Stereophile Recommended Components 2024

[JustJones]

Class A. Stereophile recommended Estelon Forza: $169,000–$185,000/ pair depending upon finish .

Estelon Forza Floorstanding Speakers; Dark Silver Pair (Unused)

Buy, sell, and trade thousands of pre-owned audio gear. All tested, certified, and backed by our 100% Happiness Guarantee, with expert HiFi guides to help you at every step.

tmraudio.com

Worse than hauling a new Mercedes off the lot and leaving in your garage and trying to sell unused.

 

[Multicore]

Which are totally irrelevant to the curation of the list.

Right. Leaving the TTs, phones and speakers to one side, we know that there is no excuse for equipment that isn't transparent. So how do we interpret these definitions...?

Class A Best attainable sound for a component of its kind, almost without practical considerations; the least musical compromise.

vs.

Class C Somewhat lower-fi sound, but far more musically natural than average home-component high fidelity; products in this class are of high quality but still affordable.

There are some A devices less expensive than C devices so the take away is that Stereophile doesn't believe in transparency and believes instead in something different and, it seems, more important: musical properties of the gear.

 

[MattHooper]

we know that there is no excuse for equipment that isn't transparent.

Of course there’s an excuse. Not everybody wants perfectly transparent equipment. That goes both for some equipment designers and for some consumers.

Let’s not have our blinders on.

 

[Purité Audio]

You believe some designers actually strive for poor performance , I always assumed simple incompetence .
Keith

 

[kyuu]

Not everybody wants perfectly transparent equipment.

Well, some may think they don't. Research using properly blinded testing tends to show that, when people are only using their ears for listening, they do, in fact, prefer transparent equipment. Or at least have no preference for non-transparent equipment. At least as far as I'm aware.

 

[gsp1971]

In March 2018, Stereophile was purchased, along with related magazines and websites, by AVTech Media Ltd, the UK company which published Hi-Fi News and Hi-Fi Choice.

Paul Miller used to do really great lab reports on Hi-Fi News several years ago. Don't know if he still does - I stopped buying hi-fi magazines years ago because of theιr tendency to prettify mediocre-performing products due to advertising revenue.

 

[MattHooper]

You believe some designers actually strive for poor performance , I always assumed simple incompetence .
Keith

I think it can be both. I guess sometimes people really know precisely what they’re doing and what they are aiming for. It’s my bet that B&W know what they are doing, and that the particular frequency response that keeps showing up isn’t an accident.
John Devore has talked about certain speaker designs of his where he’s made deliberate choices that sound better to him even though it results in “worse” measurements.

Others may be trying for some form of “ transparency and low colouration” but using dodgy theories to get there, which means they end up with some coloured sounding gear. But they still recognize their gear sounds different than traditionally neutral gear, and are happy with those results.

 

[Kremmen]

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.

 

[tw99]

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.

"Tell you how they sound?" That's not actually what they're doing though, is it.

 

[GXAlan]

Well, some may think they don't. Research using properly blinded testing tends to show that, when people are only using their ears for listening, they do, in fact, prefer transparent equipment. Or at least have no preference for non-transparent equipment. At least as far as I'm aware.

That is most people. But it’s important to understand what that means since there are clearly ASR members in good standing who have tubes or vinyl and ASR members in good standing who speakers that aren’t from Revel, Neumann or Genelec. I use my own example of the Bose 901 which will sound different to a standard speaker under blind tests.

If you look at the United States, the majority of people did not like Bill Clinton. He only got 43% of the popular vote. He won the electoral college vote. The same is true for Donald Trump in 2020. Less than 50% of the popular vote. Very few people would say that they liked both Donald Trump and Bill Clinton. The point is that the majority doesn’t represent individual purchasers.

No one disagrees that the majority of people like neutral speakers. Harman science is pretty good at that even though the studies were somewhat a selective group of listeners. (Look at the papers).

But companies that market a flavor, esp. in speakers, are financially successful because the subgroup of people who do not like neutral speakers like the sound delivered by ________.

Beats by Apple is popular yet it very much has a sound profile that is different than AirPods. Same company, same access to science.

 

[MattHooper]

"Tell you how they sound?" That's not actually what they're doing though, is it.

