Snake Oil Department, Top This

[Inner Space]

Essentially, if you are not a billionaire, you cannot ever hope to possess the gear in Category A+, A or even B.

Do you have to be a billionaire to buy a Toyota Camry or a three-bed split-level? Same kind of price. I get that you're eager to get all upset and self-righteous, but relax, man. People can make their own choices.

 

[Spkrdctr]

Mojo Warrior must have spent some serious time in the snake oil cesspool. I would recommend he clean his computer. Snake oil is insidious and will creep into every crack and crevice it finds. Even well insulated speaker wire! It will wreak havoc with a computer. I just find it hard to believe that anyone is dumb enough to spend over $100,000 on ANY piece of audio equipment of any type. I wish I knew these people as I would ask for a gift so I could buy $5000/pr speakers and a $2000 sub. That is all I need or want. $100,000? Just throwing money down a drain, and I want to be the drain!

 

[MattHooper]

First, I don't know MattHooper and my post never referenced him. Why he felt attacked, I do not know. You can draw your own conclusions. Having said that, he doesn't know me either. My post was never a personal attack against anyone. His opinions are his own as are mine.

I will point out the obvious. My post was to highlight the the ridiculous hierarchy of stereo equipment in a publication that I believe is suspect. MattHooper never references any of the listings in the publication. The Thiel speakers are no longer on the list and Joseph Audio Perspective2: $14,999/pair is.

Not many of us have $15,0000 speakers let alone the amplification to drive them.

His intent is to deflect readers of this forum from seeing with their own eyes the abundant snake oil being promoted in that publication.

I do not accept his insults as they are more a means of projection and not reality.

Sorry about the font.

But I enjoyed the self own....

"I'm not of course claiming there isn't anything ever shady in the reviewing business. There is."
-MattHooper

I didn't portray your post as a "personal attack" on me, but rather I had some direct experience of reviewing and the reviewing community, which I could offer as balance to your claims. That's it.

I was not "attempting to deflect" from any snake oil - I'm constantly railing against it here like everyone else and Stereophile has purveyed snake oil products, so maybe calm down with your leaps-of-inference. Rather, in your desire to disparage Stereophile and "audiophools" I found you were painting with too broad a brush, not to mention making some naive-sounding leaps-to-conclusion about collusion...just as you are doing again here with your insinuations about me.

And how bizarre that you want to characterize simple honesty and admission of facts - that of course as in any business there will be some shadiness in audio reviewing - as being a "self own."

This is like the logic of an anti vaxxer.

"Vaccines don't work!"

Yes they do: as intended they cut down the risk of infection and especially severe disease.
Of course sometimes the vaccines don't protect someone against infection or severe disease - no one says vaccines are perfect.

"Ha! Self-own! You just admitted vaccines don't work!"

Anyway, although you and I will likely agree on plenty of things in the stereophile lists we'd never pay for, even if we could afford, it's clear that we won't be having a meeting of the minds on the broader issue.

 

[richard12511]

1. I'm far from rich and have owned speakers in Stereophile's "A" rated category - e.g. Thiel 3.7 speakers and currently Joseph Audio Perspective speakers. I found their reviews of those speakers very perceptive. And of course they give measurements too.

Those speakers are (from what I could find), ~$13,000, and ~$15,000, and you also say you've owned MBLs and many other speakers. You may consider yourself "far from rich", but all of those speakers are obscenely expensive and unobtainable to most folks. Vast majority of folks are looking for speakers - and reviews of speakers - in the hundreds of dollar range. People buying thousand dollar+ systems are not the norm. If anything, your examples are further proof towards @Mojo Warrior 's very valid point. I don't hate Stereophile, and enjoy reading it from time, but there is no denying they have a few strong biases:

1. Bias towards reviewing really expensive(multi thousand $) gear
2. Bias towards more expensive = higher score
3. Bias towards the positive. Almost all of their reviews are positive to super positive, with the only common criticisms being along the lines of "it wasn't a good synergy with the amp" or "it exposes bad recordings" . Reviews that point out more flaws than strengths are super rare.

