Stereophile Recommended Components: 2019 Edition

[Joe P]

https://www.stereophile.com/content/...s-2019-edition

[Audiophilehi]

Thanks Joe!

[Audiophobiac]

Yes, I use it more as a list of avoidance. For the most part if it is on this list, avoid it. This has worked well for me for years. I have found that what does not make it on this list is better than what does. That's just my milage, everyone's will vary.

[Ritmo]

Always fun to look at it. So much gear that is missing. And, also, gear that's included that is no longer made.

[Priaptor]

Yes, I use it more as a list of avoidance. For the most part if it is on this list, avoid it. This has worked well for me for years. I have found that what does not make it on this list is better than what does. That's just my milage, everyone's will vary.

Agree. From my perch, this is just an absurd outdated list, that appears to be used by Stereophile as a "filler". In my younger days I may have referred to it but now it is a nuisance I avoid. Same goes with all these "Golden Ears" etc awards.

[Mike Lavigne]

at least the Stereophile list is not related to their list of current advertisers, like another publication. I'd rather something be somewhat irrelevant than manipulative.

[BlueFox]

Yes, I use it more as a list of avoidance. For the most part if it is on this list, avoid it. This has worked well for me for years. I have found that what does not make it on this list is better than what does. That's just my milage, everyone's will vary.

This only reflects what they have reviewed. They can only review so much each month, so a lot of gear will be over looked. I guess that is a boo-hoo moment, but that’s life. However, they should change the list name to ‘Gear Reviewed’.

[Mike]

I think real owners on forums are quickly surpassing magazines as the source for new buyers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NorthStar]

at least the Stereophile list is not related to their list of current advertisers, like another publication. I'd rather something be somewhat irrelevant than manipulative.

I'd rather not have any of the two.

[kiwi_1282001]

The recommended components list has its limitations.


First, the component must generally be reviewed by Stereophile and it’s obviously not possible to review everything.


Second, the component must be currently available in the US and furthermore generally be available at five or more hi-fi retail outlets. This ruling tends to preclude or at least disfavour manufacturers that sell direct to end users and also product which is either new to the US market or hasn’t yet built out the requisite dealer network.


Third, Stereophile reviewers and editors generally pick and choose what products to review based on their own interest and what they felt appropriate for their readers to know about. If reviewers are not current or have little interest in state of the art digital products / DAC's etc, or don't wish to risk their reputation on products which might be considered 'esoteric' or pseudoscience in nature - then these products will be absent.


Fourth, product not represented in the US is absent from the list. There are of course some outstanding audio manufacturers which do not target, have a strong interest in, or lack the resources to engage the US market.




I am not criticising the above limitations as they are defensible or at least understandable. For example, it is perfectly reasonable for Stereophile to consider it wasteful to publish reports on products that the magazine's U.S. readers could not locally audition for themselves at specialty retailers.


However, the limitations IMHO do tend to lead to lists which look dated and devoid of many new and outstanding audio products.

[CPP]

The recommended components list has its limitations.


First, the component must generally be reviewed by Stereophile and it’s obviously not possible to review everything.


Second, the component must be currently available in the US and furthermore generally be available at five or more hi-fi retail outlets. This ruling tends to preclude or at least disfavour manufacturers that sell direct to end users and also product which is either new to the US market or hasn’t yet built out the requisite dealer network.


Third, Stereophile reviewers and editors generally pick and choose what products to review based on their own interest and what they felt appropriate for their readers to know about. If reviewers are not current or have little interest in state of the art digital products / DAC's etc, or don't wish to risk their reputation on products which might be considered 'esoteric' or pseudoscience in nature - then these products will be absent.


Fourth, product not represented in the US is absent from the list. There are of course some outstanding audio manufacturers which do not target, have a strong interest in, or lack the resources to engage the US market.




I am not criticising the above limitations as they are defensible or at least understandable. For example, it is perfectly reasonable for Stereophile to consider it wasteful to publish reports on products that the magazine's U.S. readers could not locally audition for themselves at specialty retailers.


However, the limitations IMHO do tend to lead to lists which look dated and devoid of many new and outstanding audio products.

JA Review Policy

The Law and the Prophets: Stereophile's Review Policies

John Atkinson | Mar 9, 2007

https://www.stereophile.com/asweseei...wsi/index.html

[mep]

Here's the good news: No one is required to read any list of recommended components, but you are free to read them and bitch about them on forums.

[CPP]

Here's the good news: No one is required to read any list of recommended components, but you are free to read them and bitch about them on forums.

[Audiophobiac]

This only reflects what they have reviewed. They can only review so much each month, so a lot of gear will be over looked. I guess that is a boo-hoo moment, but that’s life. However, they should change the list name to ‘Gear Reviewed’.

Long understood. I don't begrudge certain gear being left off or included or whatever. We all have our favorites, so what?

[Audiophobiac]

I think real owners on forums are quickly surpassing magazines as the source for new buyers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't know about that, but I will add that I just think Stereophoole (as I call it) and most other publications are irrelevant on the whole in my opinion. I trust their reviews as far as I can throw the building they are written in.
In my opinion, self-education and research should be the majority source. Good to ask questions of owners indeed, but keep in mind that experiences are as varied as snowflakes because we all have different rooms, downstream gear, ears, tastes, etc.

[still-one]

Here's the good news: No one is required to read any list of recommended components, but you are free to read them and bitch about them on forums.

Usually people whine and bitch because someone isn't validating their purchases.

