I subscribe to both, mainly to support the hi-fi world in general.
I refer, dear readers, to the latest issue of each and the Editor’s intro to the magazines…
Jim Austin, of Stereophile, presents a lucid view of goings-on in “Thoughts on reviewing”; I rather enjoyed his take on subjective listening.
In contrast, in the March 2022 ‘Editor’s Choice’ edition of “The Absolute Sound”, Robert Harley wrote “The Law of Accelerating Returns”. His basic position is summed up as this: “But in my experience, when it comes to audio systems and our perception of reproduced music, it’s the Law of Accelerating Returns that prevails.”
In essence, Mr. Harley’s position is one must spend as much as possible to make improvements in sound quality. I take exception to his position.
In the many threads in our own ASR, we have discussed at length the ever-increasing incremental price of measurable and audible performance in our systems. I add parenthetically that the price of excellent electronics has, amazingly, become less insane as competent engineering and production costs have been well managed. Speakers, well, those do not seem to have an upper ceiling.
TAS has, in my opinion, some reviewers that I respect and trust, especially Robert E. Greene. The editorial from Mr. Harley has dimmed my respect over-all.
Am I being hyper-critical? Should we simply expect that the reviews have to be self-serving out of financial necessity, we as the readers adding our grain of salt to the descriptions and conclusions presented?
I refer, dear readers, to the latest issue of each and the Editor’s intro to the magazines…
Jim Austin, of Stereophile, presents a lucid view of goings-on in “Thoughts on reviewing”; I rather enjoyed his take on subjective listening.
In contrast, in the March 2022 ‘Editor’s Choice’ edition of “The Absolute Sound”, Robert Harley wrote “The Law of Accelerating Returns”. His basic position is summed up as this: “But in my experience, when it comes to audio systems and our perception of reproduced music, it’s the Law of Accelerating Returns that prevails.”
In essence, Mr. Harley’s position is one must spend as much as possible to make improvements in sound quality. I take exception to his position.
In the many threads in our own ASR, we have discussed at length the ever-increasing incremental price of measurable and audible performance in our systems. I add parenthetically that the price of excellent electronics has, amazingly, become less insane as competent engineering and production costs have been well managed. Speakers, well, those do not seem to have an upper ceiling.
TAS has, in my opinion, some reviewers that I respect and trust, especially Robert E. Greene. The editorial from Mr. Harley has dimmed my respect over-all.
Am I being hyper-critical? Should we simply expect that the reviews have to be self-serving out of financial necessity, we as the readers adding our grain of salt to the descriptions and conclusions presented?
