always based on a panel of reviewers, citing individual reviewer's notes on strengths and weaknesses and that way gives you a much better "feel" for a given piece of kit.

2c...

 

[leofahrer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattigol Any rating system must inherently rely on some points of reference, which obviously change in the course of 10 years, even within a year or two.

...though I absolutely agree: when it comes to headphones the "References" did not change that much, because they did not test a lot of cans over the years. In the old days, the Sennheiser Orpheus was the reference of open headphones with 55 points, followed by the Stax SR404 with 53 points. Now the Orpheus is not listed anymore, so the SR404 stayed as the best rated open headphone - though not marked as a "reference".

And you are right: Without a comment on how the sound signature is like, you can't use a rating at all...
But: Isn't there any HP-1 owner who wants to sell his cans now that he knows that the RS-1 has 4 points more in the rating

 

[milkpowder]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mattigol I like the UK's Hifi-Choice 5-star rating that takes into account performance/price and is always based on a panel of reviewers, citing individual reviewer's notes on strengths and weaknesses and that way gives you a much better "feel" for a given piece of kit. 2c...

To be absolutely honest, I find HiFi-Choice an absolute heap of s**t. If you've EVER read a proper audiophile magazine, you will realise right away that HiFi-Choice is consumer-grade at best. Look at what they reviews and the price range they have! It's mostly entry level stuff! I know that a magazine can't always cater for those with expensive tastes, but at least make an effort!

Admittedly, HiFi-Choice is brilliant for entry-level equipment, but insufficient for anything above. Take their speakers as an example: they never review anything higher than the Sonus Faber Cremona Auditors, neither do they even give a darn about the B&W 800D, 801D, 802D, 803S/D, etc... There is no mention of Meridian equipment, nor is their any mention of McIntosh stuff! Where did the whole dCS range go? I know it's impossible to review every single different component on the market, but as far as they're concerned, everything needs to be cheap. It's rare to find ANYTHING above 4000 pounds in the magazines, with the exception of some Naim equipment and Tag MacLaren stuff... Guys, we're talking about Hi Fi here. Hi Fidelity. Good sound comes at a cost.

How do they fix this? I say they cut down on massive pictures and attractive titles and go to the very basics of writing down genuine, three page articles in Times New Roman font. It's no use spieling out a page of useless, vague story telling. I'm sure the guys at HiFi Choice know their stuff well, just that they need to put everything in a more prosumer-friendly way like Stereophile does. I just don't understand why UK hifi magazines can't get it right. In Hong Kong, you get seriously good hifi magazines with proper substance. I mean, they really take you right into the hifi world: straight past all the Sony/Bose BS and down to the real stuff (Meridian, Magnepan, dCS, B&W, Naim, Burmester, Chord, Martin Logan, bMI, Jadis, Sonus Faber, Avantgarde, Audio Acoustics, Ayre, Accuphase, McIntosh, Esoteric, Mark Levinson, Jeff Rowland, Halcro, Linn, Parasound, PS Audio, Focal JM-Labs, etc). The stuff isn't necessarily expensive, but they are certainly much better and thoroughly reviewed. I myself am an n00b to all this hi fi stuff, but reading a good hifi magazine like Audiotechnique (音响技术) or Stereophile or 发烧音响 (for those of you who understand Chinese) really does you and your precious time more justice than reading something like HiFi Choice...

I'm sorry for the off-topic rant, but when the subject of audio review magazines came up, I just couldn't resist!

I write all this with no intention to offend ANYONE at all. It's all just personal opinion.


About whether the SR325 are better than the HP-1, I say NO. That just isn't possible. It may be true that the reviewer found the SR325 better sounding, but based on what you said about their general reviewing behaviour: new stuff gets higher points, I would disregard their final mark and look just at the comments. Headphones of the same time period can be compared by points, however.