It's why sites like ASR and Erin's audio corner are changing the game for the better. We need reviews that point out the weaknesses in speakers just often as they point out the strengths. While Stereophile subjective sections can be fun to read(especially if you own the speaker), they're more like advertisements than they are reviews.

 

[MattHooper]

I just find it hard to believe that anyone is dumb enough to spend over $100,000 on ANY piece of audio equipment of any type.

Spending lots of money like that doesn't automatically make someone "dumb." The fact you wouldn't have an interest in a piece of expensive gear doesn't mean someone else might not find value and be ok paying for it. It doesn't automatically equate to "being dumb."

There are tons of things I'd never pay a lot for - I can't believe how much some of my friends spend on watches! I can get more precise time from my iphone or my digital $30 watch! They Must Be So Dumb!

Except, no, there are aspects of those watches that THEY find value it. That's how value works.

So for audio gear, I can think of an example like the MBL X-treme omnidirectional speaker at $263,000.

That combines a design, engineering and sonic aesthetic mostly all it's own. If you like it...that's the only way to get it, by paying the money. So some do. (I've heard it, and have never heard sound quite like it anywhere else).

Many on this forum including me have spent VASTLY more money on audio gear vs the "average joe" who isn't an audiophile. Many people may think it is "dumb" for me, or Forum host Amirm for that matter who has an even more expensive system, to spend all that money "when you could listen to music for way less money." But, that's because they aren't getting out of it what WE get out of it.

 

[Robin L]

Snake oil du jour: I've got the display of my Topping E30 displaying "384.0" in bright orange, so how can I help but feel that the sound is improved, even while I'm actually listening to a Fiio mini-DAP playing a bad LP transfer of a Russian Recording of piano, with the Topping unit out of the audio chain?

 

[MattHooper]

Those speakers are (from what I could find), ~$13,000, and ~$15,000, and you also say you've owned MBLs and many other speakers. You may consider yourself "far from rich", but all of those speakers are obscenely expensive and unobtainable to most folks.

1. I am indeed very far from rich. In fact I'd bet I earn less than most on this forum.
2. The reason I own those speakers is because it's my passion. I don't own a nice car, or a cottage, or watches or motorcycles or boats or engage in any other expensive hobbies. It's taken a long time for me to be able to buy those speakers (I could buy the Thiels because I sold smaller products I'd accumulated over time, and I had to sell the Thiels to get the Joseph speakers).

Even so, I don't think that only the stinkin' rich could buy those speakers.

I know a number of middle class/upper middle class friends who could afford to buy those speakers IF IT WERE THEIR PASSION TO DO SO, but instead they put similar or much more money in to upgrading some part of their house, or into a "better" version of the car they want, or vacations, cottage, whatever.

Vast majority of folks are looking for speakers - and reviews of speakers - in the hundreds of dollar range.

Then it doesn't sound like you are speaking of the actual target - the hobbyist target of the magazine - audiophiles.

Go to many audiophile forums and you'll see plenty of people who own gear in the multiple thousands of dollars range, some of which is found in Stereophile. And it's often not because they are richer than most, but that music/audio is their passion and they do what they can to afford it.

This is a pretty good snapshot of the range of gear owned by such audiophiles, and they aren't all wealthy:

Hi-Fi Audio Systems & Audiophile Listening Rooms

Explore audiophile equipment, hi-fi audio systems and listening rooms for inspiration and ideas.

systems.audiogon.com

People buying thousand dollar+ systems are not the norm. If anything, your examples are further proof towards @Mojo Warrior 's very valid point. I don't hate Stereophile, and enjoy reading it from time, but there is no denying they have a few strong biases:

1. Bias towards reviewing really expensive(multi thousand $) gear
2. Bias towards more expensive = higher score
3. Bias towards the positive. Almost all of their reviews are positive to super positive, with the only common criticisms being along the lines of "it wasn't a good synergy with the amp" or "it exposes bad recordings" .

