Stereophile Recommended Components 2024

[Hear Here]

Me, too. NAD C298,C3050, M10 V2 and M28 are listed. I suspect the others were "aged off" as explained in the headnotes.

Interesting that the award-winning M33 was aged off" while the Anthem STR that was reviewed over 2 years earlier than the NAD, is still featured. I think we should ask for further digging into the reason the M33 is no longer listed. It's arguably a better amp than many others at comparable prices. OK, I'm biased because I bought the M33 and haven't found anything better at its price point!

 

[Kal Rubinson]

Interesting that the award-winning M33 was aged off" while the Anthem STR that was reviewed over 2 years earlier than the NAD, is still featured. I think we should ask for further digging into the reason the M33 is no longer listed. It's arguably a better amp than many others at comparable prices. OK, I'm biased because I bought the M33 and haven't found anything better at its price point!

The criterion for being "aged off" can be mitigated if any of the reviewers has continued to actively use a particular device. For example, I own and often use my exaSound and Okto DACs.

Your reaction is not surprising. I imagine NAD feels the same way.

 

[pablolie]

Interesting that the award-winning M33 was aged off" while the Anthem STR that was reviewed over 2 years earlier than the NAD, is still featured. I think we should ask for further digging into the reason the M33 is no longer listed. It's arguably a better amp than many others at comparable prices. OK, I'm biased because I bought the M33 and haven't found anything better at its price point!

We all know it's an incredibly competent piece of equipment, whether or not it's listed there doesn't detract one iota from that, and arguably just highlights some editorial compromise.

I am a Stereophile subscriber, but it's not because I expect any publication -even ASR- to be 100% infallible and always consistent. Would be nice, but it'll never happen. Even ChatGPT has editorial bias here and there (arguably more than humans that try hard to be unbiased).

 

[Chester]

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.

So I think what they mean here is, let’s not offend any sponsors or potential sponsors, and make every category sound good.

 

[pablolie]

So I think what they mean here is, let’s not offend any sponsors or potential sponsors, and make every category sound good.

In all fairness, that's all around us, and has been for some time. Somebody tell me of publications that see absolutely no redeeming quality in a product and publish the review like that? Chances are every competently managed company makes products with a certain target customer in mind, and as incomprehensible as that choice may be to some of us, there's a need to see that covered by some.

I think we sometimes are naively idealistic with our demands.

The great benefit of a publication like Stereophile is that it strikes a balance between unashamed esoteric equipment porn, practical products, great writing (I value that)... and I don't expect it for free. It costs $ to get that going, and look around you and see how many publications survive solely on subscriptions without any sponsorships. You pay $15k for 20-page Gartner or other industry "overviews" (and they are not totally impartial, they'll give slight nods to those who pay them very generously for yearly subscriptions, which only deep pockets can). Nothing new under the sun here. Just look at the news sources we have available: neither MSNBC nor Fox News will ever cover "the other side" fairly... because they are not paid to, and they'd lose their audience if they did. Both are free to me. But I prefer to pay $100 a year for my Economist subscription, because it is (a) well written and (b) contains multiple points of view.

When it comes to audio, as a rule I cannot stand "free reviews". I question their impartiality as well as the qualifications of the reviewer, and very often the narrative and writing range from horrid to a hallucinatory stream of consciousness with zero informative value. I am not going to waste my time like that. The whole point about reading is to learn - either by admiring beautiful writing for its own sake, or to learn more about a particular subject.

I pay for my ASR subscription as a supporter because I know the quality of the reviews isn't free, and I want to support it to stay just the way it is. So don't be freeloaders!

 

[Mikig]

Additionally, for those who could afford the recommendations there is no ability to elucidate, other than the steep prices, the benefits of one expensive piece of “jewelry” over another.

I take inspiration from one of your sentences for some general reflections because I notice a tendency that leaves me pensive too often. And that leads me to ask questions to the members of the forum. In the hope of getting answers, I declare from now that nothing is personal or aimed at specific users.

If a person wants to spend 500,000 euros for a system, because he likes it and does not have the problem of measurements, why should it be for you, so much so as to become a judgment?

Why should we have to judge the way of living the audio hobby when it is different from how we live it?

Why should we worry about the clarifications of the benefits of other people's choices when the true and only benefit is to satisfy one's own desires, provided of course that they are legitimate !

There are those who desire the absolute purity of sound, those who only want to collect, those who desire pleasing listening and nothing more, those who only love the technique of things, those who are madly in love with a certain brand, those who cannot do without tubes, digital or turntables, and everything you want to put in there. The question arises spontaneously: why should we worry about giving a judgment on the choices of others and expect that these choices necessarily have a justification that must make us happy?

