Stereophile Recommended Components 2024

[MattHooper]

I actually sometimes find myself getting angry at some high-end audio prices. Sometimes just looking at the prices and claims made on behalf of cables can make my blood boil. And I’d like nothing better than many of those high-end cable companies to be exposed.

That’s why one of my favourite types of Amir reviews have to do with exposing that type of nonsense.

I also find myself getting pissed off at other high-priced gear, whether it be ultra expensive music servers, speakers or anything else - when I see what seems to be such stratospheric pricing that it’s hard to not see it as pure cynicism on behalf of the manufacturer. Like “ come on you can’t be serious here.” Some of it feels like an actual dare from the manufacturer “ I dare you to pay the price we are asking for this!”

On the other hand, I have to recognize that I don’t have some principled cut off point that I can point to in determining a price at which I should be pissed off. There’s plenty of overpriced stuff that I look at and say “ OK that’s high price but that’s pretty cool and I wouldn’t mind owning it.”
And some of my gear could fit into the “ stupid cost” level by the lights of another audiophile.

 

[egellings]

It seems that many of Stereophile's loyal readers might prefer reading fictional accounts of hi-fi equipment performance over factual ones. It gives one a nice, warm feeling in one's loins, does it not? Especially when considering where to squirt one's next $100,000.

I read the high end reviews just for entertainment, with no intent of ever buying any of the stuff.

 

[egellings]

It seems that many of Stereophile's loyal readers might prefer reading fictional accounts of hi-fi equipment performance over factual ones. It gives one a nice, warm feeling in one's loins, does it not? Especially when considering where to squirt one's next $100,000.

...thy loins...

 

[Platypus20]

I read both Stereophile and The Absolutely Sound every month, it’s a like like TV, you ignore the stuff that does not interest you, it lets you know what’s out there, especially important if you like in an audio wasteland, with no physical access stores for equipment or accessories. Sometimes the music reviews are helpful, then some of the content is pure fantasy, its up to the reader to separate the wheat from the chaff.

 

[GXAlan]

ok, it's not hi-fi though is it? Where's the fidelity?

This is part of the opinion vs fact.

Fans of tubes, where the difference is arguably at the threshold of audibility, will not claim that it’s more truthful to the recording. The perspective is that the fidelity is toward the emotion of the original experience.

Again, I say this as a big proponent of measurements and eliminating snake oil from the hobby. However, “hi-fi” as a hobby should include fans of lp vinyl and tubes and gate keeping what hifi means is a bit rigid

 

[jsrtheta]

Here we go: The annual Stereophile recommended components chum, tossed into the ASR shark tank.

As usual, there will be plenty of overpriced stuff to lambaste.

I like to keep in mind that Stereophile has a different approach to audio gear.

ASR takes a single criteria based approach on which to rate gear essentially “ good or bad.” (as in: here is a suite of measurements that would indicate best practises. To the degree gear deviates from this it is a bad design)

Stereophile takes the view that there are legitimate different approaches to designing equipment and different sonic profiles, and they don’t rate them “ good or bad” but rather to tell you how they sound. And then the consumer can decide whether that sounds interesting or not to pursue.

Of course, these annual recommended components do attempt a rating of one sort, but their approach is going to mean that, for instance, speakers that would be dismissed on ASR can be rated highly in Stereophile.

There’s obvious liabilities in Stereophile’s approach that everyone here recognizes.

But I’m glad both approaches exist as I can get something out of each.

Still strange, though, how the "differences" vanish when the makers' names are unseen.

 

[MattHooper]

Still strange, though, how the "differences" vanish when the makers' names are unseen.

For some stuff maybe, not for others.

“ stop the slaughter of babies being thrown out with bathtubs…”.

 

[NoMoFoNo]

I agree.

My take is that there are many here who are evangelical in their need to spread "the word" that audio bling is against "science" and they can get quite animated if anything other than this gospel is offered as an alternative.

I see what you did there.

 

[NoMoFoNo]

I read both Stereophile and The Absolutely Sound every month, it’s a like like TV, you ignore the stuff that does not interest you, it lets you know what’s out there, especially important if you like in an audio wasteland, with no physical access stores for equipment or accessories. Sometimes the music reviews are helpful, then some of the content is pure fantasy, its up to the reader to separate the wheat from the chaff.