It's why sites like ASR and Erin's audio corner are changing the game for the better. We need reviews that point out the weaknesses in speakers just often as they point out the strengths. While Stereophile subjective sections can be fun to read(especially if you own the speaker), they're more like advertisements than they are reviews.

I generally agree with all of that. (And there are caveats to put aside).

But that doesn't entail the collusion Mr. Mojo ranted about, and you have put it in much less broad-brushed, less disparaging terms.

Cheers.

 

[Mojo Warrior]

This is like the logic of an anti vaxxer. -MattHooper (a shot from the hip and a ....a miss)

Just WOW! Of course I'm not an anti-vaxxer, how dare you imply that. Again, you do not know me and that misstatement
is proof. Sorry to step on your toes or whatever, I must've hit a very sensitive nerve.

So to avoid future misguided mis-characterizations, let me set the record straight.

I'm vaccinated
I have a degree in science
I'm a physician
I've been involved in hi-fidelity for 50 years
I've worked in the Hi-fi industry when my hearing was excellent (college)
I enjoy music immensely
I do not let other peoples opinions spoil my day, especially those who I do not know well
At my age, I have am able to spot BS
BTW I do know some billionaires and they are not smarter than average people but certainly not dumb
As a confession, I have bought snake oil products in the past that was recommended by a reviewer, I'm done with that
Final confession, I was a former subscriber to that publication

 

[MattHooper]

This is like the logic of an anti vaxxer. -MattHooper (a shot from the hip and a ....a miss)

Just WOW! Of course I'm not an anti-vaxxer, how dare you imply that. Again, you do not know me and that misstatement
is proof. Sorry to step on your toes or whatever, I must of hit a very sensitive nerve.

So to avoid future misguided mis-characterizations, let me set the record straight.

I'm vaccinated
I have a degree in science
I'm a physician
I've been involved in hi-fidelity for 50 years
I've worked in the Hi-fi industry when my hearing was excellent (college)
I enjoy music immensely
I do not let other peoples opinions spoil my day, especially those who I do not know well
At my age, I have am able to spot BS
BTW I do know some billionaires and they are not smarter than average people but certainly not dumb

Mojo, it was an informal reductio ad absurdum of your reasoning about my "self own."

I did not suggest you were anti-vax. Just the opposite.

My example of the anti-vaxxer logic PRESUMED you are NOT an anti-vaxxer, in order to show how the same style of "reasoning" you applied to me, is absurd.

In any case, it's nice to see your personal history. It sounds interesting!

 

[Spkrdctr]

Spending lots of money like that doesn't automatically make someone "dumb." The fact you wouldn't have an interest in a piece of expensive gear doesn't mean someone else might not find value and be ok paying for it. It doesn't automatically equate to "being dumb."

There are tons of things I'd never pay a lot for - I can't believe how much some of my friends spend on watches! I can get more precise time from my iphone or my digital $30 watch! They Must Be So Dumb!

Except, no, there are aspects of those watches that THEY find value it. That's how value works.

So for audio gear, I can think of an example like the MBL X-treme omnidirectional speaker at $263,000.

That combines a design, engineering and sonic aesthetic mostly all it's own. If you like it...that's the only way to get it, by paying the money. So some do. (I've heard it, and have never heard sound quite like it anywhere else).

Many on this forum including me have spent VASTLY more money on audio gear vs the "average joe" who isn't an audiophile. Many people may think it is "dumb" for me, or Forum host Amirm for that matter who has an even more expensive system, to spend all that money "when you could listen to music for way less money." But, that's because they aren't getting out of it what WE get out of it.

Of course, I meant everyone else is dumb. Not you and certainly not me if I win the lotto in Florida! Instead of dumb I should have said inconceivable! But, depending on where one sits makes a big difference! If I had a billion dollars, $100,000 would be chicken feed. I still find it amazing to spend that amount though. As in WOW! unbelievable.