I personally match pieces recommended by Amirm, with pieces that I discovered to be recommended by SP with pieces that I simply like.
And I don't feel the need to have to conform completely to predetermined schools of thought nor to have to prove something or justify choices...
And I think I'm in good company here, given that not everyone has a Benchmark, Benchmark, Su10, Revel system...
which would be the best for measured performance.
I've seen some nice CJs, some Mark Levinsons, I've seen some Altecs, like some nice Marantzs from the 70s, some wonderful turntables or fantastic digital devices, I see DIY and I see systems built that carry with them an engineering that could launch a spacecraft... To each his own, in the end I think what counts is personal satisfaction and not what you want to demonstrate to others...

 

[Mark617]

I take inspiration from one of your sentences for some general reflections because I notice a tendency that leaves me pensive too often. And that leads me to ask questions to the members of the forum. In the hope of getting answers, I declare from now that nothing is personal or aimed at specific users.

If a person wants to spend 500,000 euros for a system, because he likes it and does not have the problem of measurements, why should it be for you, so much so as to become a judgment?

Why should we have to judge the way of living the audio hobby when it is different from how we live it?

Why should we worry about the clarifications of the benefits of other people's choices when the true and only benefit is to satisfy one's own desires, provided of course that they are legitimate !

There are those who desire the absolute purity of sound, those who only want to collect, those who desire pleasing listening and nothing more, those who only love the technique of things, those who are madly in love with a certain brand, those who cannot do without tubes, digital or turntables, and everything you want to put in there. The question arises spontaneously: why should we worry about giving a judgment on the choices of others and expect that these choices necessarily have a justification that must make us happy?

I personally match pieces recommended by Amirm, with pieces that I discovered to be recommended by SP with pieces that I simply like.
And I don't feel the need to have to conform completely to predetermined schools of thought nor to have to prove something or justify choices...
And I think I'm in good company here, given that not everyone has a Benchmark, Benchmark, Su10, Revel system...
which would be the best for measured performance.
I've seen some nice CJs, some Mark Levinsons, I've seen some Altecs, like some nice Marantzs from the 70s, some wonderful turntables or fantastic digital devices, I see DIY and I see systems built that carry with them an engineering that could launch a spacecraft... To each his own, in the end I think what counts is personal satisfaction and not what you want to demonstrate to others...

There is no judgment in the sentence I wrote. I am indicating that there is little to learn from a list price of products posing as a recommendation (see ”A (FULL RANGE):”). I come to ASR or SP with the goal of learning something from a review besides name, price and a generic “good”. I do not have a problem with measurements: they are a tool and not an end onto themselves. Same with a review. However, a review stating that a piece of equipment is “very musical” without an explanation on what compels that statement shares no knowledge. Platitudes are not informing, they are advertisement.

Cheers.

 

[pablolie]

I take inspiration from one of your sentences for some general reflections because I notice a tendency that leaves me pensive too often. And that leads me to ask questions to the members of the forum. In the hope of getting answers, I declare from now that nothing is personal or aimed at specific users.

If a person wants to spend 500,000 euros for a system, because he likes it and does not have the problem of measurements, why should it be for you, so much so as to become a judgment?

....

I am 200% there with you. I never judge what others buy for their own enjoyment if that's their preference. If someone's preference is to highlight they can splurge on audio jewelry and just use the room as a showpiece (and seldom or never listen "critically", as a rule)... or the next person wants to brag about their system having a SINAD of 140dB while exclusively listening to curated audiophile track collections, hey, it's no business of mine.

It's only when I am told I am ignorant/inferior/etc because I don't abide by their personal standards or preferences or fetishes that I will speak up.

 

[Thomas_A]

OMA K3: $363,000 including power supply and Schröder SLM tonearm

MF described this idiosyncratically styled, massive, and very expensive turntable as looking “somewhat like the Guggenheim Museum topped by a heliport and a construction crane.” Even so, he was impressed by its performance, with the 11.1" “aluminum girder” Schröder tonearm fitted with Ortofon Anna D, Lyra Etna l Lambda SL, and Lyra Atlas l Lambda SL phono cartridges. He described the K3’s sound as “fast, clean, detailed, highly resolving, super-transparent, effortlessly dynamic, and capable of producing unparalleled transient precision and depth-charge-deep bass ‘wallop’ that’s fully extended yet totally free from overhang.” He concluded, “As with any truly great audio product, regardless of price, the OMA K3 turntable speaks with a singular voice.” Offers 33 1/3, 45, and 78rpm speeds. Dedicated stand costs $40,000

363,000$ for a turntable without one shred of factual evidence to justify the astronomical price tag.
And that is just one of many example. Imagining a person who bought one, listening to that TT on a pair of speaker connected out of phase brings a smile.
ASR or no ASR, how can a price tag of that magnitude make sense to any sane person?