You mean, like, paper copies?

 

[Blake Klondike]

In my opinion, this 2024 Stereophile Recommended components list smacks of advertising under the guise of "Recommended Components". I wouldn't be surprised if great components that didn't place an ad were ignored. I don't even see the RME ADI-2 DAC FS listed and it's the best component I have used for maximizing performance and getting my system to sound just the way I want at any volume level.

Anybody that thinks this list is important can part with their wallet now. Only fools will see this as their audio Bible.

Indeed, the first time I heard Dutch 8C's, I understood how a speaker could approach neutrality. By that point, I had owned some okay speakers over the years from well-regarded mfrs, and I was running Linkwitz Orions, which imaged beautifully but almost certainly were not tonally neutral. But hearing a demonstrably neutral speaker spoiled me for anything designed by "speaker designers" who just push and pull shapes and configurations for the sake of novelty.

what are some examples of neutral speakers?

 

[pablolie]

I have said that I really enjoyed certain loudspeakers (to the point of almost buying them) that were dismissed here as an overpriced disgrace in terms of engineering and measurements, and even that my expressed enthusiasm was tantamount to
“ promoting snake oil.”

It can get harsh around here sometimes ;-)

I actually laughed hard when several in here on ASR were enthusiastically echoing approval of a very marginal improvement of a popular speaker even when the measured differences were minimally apart... the only big difference was the final (inconsistent) personal recommendation. Several "Audio Science“ stalwarts claimed to hear clear differences and some even claimed the barely different measuring older model was suddenly unlistenable. Herd mentality is powerful. ASR can sometimes be just as subjectively ridiculous ("but our ability to discern a 1dB difference is based on measurements!") as any other audio site... but as a rule it is not, which I love and that's why I am still here.

 

[pablolie]

The speaker that I was referencing is the Devore Fidelity O/96. No Devore speaker has been formally reviewed by Amir, but the brand has been discussed a fair amount on this site. Based upon the design and measurements of that speaker and other Devore loudspeakers, ASR members have almost invariably been critical.

I didn’t really wanna get into it again as I’ve been round and round on those loudspeakers before.

One of my best friends owns Devore speakers. They would never rank anywhere near my personal choice... but they work stunningly well for the music he loves and has tuned his system to deliver. They are colored as hell, but play Chopin through them and your heart and breathing will beat in tune. There is all sorts of embellishment going on, but it is amazing I can't bring myself to condemn it. And I doubt any true music lover would.

 

[MaxBuck]

They're very expensive. I would expect them to measure well for that price.

Speakers are a lot like spouses. Reality often diverges significantly from expectations.

 

[Descartes]

And yet, for the speakers and most of the electronics there, you have a full set of measurements from @John Atkinson

Can’t say that about many other recommended lists…

Yes but do not forget that these companies are paying for their advertising and their salaries! So they are not going to bite the hand that feeds them!

 

[Descartes]

View attachment 394765

Let me separate you from your money! A fool is born every day’

 

[Descartes]

J.Sikora Reference: $48,000 w/o tonearm

For 48K you think they could toss in a tonearm. A total system of price related components might cost 300-500K. How many people are dumping that on a stereo? Not that many are spending 3-5K. Silly.

It will be better than if it is in 24 carat solid platinum! Gold is not good enough

 

[GXAlan]

Yes but do not forget that these companies are paying for their advertising and their salaries! So they are not going to bite the hand that feeds them!

@Kal Rubinson wrote this years ago:
“But in its present state I cannot recommend the M1. It imposed a tonal signature on the sound that was simply not neutral”

Anthem Statement M1 monoblock power amplifier Page 2

www.stereophile.com

 

[Mart68]

Fair enough, I presumed people would have interpreted that I was exaggerating for effect.

I’m certainly aware that some ASR members don’t have the type of equipment I would make an “ASR recommended list.”

And of course, we all agree that it’s good to promote realistic information about audio gear, especially so that people can make choices advisedly.

However, I submit there is still a general truth in what I was implying.



No, but there is a very obvious trend and tenor in this forum, right? It’s not just trying to save people from buying expensive cables.

The general trend is evaluating performance and value based on some specific technical criteria. And we can see how this narrows the playing field far more than anything you’d see on Steve’s channel.