 

[John Atkinson]

Interconnects

TARA Labs Zero Evolution w/HFX Ground Station: $20,995/1m, each add'tl meter is $2300
The Zero Evolution is an all-new, physically flexible, easier to manage air-dielectric interconnect than the original Zero with non-insulated square solid-core conductors. Because neither end of The Zero Evolution's shield is attached to ground, TARA employs the Floating Ground Station, a heavy, black box containing Ceralex, a combination of ceramic materials and metallic compounds that absorbs RFI and EMI. Switching from the original Zero to the new Evolution Zero, MF's system benefited yet further from an enormous addition of lushness, texture, and warmth, along with major extensions of air, detail, and transparency. Due to The Evolution Zero's ultrawide bandwidth, some outside transient noise can leak into the system when nearby appliances are activated. But—"I've heard nothing like it," he declares, adding "a genuine breakthrough, though hideously expensive. The TARA Labs Evolution Zero had a fast, clean, open overall sound, with airy highs and tight bass. The Evolution upgrade adds the rich, textured midrange of the Stealth Sakra, while continuing to produce faster attacks, longer sustains, and deeper decays, said MF." (Vol.29 No.12, Zero; Vol.34 No.6 WWW, Zero Gold; Vol.36 No.11, Zero Evolution)

As with all your recent postings of Stereophile's copyrighted content in this thread, we request that you include a link to the original web page.

Thank you in advance for doing so.

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

[John Atkinson]

They might not be gamed as such, but the graph scales are typically set such that nothing useful can be gleaned from them.

I think consistency in presentation extremely important. The graphs in Stereophile for each product category almost always have the same aspect ratio and scaling. That way the measurements for different products can be readily compared, even when the reviews are years apart.

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

 

[richard12511]

1. I am indeed very far from rich. In fact I'd bet I earn less than most on this forum.
2. The reason I own those speakers is because it's my passion. I don't own a nice car, or a cottage, or watches or motorcycles or boats or engage in any other expensive hobbies. It's taken a long time for me to be able to buy those speakers (I could buy the Thiels because I sold smaller products I'd accumulated over time, and I had to sell the Thiels to get the Joseph speakers).

Even so, I don't think that only the stinkin' rich could buy those speakers.

I know a number of middle class/upper middle class friends who could afford to buy those speakers IF IT WERE THEIR PASSION TO DO SO, but instead they put similar or much more money in to upgrading some part of their house, or into a "better" version of the car they want, or vacations, cottage, whatever.

I understand being a good saver. I'm the same way, I drive an old car and audio is the only passion I spend real money on. Still, it's about what's the norm. Most people either don't make enough money, or don't want to save enough to be able to buy $50,000+ worth of audio gear. I get why you might enjoy Stereophile, and not see the problem, but you are not the norm. I'd bet you're in the top 5-10% of this forum in terms of what you've spent on audio. I'd guess that most people on this forum are generally looking for options in the $500-$3,000 range for speakers, and probably have somewhere between $1,000 - $10,000 invested total in the hobby. Most audio enthusiasts are not looking to spend $3,000 on a DAC, $15,000 on speakers, etc, at least IME.

Then it doesn't sound like you are speaking of the actual target - the hobbyist target of the magazine - audiophiles.

Go to many audiophile forums and you'll see plenty of people who own gear in the multiple thousands of dollars range, some of which is found in Stereophile. And it's often not because they are richer than most, but that music/audio is their passion and they do what they can to afford it.

This is a pretty good snapshot of the range of gear owned by such audiophiles, and they aren't all wealthy:

Hi-Fi Audio Systems & Audiophile Listening Rooms

Explore audiophile equipment, hi-fi audio systems and listening rooms for inspiration and ideas.

systems.audiogon.com

I'm on quite a few audiophile forums, and by far the most common threads I see are people looking for speakers $1,000 or less, with very, very few threads asking about $10,000 speakers. Again, I don't think it's about whether one is filthy rich or one is just a very passionate saver; I think it's more about "where is the average audiophile". I really doubt that most people are passionate or rich enough to afford much of the gear that Stereophile reviews. I think we have a tendency to see ourselves as more normal than we actually are. I think you may be falling victim to this a bit here. Most audiophiles aren't looking to spend the amount that you've spent.