In many cases I think they are doing that. Sometimes to a useful degree IMO. It does take navigating some BS, but I don’t find that terribly difficult myself. I understand others are not motivated to bother.

 

[Kremmen]

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.

"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)".

How then do you account for Amir's listening tests when evaluating equipment (when he is able to listen to a product), which clearly contribute to his final verdict? Hardly the "single criteria based approach on which to rate gear essentially "good or bad"" that you speak of, or have I missed something?

Stereophile is definitely guilty of a single criteria-based approach when allowing many of its "reviewers" to eulogise endlessly about all manner of ridiculously overpriced snake oil. Each to his own I suppose!

 

[MattHooper]

How then do you account for Amir's listening tests when evaluating equipment (when he is able to listen to a product), which clearly contribute to his final verdict? Hardly the "single criteria based approach on which to rate gear essentially "good or bad"" that you speak of, or have I missed something?

I think Amir’s sighted impressions provide some wiggle room there and I appreciate them. Occasionally, he has said that despite something not measuring best practises, he still felt it sounded compelling.

But generally speaking, Amir’s and many ASR members approach taken together, is that there are best practises in terms of designing any particular type of gear, speakers, DACs, Amps etc, And gear is weeded out as good or bad based on how it measures to particular criteria. I don’t think that would be controversial to state. How many times have we seen people stay here “ gear should be accurate and neutral?” And of course we have the panther ratings.

It clearly does narrow the field from what many on ASR would judge as acceptable per performance versus what you’ll find in Stereophile or among or subjective audiophiles. This continually plays out in ASR criticisms of Stereophile praising gear that measures poorly.

So I think it’s quite obvious that the two different approaches I outlined explains the divergence and the type of gear that gets recommended or lauded here, versus in Stereophile.

Which again I hasten to add, is not a knock against ASR’s approach.

 

[Kremmen]

I think Amir’s sighted impressions provide some wiggle room there and I appreciate them. Occasionally, he has said that despite something not measuring best practises, he still felt it sounded compelling.

But generally speaking, Amir’s and many ASR members approach taken together, is that there are best practises in terms of designing any particular type of gear, speakers, DACs, Amps etc, And gear is weeded out as good or bad based on how it measures to particular criteria. I don’t think that would be controversial to state. How many times have we seen people stay here “ gear should be accurate and neutral?” And of course we have the panther ratings.

It clearly does narrow the field from what many on ASR would judge as acceptable per performance versus what you’ll find in Stereophile or among or subjective audiophiles. This continually plays out in ASR criticisms of Stereophile praising gear that measures poorly.

So I think it’s quite obvious that the two different approaches I outlined explains the divergence and the type of gear that gets recommended or lauded here, versus in Stereophile.

Which again I hasten to add, is not a knock against ASR’s approach.

Some valid comments you have made here, which I do appreciate. Unfortunately, Stereophile has not done itself any favours over the years by publishing reviews such as the following, which features no measurements whatsoever to back up the appraisal of some seemingly hallowed speaker cables: the $4200/m pair Nordost Valhalla speaker cables.

Nordost Valhalla interconnect & speaker cable Valhalla loudspeaker cable

Valhalla loudspeaker cable: $4200/m pair

www.stereophile.com

I'd rather read Alice in Wonderland for a truer version of reality! It's all a bit embarrassing really.

 

[suttondesign]

Well, some may think they don't. Research using properly blinded testing tends to show that, when people are only using their ears for listening, they do, in fact, prefer transparent equipment. Or at least have no preference for non-transparent equipment. At least as far as I'm aware.

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.

 

[amper42]

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.

 

[MattHooper]

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.

I get that. I’ve listened to and used (at home and in work ) plenty of well-designed neutral speakers. There is something reassuring about recognizing the sound of neutrality.
Your mind isn’t busy noting colorations and you can just relax.

I have a fairly high tolerance for colorations when it comes to just sitting down and listening to different systems. I’m intrigued by how different colorations sound.

On the other hand, I have a fairly low tolerance for colorations when it comes to loudspeakers that I actually want to own.
If I’m too aware of a coloration that can be an issue. However, I’m OK if there’s a bit of colouration that has been integrated in way enough so that it doesn’t jump out at me, and I’m able to otherwise enjoy features of the sound that I really like.