It’s not for nothing that when people ask about what speakers to buy, the same handful of speakers keep getting suggested over and over “Genelec, Neumann, KEF, Revel..,”

Or if someone is looking at buying a turntable, the recommendations will be to not waste too much money on turntables. Where is clearly in Steve’s viewer systems, you’re going to see spending on turntables that most on ASR would deem wasteful.

There’s a very heavy “price to technical performance” bias in the forum which is perfectly legitimate, but which as I am saying, would rule against the majority of what you see in the Steve’s Viewer systems.

We know very well that plenty here with scoff at the price performance ratio for many of the speakers, turntables and other gear selected by Steve’s viewers. You can be guaranteed that much of what you see there would not be recommended had those people come here for advice. A lot of stuff in those viewer systems are no doubt just the type of gear many on ASR would deem sold on manufacturer-inflated bs and audiophile myths or misconceptions.

And no doubt there are probably some over spending on cables.

That’s why, if I look at the big picture, I can ask myself “ should I look at those systems with dismay? With the attitude that those poor audiophiles could have gotten technically better performance for less money, and so “poor them for not having ASR having advised them?”

And as I said, my answer is no. I still think they are having a blast.

Accurate information about audio gear is clearly worth being promoted. (I tried to do my modest part in this in the subjective forums).

But I don’t see common ASR criteria as the only viable route to putting together satisfying sound systems, and I try not to feel too white knighty - even if there is some level of ignorance or misconception mixed into some audio files system, hey, we can’t “save” everyone, and they are still generally having a satisfying experience.

I think the issue here is that you're conflating a few people's views with the 'ASR' view.

I don't think there is an 'ASR View' - there's 37K members and a lot of active posters. You can't lump us all in together.

Maybe we could broadly say that the ASR view on loudspeakers is 'Start with as neutral as possible and use DSP to tweak to personal taste.'

For electronics 'Buy what appeals but be aware that you can get maximum performance for not a lot of money.'

For cables 'There is zero benefit in spending a lot'

For other devices such as power conditioning, 'grounding boxes' etc -' Don't bother, they do nothing beyond maybe a temporary placebo effect'

None of this is bad advice. And if someone is aware of this advice and still chooses to ignore it, that's up to them. At least they make a decision in full knowledge that there are differing points of view.

It does not add up to 'Do it our way or you're wrong and stupid.' (That may be the attitude of some posters on ASR but unless Amir comes down from the mountain with the 'ASR Way' on tablets of stone, it isn't ASR). This site is, in fact, a very broad church.

Yes, some of us do like to have a laugh at the dreadful measuring speakers, especially if they are horrendously expensive and come with an idiotic back story. But I think you are reading too much into that.

Also, people who buy these speakers do, IME, mostly end up dissatisfied and end up blaming recording quality, or some other component in their system, leading to a round of pointless 'upgrading' or tweaking (although I accept that there are exceptions where they have a very narrow taste in music which the speakers enhance, that situation is quite rare).

In short, I think you're tilting at windmills. The vast majority here don't have any issue with someone owning Zu Druids and a noisy tube amp. They just wouldn't do that themselves.

 

[MattHooper]

ok, it's not hi-fi though is it? Where's the fidelity?

John Devore has said one motivation for his chosen company name is that he thought it was funny to abbreviate it in his logo to “DeF”


John has said that he’s always been attracted to loudspeaker brands that had some
“ personality,” that came from a head designer.

But in terms of Sonic Fidelity…

The term originally arose from the attempt to reproduce the sound of voices and live instruments with Fidelity. To sound like the real thing.

What John wants his loudspeakers to do especially his wide baffled O series is to paint a “ solid picture” of a musical event in front of you, the sense of dense, palpable voices and instruments, along with a dynamic liveliness, the communicates the efforts of the musicians.

That is precisely the type of qualities I heard from those speakers. There was a “heft” to the sound that made instruments and voices sound more rich and corporal. And wow, did drums sound great. Very big on the “ boogie factor” for the type of music I love.

I’ve mentioned before that I’ve had similar experiences with other idiosyncratic loudspeakers. Shun Mook, for instance.
They were known for all sorts of woo woo tweaks, which I never believed in and don’t believe it now. But they made a loudspeaker designed on their idiosyncratic principles: their belief that the sonic signature of cabinet wood materials made a difference, and they selected cabinet wood for its resonating quality as I did a musical instrument. They did a three-way without segmenting the cabinet, feeling that all three drivers resonating in a single cabinet aided coherence. They “ tuned” the inside of the cabinet with their famous little wood Mpingo discs.