I generally agree with all of that. (And there are caveats to put aside).

But that doesn't entail the collusion Mr. Mojo ranted about, and you have put it in much less broad-brushed, less disparaging terms.

Cheers.

I enjoy reading Stereophile, and will continue to do so, but I do wish they would review more average priced gear far more often than they do. I also understand why they can't review equipment honestly like Amir and Erin do, as they have a business they have to run, with employees to pay.

 

[rdenney]

I occasionally read car magazines that have articles about cars I can't afford, too. Some of those cars are stupidly impractical. And I read wristwatch magazines about watches I would never buy at the price they sell for (though I have watches others think are ludicrously expensive, too--it's all a matter of perspective). Some of those watches are downright goofy, but I still like reading about them. Yes, I would like to see content geared towards affordable stuff at a range of definitions of "affordable", but I don't particularly mind if there are reviews of Wilson Audio WATT Puppies or whatever. (And there are those on this forum who do buys stuff like that, and can afford it.)

But, back to my question, which was ignored: ASR's owner has invested well into five figures into his amplifiers, and has Revel Salon2 speakers that cost twenty grand or thereabouts. Is he a fool for spending so much? Does spending so much signify some lack of regard for science on his part?

I wouldn't want to be the one charged with defending that proposition.

Rick "with apologies to Amir for using him as an example" Denney

 

[Count Arthur]

Apparently for streaming audio, which ranges from around 128kbps to 22,579kbps for really hi-res, you need a special cable: https://www.hifichoice.com/content/chord-company-introduces-clearway-streaming-cable

Whereas in lowly data centres, where they use 10Gbps connections, and send tens of terabytes of data back and forth all day long, any old Cat 6a cable will do.

Cable management - optional:

 

[ahofer]

First, I don't know MattHooper and my post never referenced him. Why he felt attacked, I do not know. You can draw your own conclusions. Having said that, he doesn't know me either. My post was never a personal attack against anyone. His opinions are his own as are mine.

I will point out the obvious. My post was to highlight the the ridiculous hierarchy of stereo equipment in a publication that I believe is suspect. MattHooper never references any of the listings in the publication. The Thiel speakers are no longer on the list and Joseph Audio Perspective2: $14,999/pair is.

Not many of us have $15,0000 speakers let alone the amplification to drive them.

His intent is to deflect readers of this forum from seeing with their own eyes the abundant snake oil being promoted in that publication.

I do not accept his insults as they are more a means of projection and not reality.

Sorry about the font.

But I enjoyed the self own....

"I'm not of course claiming there isn't anything ever shady in the reviewing business. There is."
-MattHooper

I don’t think Matt was confrontational in a way that deserved this. I don’t agree with him on everything, but he keeps it civil.

 

[ahofer]

I enjoy reading Stereophile, and will continue to do so, but I do wish they would review more average priced gear far more often than they do.

They do divide stuff into classes, but it’s extraordinary how the cheaper stuff is almost always in the lower letter classes. Even things where we know they wouldn’t be able to tell the difference blind. Class A DACs, amps, and cables, indeed.

 

[TLEDDY]

I think consistency in presentation extremely important. The graphs in Stereophile for each product category almost always have the same aspect ratio and scaling. That way the measurements for different products can be readily compared, even when the reviews are years apart.

John Atkinson
Technical Editor, Stereophile

I think John is correct... consistency is desireable. He also is “measured” in his subjective remarks, a trait I admire.

 

[mansr]

I think John is correct... consistency is desireable.

Unless it's consistently useless.

 

[TLEDDY]

Unless it's consistently useless.

Ouch!