 

[panda]

i don't know how (if they've heard both) one could even consider sr325 being better than the hp-1, unless of course they have a serious issue hearing high frequencies. i can't even stand listening to the 325, they hurt to listen.

ratings and point systems are worthless when it comes to audio gear, let alone one from a 'magazine'. professional reviews have little credibility. when looking for how something holds up, getting the average opinion of multiple feedbacks by consumers is the only opinions i'll even consider. even then i trust very few peoples ears. i've noticed trends where one person states a strong opinion and everyone else follows suit by agreeing. yet i or someone else hears it very differently which leads me to believe most people let their bias get in the way of what they are truely hearing. as in they hear what they think they should hear...

 

[Edwood]

HP-1's are more detailed than the SR325's.

And heavier too.

-Ed

 

[MarkyMark]

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkpowder To be absolutely honest, I find HiFi-Choice an absolute heap of s**t. If you've EVER read a proper audiophile magazine, you will realise right away that HiFi-Choice is consumer-grade at best. Look at what they reviews and the price range they have! It's mostly entry level stuff! I know that a magazine can't always cater for those with expensive tastes, but at least make an effort! Admittedly, HiFi-Choice is brilliant for entry-level equipment, but insufficient for anything above. Take their speakers as an example: they never review anything higher than the Sonus Faber Cremona Auditors, neither do they even give a darn about the B&W 800D, 801D, 802D, 803S/D, etc... There is no mention of Meridian equipment, nor is their any mention of McIntosh stuff! Where did the whole dCS range go? I know it's impossible to review every single different component on the market, but as far as they're concerned, everything needs to be cheap. It's rare to find ANYTHING above 4000 pounds in the magazines, with the exception of some Naim equipment and Tag MacLaren stuff... Guys, we're talking about Hi Fi here. Hi Fidelity. Good sound comes at a cost. How do they fix this? I say they cut down on massive pictures and attractive titles and go to the very basics of writing down genuine, three page articles in Times New Roman font. It's no use spieling out a page of useless, vague story telling. I'm sure the guys at HiFi Choice know their stuff well, just that they need to put everything in a more prosumer-friendly way like Stereophile does. I just don't understand why UK hifi magazines can't get it right. In Hong Kong, you get seriously good hifi magazines with proper substance. I mean, they really take you right into the hifi world: straight past all the Sony/Bose BS and down to the real stuff (Meridian, Magnepan, dCS, B&W, Naim, Burmester, Chord, Martin Logan, bMI, Jadis, Sonus Faber, Avantgarde, Audio Acoustics, Ayre, Accuphase, McIntosh, Esoteric, Mark Levinson, Jeff Rowland, Halcro, Linn, Parasound, PS Audio, Focal JM-Labs, etc). The stuff isn't necessarily expensive, but they are certainly much better and thoroughly reviewed. I myself am an n00b to all this hi fi stuff, but reading a good hifi magazine like Audiotechnique (音响技术) or Stereophile or 发烧音响 (for those of you who understand Chinese) really does you and your precious time more justice than reading something like HiFi Choice... I'm sorry for the off-topic rant, but when the subject of audio review magazines came up, I just couldn't resist! I write all this with no intention to offend ANYONE at all. It's all just personal opinion. About whether the SR325 are better than the HP-1, I say NO. That just isn't possible. It may be true that the reviewer found the SR325 better sounding, but based on what you said about their general reviewing behaviour: new stuff gets higher points, I would disregard their final mark and look just at the comments. Headphones of the same time period can be compared by points, however.

Come off it! For starters, a £4000 component is not entry-level in anybodys book !!! Also, you only have to take a glance at their buying guide to note that HFC review plenty of gear well over that level ....dCs Purcell, Wadia, Krell, Townshend, various exotic turntables, cartridges. Most if not all the names you checked above have been reviewed in there in the last couple of years! Each year they also do a special 'collection' issue which is contains high-end stuff only. But they also have to cater for people who have more realistic budgets... as do TAS and Stereophile IME.

I don't buy HFC regularly nowadays but I always enjoyed their scientific approach. They do full lab tests on everything and use a 'blind' panel for the group tests.