All of which seems to me dubious. And yet when I first encountered that loudspeaker at a local audio store, not knowing what it was or who designed it, I heard one of the most captivating, graceful, coherent presentations I’d heard from a loudspeaker. That remains true when I got it in for a review in my room.
The sound was “ unmechanical” and natural sounding in a way that to my ears eluded many loudspeakers.

For me, these are some of the interesting finds that are unlikely to show up, much less be lauded, in a forum like this. And so I’m happy to be able to read about them in some of the subjective magazines.

Cheers.

 

[MattHooper]

I think the issue here is that you're conflating a few people's views with the 'ASR' view.

I don't think there is an 'ASR View' - there's 37K members and a lot of active posters. You can't lump us all in together.

I am aware of the variety of views I encounter in this forum, and I think most of your criticism is already handled in what I wrote.
I spoke of “ General trends” which of course admit of all sorts of different exceptions and viewpoints.

None of this is bad advice.

I agree. But it is still the type of advice you would get here, which would rule out much of what one sees in Steve’s viewer videos. Much of that equipment would “ not be advisable” on ASR.

And if someone is aware of this advice and still chooses to ignore it, that's up to them. At least they make a decision in full knowledge that there are differing points of view.

Sure, I know that’s a common view here.

But it’s also common here to look upon a reviewer like Steve Guttenberg as misleading his viewers in various ways, including lauding gear that on ASR would generally be seen as overpriced and under performing, and to be avoided.

And that’s just the type of gear that shows up in a lot of his viewer systems.

In other words, it’s probably a safe assumption that most of Steves viewers were not putting together their gear after reading ASR. And therefore probably weren’t as “ASR Educated” - making their choices with the type of education you are suggesting and as many here would like to see, leading them to make some dubious purchases.

It’s from that standpoint I’m saying I mostly don’t feel sorry for those making those choices, and in many cases I don’t think they were necessarily duped. They’ve found their way to satisfying systems.

It does not add up to 'Do it our way or you're wrong and stupid.' (That may be the attitude of some posters on ASR but unless Amir comes down from the mountain with the 'ASR Way' on tablets of stone, it isn't ASR). This site is, in fact, a very broad church.

It’s broad, which is why I come here. But I think you are underestimating the amount of disparagement found on ASR against the type of subjective reviewers (such as Steve) who helped drive the type of purchases I’m talking about. It is one of the more common themes here to dismiss the worth of subjective reviews, not only as fantasy or playing to advertisers, but for promoting the type of “ poor price to performance ratio” equipment one might see in those videos.

Also, people who buy these speakers do, IME, mostly end up dissatisfied and end up blaming recording quality, or some other component in their system, leading to a round of pointless 'upgrading' or tweaking (although I accept that there are exceptions where they have a very narrow taste in music which the speakers enhance, that situation is quite rare).

I’ve tried to pay attention to exactly that because it’s often claimed. But in perusing various “ what’s your gear and how long have you had it?” threads In subjective forums, as well as what people describe here, I haven’t seen good evidence that there is such a trend. I’ve posted examples before showing the plenty of those on the subjective forums have had equipment for very long time.

SEE HERE for instance

Audiophiles tend to be interested in audio gear, and find excuses to play with new gear, whatever your subjective or objective disposition, this trend seems to occur.

Hell, our dear leader Objectivist Amir has found a way to turn his gear obsession into an entire website, so he can keep playing with different gear.

In short, I think you're tilting at windmills. The vast majority here don't have any issue with someone owning Zu Druids and a noisy tube amp. They just wouldn't do that themselves.

That’s definitely true of some, but I think you are underestimating the more prevailing attitudes to that type of equipment. Very often, the criticism is not couched as “ this isn’t for me” but more “ This design is just bad!” and a silly choice. And often enough that praise for such designs are misleading audiophiles (see those mischievous subjective reviewers, giving praise to “ poorly designed equipment.”)

There’s a fair amount of typical attitude towards Zu here

Again, I’m with you that there is a broad range of opinions on this forum, but when it comes to generalities, I suspect you were underestimating the general tilt of this forum, in terms of what I was getting at.