[still-one]

I don't know about that, but I will add that I just think Stereophoole (as I call it) and most other publications are irrelevant on the whole in my opinion. I trust their reviews as far as I can throw the building they are written in.
In my opinion, self-education and research should be the majority source. Good to ask questions of owners indeed, but keep in mind that experiences are as varied as snowflakes because we all have different rooms, downstream gear, ears, tastes, etc.

I trust them no more or and no less than the so called experts who post on the various audio websites that populate the net.

[Audiophobiac]

I trust them no more or and no less than the so called experts who post on the various audio websites that populate the net.

Yes. For me alone, I boil it down to this: After gathering just the facts on a piece of consideration, I move it to no see-ee, no hear-ee, no buy-ee. That's just my policy for me though.

[Projectman]

I find most of the Stereophile and TAS reviews touch on the areas of a component's performance I want to know about, but I still do further research. Forums are somewhat helpful, but you always have opinions that are heavily biased and often contain utter nonsense. I prefer a balanced review (subjective and objective), and I respect most of the reviewers opinions (they are just opinions after all) I read on Stereophile and TAS.

People that write off all or most of the reviews in magazines usually are the ones that have heavy biases and aren't open to opinions other than their own. Their opinions are of little use to me because of their biases.

[Audiophobiac]

I find most of the Stereophile and TAS reviews touch on the areas of a component's performance I want to know about, but I still do further research. Forums are somewhat helpful, but you always have opinions that are heavily biased and often contain utter nonsense. I prefer a balanced review (subjective and objective), and I respect most of the reviewers opinions (they are just opinions after all) I read on Stereophile and TAS.

People that write off all or most of the reviews in magazines usually are the ones that have heavy biases and aren't open to opinions other than their own. Their opinions are of little use to me because of their biases.

My question would be how are people with heavy biases any different from reviewers in stereophile or other publications? I find them to be very heavily biased as well and of no use. Realize that reviewers review what they want to review. They are not told to review the pieces they do. They choose the pieces.
I approach it with "opinions are just that, opinions". One can agree or not. Example: Some folks like horn-loaded speakers, others (like myself) go running from the room usually. No one piece is for everyone. Just like music, some like variety and some are very narrow only liking one style, to each their own and it should never have baring on gear, even speakers unless they are not voiced for your preference.
That is why I just stick with cold hard facts as boring as it may be and then use my ears to decide what "I" think of said product and that is only for me. It has no bearing on joe blow down the street and his system. I built my system for me to listen to.
I do know a couple of reviewers (independant) with the passion and are like switzerland, totally neutral. They demo in real-world, and give you a more general findings opinion without trying to sell you and they tell you upfront it is opinion. I don't get that from publications like Stereophile, TAS, etc. I can appreciate those "neutral opinions" for what they are, but would not hang my hat on them. In fact, those guys I know flat out say not to do that! I like that kind of honesty and/or integrity.

[Projectman]

My question would be how are people with heavy biases any different from reviewers in stereophile or other publications? I find them to be very heavily biased as well and of no use. Realize that reviewers review what they want to review. They are not told to review the pieces they do. They choose the pieces.
I approach it with "opinions are just that, opinions". One can agree or not. Example: Some folks like horn-loaded speakers, others (like myself) go running from the room usually. No one piece is for everyone. Just like music, some like variety and some are very narrow only liking one style, to each their own and it should never have baring on gear, even speakers unless they are not voiced for your preference.
That is why I just stick with cold hard facts as boring as it may be and then use my ears to decide what "I" think of said product and that is only for me. It has no bearing on joe blow down the street and his system. I built my system for me to listen to.
I do know a couple of reviewers (independant) with the passion and are like switzerland, totally neutral. They demo in real-world, and give you a more general findings opinion without trying to sell you and they tell you upfront it is opinion. I don't get that from publications like Stereophile, TAS, etc. I can appreciate those "neutral opinions" for what they are, but would not hang my hat on them. In fact, those guys I know flat out say not to do that! I like that kind of honesty and/or integrity.

I go in to reading reviews with an open mind and I believe most reviewers do the same. An opinion is just that. To say that Stereophile, TAS or even your opinion has no value is like putting your head in the sand. I don't like sand in my hair and ears so I will keep my head up and be on the lookout for differing opinions and make my own decision. Perhaps audiophiles do what you do, but as an enthusiast I have my eyes wide open.

[Audiophobiac]

I go in to reading reviews with an open mind and I believe most reviewers do the same. An opinion is just that. To say that Stereophile, TAS or even your opinion has no value is like putting your head in the sand. I don't like sand in my hair and ears so I will keep my head up and be on the lookout for differing opinions and make my own decision. Perhaps audiophiles do what you do, but as an enthusiast I have my eyes wide open.

I'm as far as you get from audiophile by any stretch. I'm a music enthusiast. For me, its music before gear. When I am considering a piece (which will not happen for the rest of my life now that my system is built), I do gather up any reviews on it to compare notes, but that is as far as I go and I take it with a salt-lick. I always feel like the reviewers at Stereophile, TAS etc. are just trying to sell me a bill of goods. I don't respond to marketing or paid adverts, outlandish claims, etc.
The only opinion that has any meaning is your own in what you heard or experienced with said piece at the end of the day
I don't habitually read those magazines or other reviews on gear, whether I like the peice or am interested or not. I do this only if I am needing to get something. I finished my system (yes, "finished" forever, not 2 weeks or 3 months or whatever) about just less than 3 months ago.
For me it is about the music, first, last and always, period, end of story. So now I can get back to it.