The OMA sways like a rollercoaster.

Fun with vinyl measurements

It’s correlated but a bit out of phase. Which part of the record is this?

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[MattHooper]

I am indicating that there is little to learn from a list price of products posing as a recommendation

That depends what you’re trying to learn.
Some people do find value in Stereophile reviews. What I really like about the recommended components list is that they come with pertinent sections from the review, suggesting what characteristics the reviewer saw in the gear in question. It’s a nice way to get short form snapshots of the reviews. Sometimes. the snapshot will be intriguing such that I (and likely other readers) seek out the full review. There, you can see the measurements for the gear and correlate that with the impressions from the reviewer if you wish. It might end up being being a piece of gear that you were interested in, even when you end up purchasing and enjoying.

As I keep saying here: communication is a two-way street. Both parties have to be interested in order for anything to be communicated. If one party is just completed dismissive of the other ones message, well, of course you’re not going to get anything from that message.

There is plenty of gear in the Stereophile list that people are actually interested in. (and which will never appear on a website like this) and so Stereophile may be the only source of information. For the reader to make it what he/she will.

 

[Mikig]

There is no judgment in the sentence I wrote. I am indicating that there is little to learn from a list price of products posing as a recommendation (see ”A (FULL RANGE):”). I come to ASR or SP with the goal of learning something from a review besides name, price and a generic “good”. I do not have a problem with measurements: they are a tool and not an end onto themselves. Same with a review. However, a review stating that a piece of equipment is “very musical” without an explanation on what compels that statement shares no knowledge. Platitudes are not informing, they are advertisement.

Cheers.

yes although it must be said that what you see in the "recommended" are small summaries. You should read the full review to the end and maybe see the instrumental tests that are combined. It would certainly be easier to get an idea of how a statement about a device wants to be explained. I personally don't worry too much if an article is a copy and paste of an explanation made by the manufacturer, if a device is on loan, given as a gift, paid or advertised. I think I have enough critical capacity to get an idea and in any case want to pursue my goals. Otherwise we should worry about everything: cars, food, wine, watches, holidays, airlines, transport, nations...

 

[Mikig]

It's only when I am told I am ignorant/inferior/etc because I don't abide by their personal standards or preferences or fetishes that I will speak up

absolutely agree! there are two of us!!!

 

[Mark617]

That depends what you’re trying to learn.
Some people do find value in Stereophile reviews. What I really like about the recommended components list is that they come with pertinent sections from the review, suggesting what characteristics the reviewer saw in the gear in question. It’s a nice way to get short form snapshots of the reviews. Sometimes. the snapshot will be intriguing such that I (and likely other readers) seek out the full review. There, you can see the measurements for the gear and correlate that with the impressions from the reviewer if you wish. It might end up being being a piece of gear that you were interested in, even when you end up purchasing and enjoying.
ial
As I keep saying here: communication is a two-way street. Both parties have to be interested in order for anything to be communicated. If one party is just completed dismissive of the other ones message, well, of course you’re not going to get anything from that message.

Matt,

Your quote of my message is incomplete as it does not include the exemplar I was providing (a part snapshot is also included below). The full sentence I wrote was:

I am indicating that there is little to learn from a list price of products posing as a recommendation (see ”A (FULL RANGE):”).

I do not see value add of this portion of the recommended products over a price list.

Let’s agree to disagree: we are both entitled to our opinions. I understood several postings back that you value SP reviews. I heard you and I said "I am happy for you." I have a different opinion than yours.

 

[Mark617]

yes although it must be said that what you see in the "recommended" are small summaries. You should read the full review to the end and maybe see the instrumental tests that are combined. It would certainly be easier to get an idea of how a statement about a device wants to be explained. I personally don't worry too much if an article is a copy and paste of an explanation made by the manufacturer, if a device is on loan, given as a gift, paid or advertised. I think I have enough critical capacity to get an idea and in any case want to pursue my goals. Otherwise we should worry about everything: cars, food, wine, watches, holidays, airlines, transport, nations...

Don’t we have to worry about it all?