 

[DVDdoug]

But it’s important to understand what that means since there are clearly ASR members in good standing who have tubes or viny

But most of us recognize that tubes can be (technically) inferior and that vinyl is (technically) inferior. If someone enjoys "the warm crackle of vinyl" of if they enjoy vinyl for different reasons I have no issue with that.

I use my own example of the Bose 901 which will sound different to a standard speaker under blind tests.

Since most speakers do sound different, blind listening serves a different purpose than with electronics where you want everything to be transparent sound the same. I would prefer the reviewer to listen with the speaker behind a screen without knowing the manufacturer, price, or anything about it. And it's OK if they compare it to one more known reference speakers. Then write-up their impressions while still "blind". But that would take guts, or confidence. Floyd Toole did these kinds of experiments (with listening panels, not just him) but as a scientist, not as a reviewer.

 

[amper42]

I get that. I’ve listened to and used (at home and in work ) plenty of well-designed neutral speakers. There is something reassuring about recognizing the sound of neutrality.
Your mind isn’t busy noting colorations and you can just relax.

I have a fairly high tolerance for colorations when it comes to just sitting down and listening to different systems. I’m intrigued by how different colorations sound.

On the other hand, I have a fairly low tolerance for colorations when it comes to loudspeakers that I actually want to own.
If I’m too aware of a coloration that can be an issue. However, I’m OK if there’s a bit of colouration that has been integrated in way enough so that it doesn’t jump out at me, and I’m able to otherwise enjoy features of the sound that I really like.

I use to think this way. Then I started playing with the ADI-2 DAC FS "Loudness" controls. What I found was with the RME I could make speakers sound just about any way I want them. It was eye opening how I could make my BMR Monitors sound amazingly close to the Revel F328Be playing in the next room. With the RME just about any decent speaker can be persuaded to sound like your favorite.

You won't believe this until you try it. I laugh thinking about all the people hooking up different speakers to find the exact sound they are looking for when they could simply dial it in with the ADI-2 DAC FS.

 

[Mikig]

i want to share some thoughts with you….personal and debatable, as always

I read Stereophile's reviews. I like them, I like the somewhat fictionalized part, the anecdotes, the history of brands and audio components. It's literature, and we all know that literature can be humanistic, philosophical, scientific, sociological... so why not?

ASR is unique in its genre, it has a different approach, more targeted and focused on purely scientific issues. I find it very educational and full of concrete ideas to use. But one does not exclude the other: indeed, in some ways they even manage to compensate each other.
I appreciate discoveries, science, physics, the chemistry of things, even if I am a humble former lawyer, but I also appreciate what makes these disciplines human.
Even if the fictionalized part "can somehow escape from the cold reality of things... Otherwise it would all be a bit indigestible, for me, if they were just cold numbers, that want to forget the man around us.
Anyway, I bring you a small contribution read in a test. A concrete example of what Stereophile is also? Here is a sentence that I find brilliant, inside a review from last summer: “In 2024, discerning the sonic differences among well-designed digital components is not a straightforward affair. For me, DACs and streamers now tend to be as close in sonic quality as varieties of mineral water: they're substantially alike, and personal taste plays an outsized role. Just as it's unlikely that being served a non-favored bottle of water will spoil your meal, it's conceivable but improbable that a carefully built digital source will make or break your listening experience.”….
in my opinion, from many points of view, ultimately they say the same things…. some are more direct, some are more romantic, but the concepts are not that far apart…. So as far as I'm concerned, I also like to see the world that goes beyond the most extreme utilitarianism. I like special wines, 30,000 euro amplifiers, even if I can't buy them, as I like tourbillions and handcrafted cars, especially if built in Modena and I like the stories about these special objects....
they help me to have a more complete overall vision, and I find them fundamental to stimulate an essential part of my life: dreams and desires....
the only criticism I make about the list of Recommended Components? 97% of the components, even if very beautiful and subjectively attractive, are out of reach for me....then even on this one could discuss why those who sell 5 turntables a year for functional economic reasons must add an extra 0 to the price list...but that's another matter....