DSJR
Major Contributor
Anything you can do... A few more added in more recent times as well, mounted up in Dual and Garrard carriers...
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Stereophile doubles down on the snake oil!
- Thread starter mcdn
- Start date
- Status
Maybe it should be ?
Is much of it not right up their with other actionable fraudulent presentations?
But WHY. All that money spend on a 50 year obsolete medium that offers second class sound quality and is extremely inconvenient to use, store and handle.
I sold all my vinyl gear back in the late 90s, early 2000s and invested all the money in updating my multich system. That WILL give you a big return in listening pleasure!
It’s about the gear and the manual procedure. Not about SQ.
OK, I thought it was all about the MUSIC. That's why we've always called the passion High Fidelity.
It is about music. And high fidelity is not up for debate. But some can tolerate admittedly lower-than-technical possible SQ at times while enjoying retro-style gear? I mean, why not? Has it always to be dead serious?
Stereophile does not present itself as a fantasy story magazine and Mr. Austin does not present himself as writer of fiction. Neither Stereophile, nor Mr. Austin create and publish their stories just for fun. They are doing it professionally to earn money. Significant part of that money comes from the marketing departments of Hi-Fi equipment manufacturers. Most of their clients see Stereophile and Mr. Austin as Hi-Fi experts providing authoritative advice. Providing intentionally misleading and false information in order to gain financial advantage constitutes a fraud.
The subjective reviews represent one person describing a personal experience. It's not possible to determine if that is genuine or made up. Even if it is made up that still doesn't constitute fraud at least not by the definition of UK law.
Making false technical claims, even by a manufacturer, would be dealt with in the UK by the ASA which is the advertisers self-regulatory body, not by the Courts. In an situation where someone had bought a product based on false technical claims they would have redress through the Small Claims Tribunal, but that is a civil action not a criminal one.
Whilst I agree that many readers will assume they are getting impartial consumer advice from magazines and Youtube 'influencers', this is due to naivety on their part. Again this is not actionable, since those outlets are clearly 'for entertainment purposes only.' A disclaimer you will also see on those TV shows where mediums - prima face - talk to the dead. People still think it is genuine. You can't really legislate to prevent that, it just isn't practicable.
It's up to people to be less daft about what they believe. If they don't want to be then it's their problem.
Last edited:
Noske
Active Member
Negligent fraud does not require intent. A much lower hurdle to jump.
The general definition is that it is a false statement of a material fact, made without the intention to deceive, but upon which someone else relies and is injured.
An example would be if a writer for an erudite publication states that red cables are superior in their abilities to convey dulcet tones compared to cables of any other colour, when in reality the writer did not know but nevertheless conveyed that impression - that is all that is required, or not required, for "intent".
Was anyone injured? That bit could be interesting.
Edit - written before I read @Mart68 just above. I think NF covers some aspects.
Lucky for me I used the word "erudite" because that covers off on the reliance aspect. Should the situation be known to be entertainment with disclaimers, tricky to show reliance. Disclaimers may be mandatory in some circumstances.
Last edited:
They only suffer financial loss, for which they could attempt redress through the civil courts.
This is in the realm of the fundamental subjective/objective discussion. It is perfectly fine to express personal opinions however wildly they may be in conflict with reality as long as one does not claim that they represent objective truth. If that were all Mr. Austin and Stereophile publish, then there would be no discussion about fraud. However, they make constantly claims about actual objective benefits, which are demonstrably not true. That is an entirely different thing.
Afaik, the Small Claims Tribunals are for "smallish" disputes between a seller and a client, and advertisers self-regulatory bodies are - as their name implies - handling advertisement related cases. Again, I don't claim expertise here, but I don't think they are the institutions to handle the kind of issue we are talking here.
By the way, I went through a couple of various "Hi-Fi stuff magazines", I happened to have around, and I could not find any disclaimer saying "Our stories are for entertainment purposes only, and should not be taken seriously".
I don't think a fraudster can talk himself out of trouble in court by claiming that he can't be accused, because the victims should really have been more savvy.
The disclaimer is implied. I think you will find that the law assumes that - that's in the UK I can't speak for any other nation or territory.
You're correct that someone on trial for fraud cannot use his victims' ignorance as a defence but that's in a criminal case where fraud under the legal definition may have been committed. What we're talking about here with regard to 'imaginative subjective hi-fi reviewing' does not constitute fraud in that it is not an offence under the Fraud Act 2006 since no false factual claims are being made.
Even if false factual claims are made (and both reviewers and advertisers are usually very careful to avoid this) there is still a hard case to prove since the magazine and its writers are not directly involved in the transaction of the products or services they review.
What about the "recommended component" lists -- aren't those an enticement to purchase particular products, based on subjective evaluations which, for the most part, defy the laws of physics? Consider, for example, the desriptions of various cables.
Very nice, where do you get these DUAL head-shells from... I could use a couple...
I'm running out of tables, and what's more - out of cables... Stereophile has been no help
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2025
- Messages
- 499
- Likes
- 399
Hey!
At least, he did not rise to the occasion w/an emotional outburst - in the vernacular - by using words like 'hate'!
Looks like you have a really mint example of the AR-ES table, IMO, the poor mans Linn Sondek and it probably can deliver 90 % of the sound quality and detail that the LP format is capable of. Mostly only lacking a SLT tonearm and speed control for the last 9% of it.
AR ES-1 - Vinyl Nirvana - Vintage AR and Thorens Turntable Sales, Parts, and Restorations
ES-1 Photo with Merrill Platter and Grace 707 Arm ES-1 (Connoisseur Series) 1984-198? Though the ES-1 and the AR the Turntable look. AR ES-1. Vintage AR and Thorens Turntable Sales, Parts, and Restorations.
vinylnirvana.com
2025 Accessory of the Year: A.R.T. Electromagnetic Treatment
Audibly effective, for ultra-high-end systems these mats and clamps are well worth the not insubstantial prices asked for them; indeed, they are worthy of this year’s TAS Accessory of the Year Award.
My, my, my…and to purchase:
audiorealignment.com
Audibly effective, for ultra-high-end systems these mats and clamps are well worth the not insubstantial prices asked for them; indeed, they are worthy of this year’s TAS Accessory of the Year Award.
My, my, my…and to purchase:
ART 1X – ART
audiorealignment.com
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2019
- Messages
- 14,646
- Likes
- 32,980
Yeah.
At least, he did not rise to the occasion w/an emotional outburst - in the vernacular - by using words like 'hate'!
Man... I hate that!
Love it and might order a pair or so. I mean these guys dedicated 2 yrs of hard work to this marvel of a con. Needs some support and cheer up!2025 Accessory of the Year: A.R.T. Electromagnetic Treatment
Audibly effective, for ultra-high-end systems these mats and clamps are well worth the not insubstantial prices asked for them; indeed, they are worthy of this year’s TAS Accessory of the Year Award.
My, my, my…and to purchase:
ART 1X – ART
- Status
Similar threads