 

[Mikig]

Don’t we have to worry about it all?

yes, but life is only one, too short to do everything we like, we must necessarily accept some "small" compromises....
if we had to worry not only about life and the essence of things but also about the explanation and justification of the dynamics of how some things arrive in "our daily reality"

well, I leave that to others!! and I try to enjoy life and the essence of the things in life...

 

[MattHooper]

Matt,

Your quote of my message is incomplete as it does not include the exemplar I was providing (a part snapshot is also included below). The full sentence I wrote was:

View attachment 394971
I do not see value add of this portion of the recommended products over a price list.

Let’s agree to disagree: we are both entitled to our opinions. I understood several postings back that you value SP reviews. I heard you and I said "I am happy for you." I have a different opinion than yours.

Are you sure I can’t interest you in a 7 watt SET amp and a $40,000 turntable?

You’ve never heard music sounds so natural!

 

[Multicore]

So I think what they mean here is, let’s not offend any sponsors or potential sponsors, and make every category sound good.

I really don't think that's the whole story. I think it's a part of it, perhaps a big part, idk.

Let's think for a moment about consumers who are into the same kind of esoteric/mystical gear worship. Is their belief system similarly quid pro quo compromised by deals with advertisers? Not directly, no. Is it idealistic, as the lovely liturgical texts we can read in Stereophile suggests? I think it probably it is so.

And I tend to think it this same idealism is a true belief among the writers for Stereophile. Whether that came from fake it til you make it or the other way around doesn't really matter. The beliefs are probably sincere.

 

[Kal Rubinson]

The beliefs are probably sincere.

But not uniform.

 

[MattHooper]

I can't comprehend why anyone in 2024 would want to spend money on this scale to listen to vinyl!

I haven’t spent money on that scale, but I’m pretty sure I’ve spent money on a scale, for my turntable set up, that you would likely find to be ridiculous.

And I’m OK with that. I got a turntable for me has great aesthetic appeal. Plus I got a level of performance with vinyl in my system that, overall, makes the sound closer to my digital source than I would have previously imagined I’d get. Since I enjoy playing records so much, I cared a lot about the sound quality as well, and now when I switch from playing my digital streamer to playing a record I usually don’t feel like I’m “ slumming it” sonically. Records sound fabulous too.

So it was all worth it for me.

So what's this going to achieve? A better reproduction of surface noise, clicks and pops?

I have no idea where the cutoff point is for which phono equipment cannot be improved upon. Likely less than I paid! However, I did notice a reduction of overall record noise, especially surface noise, when I replaced my turntable with my current turntable/arm/cartridge. I don’t welcome record noise and seek to reduce it, but since I really like playing records, I’m also realistic that such artefacts are going to show up in varying degrees.

It can't put back all the components of the music that were excluded in the mastering process. Okay, so you can plug three pickups into it and there's a bunch of options you can select but why fluff about with all this archaic crap when you can listen to the cleanest version of almost anything via streaming.

Because playing records (to me) is fun and rewarding in a variety of ways that streaming doesn’t satisfy. And if I pay attention to good quality gear, I also maximize my satisfaction with the sound as well.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

The Recommended List is always interesting because you'll see them getting some things very right like D&D 8C's or the Octo Dac 8 or the Nad based Purifi Amps in Class A. But then we have to take note of the silly stuff like $49K dacs and $80k tube amps, or $300k speakers which are not in any meaningful sense real consumer products listed right beside them. Makes you shake your head, because you know there are people over there who know what real performant, high quality gear is, even while allowing high end snake oil products to be juxtaposed and classified on the same tier with the best stuff.

Hard to believe it's lack of editorial judgement at the level of the individual case, but rather more of a blanket editorial policy choice to just recommend everything--especially if it's priced and positioned by an advertiser's marketing department as a high end audio offering. Perhaps they figure no harm, no foul because nobody in their right mind is going to buy the exorbitantly priced stuff anyway. But then again, there's all the less than stratospherically priced but still expensive junk they do recommend. And I bet a lot of people, particularly newbies wind up with Zu Dirty Weekends because of a glowing review and its place on the list.

That's why it's impossible to take Stereophile seriously or consider it relevant anymore. The most important task of a critic/reviewer isn't even to rank order what's under consideration. Rather it's to separate the genuine from the spurious. There's a lot of junk in the audiophile marketplace, spurious crap which co-exists right along with some absolutely brilliant products, and if the publication which positions itself as the primary reviewer doesn't differentiate between those two polar opposites, but actually in many cases misinforms, why should anyone consider its offerings worth anyone's time anymore?