In line with Jay, Mike & Elliot....

[Michaels HiFi]

It's GREAT to see people talking publicly about finally being honest about what "hifi audio" has become.

There have been numerous events over the last 9 months that have now been topped with the excellent recent videos by Elliot & Gang and the video the other day with Mike, Jay and Elliot.

Seeing them talk about the issues many so called "forum audiophiles" have denied exist is a wonderful positive shift for this industry.

I hope 2026 will be the year we take hifi audio back as music lovers and start to clean it up and make it more welcoming and accepting of new people and the push back on the nitwits and shills who have been ruining it for so many others.

 

[Mike]

I want to make my point simple and clear.

- I do not care about long term loans.

- I do not care about trips and other favors.

- I do not care about only positive reviews.

- All of this is just noise.

- What I DO care about is spending $180,000 over the past 60 months (5 years) on print ads in the magazines and getting ZERO, and I mean, ZERO phone calls, emails or text messages from anyone who mentioned they saw the ad. This means ZERO ROI.

- What I do care about is one of the magazines standing us up or canceling every phone call meeting myself and my marketing team scheduled in 2025. We are clearly not important to them if they can’t even be bothered to show up. But when I did make the last video, they finally cared, only to underscore the point I was making all along: social media is far more effective than print.

- What I do care about is not receiving a single phone call from the magazines I am sending a check to every month for 60 months to say, “hey, how’s it going? How can we help?” Nope, just keep sending us those checks. Someone told me they only give a shit to those who are also giving them free gear. I don’t know, don’t care. I’ve moved on.

The above items are what I do care about. My fiduciary duty requires me to always look out for the best interests of my companies.

Given all of this, we will NOT be participating in any PRINT advertising in the audio magazines now, in the near future or possibly ever.

 

[BendingWave]

I second this Mike but I do care about the look of impartiality when they have millions of dollars of long terms loans. Thats me !
The lack of return for the investment spent does not seem to be on their list of important items. In the old days the Mags worked. That ended IMO when HP was no longer in charge or important. The ride down hill has contined ever since .

 

[JCS123]

I second this Mike but I do care about the look of impartiality when they have millions of dollars of long terms loans. Thats me !
The lack of return for the investment spent does not seem to be on their list of important items. In the old days the Mags worked. That ended IMO when HP was no longer in charge or important. The ride down hill has contined ever since .

So true about Harry. His loss is incalculable for this industry/hobby. Who will now be the standard-bearer?

I sometimes find myself reading a review, looking at the writer's system, and a sharp disconnect forms in my mind. Not often is it mentioned how the system was built, whether the reviewer bought the products, at what kind of discount, is it on loan to him or her? For how long? And why have they had it for so long?

Sure,I can imagine that a couple of these writers has saved diligently and amassed enough wealth to be able to afford these megabucks systems. But I can't fathom the vast majority of them buying these $600,000 speakers, $200,000 amps and $25,000 cables that they're reviewing, even at a hefty discount.

There needs to be some kind of disclosure to let readers know how much trust we should place in a reviewer's work. It's nice to see this coming to a head. It can only be a positive for us consumers, and I would think the industry as a whole.

 

[JCS123]

It's GREAT to see people talking publicly about finally being honest about what "hifi audio" has become.

There have been numerous events over the last 9 months that have now been topped with the excellent recent videos by Elliot & Gang and the video the other day with Mike, Jay and Elliot.

Seeing them talk about the issues many so called "forum audiophiles" have denied exist is a wonderful positive shift for this industry.

I hope 2026 will be the year we take hifi audio back as music lovers and start to clean it up and make it more welcoming and accepting of new people and the push back on the nitwits and shills who have been ruining it for so many others.

POSITIVITY TOUR 2026!!!

I'm in!!!

 

[BendingWave]

So true about Harry. His loss is incalculable for this industry/hobby. Who will now be the standard-bearer?

I sometimes find myself reading a review, looking at the writer's system, and a sharp disconnect forms in my mind. Not often is it mentioned how the system was built, whether the reviewer bought the products, at what kind of discount, is it on loan to him or her? For how long? And why have they had it for so long?

Sure,I can imagine that a couple of these writers has saved diligently and amassed enough wealth to be able to afford these megabucks systems. But I can't fathom the vast majority of them buying these $600,000 speakers, $200,000 amps and $25,000 cables that they're reviewing, even at a hefty discount.

There needs to be some kind of disclosure to let readers know how much trust we should place in a reviewer's work. It's nice to see this coming to a head. It can only be a positive for us consumers, and I would think the industry as a whole.

Harry was a friend and a Mentor but thats not what it is all about. If you go back and read those old TAS books, he took you on a journey and explained all the way along what he wa doing and provided a language for which we could converse. He always spoke about the music and I can tell you he had incredible passion for the music, NOT the gear. He educated us, he taught us, he made it fun. Today its all about the gear and the money.
IMO if there are no goals or standards that they are trying to achieve other than a few vague meaningless words then whets the purpose? They have nothing that anyone can use to understand their conclusion. If every reviewer has different standards and non ever listen to the what the others call a reference then we just have a bunch of opinions, thats all opinions with out goals.
HP showed manufacturers what their stuff could and could not do. Thats the truth. I was there when they came and got blown away or horribly disappointed. You know what it made stuff better, it made people grow. YOU grow from failure.

 

[JCS123]

Regarding growing through failure. It might not be the only way to learn, but in my experience it is certainly the best way.

Regarding everyone having different standards, that's why I have tried to identify a reviewer or two that has agreed with me in general on a piece of equipment or two. If they are clear up-front about any financial arrangements that have gotten the piece in question to them for review, all the better. There are WAY too many variables involved to make this fool-proof, but it is a starting point.

The importance of a dealer that you can go to and not only hear opinions but actually listen to gear can't be overstated.

My dealer's advice and several days of listening resulted in a system that I could NEVER have put together by reading peoples' opinions on the internet and in the magazines. In the process of becoming my favorite store, he also emerged as my favorite reviewer. I am so grateful for having spent time with Harry in his store, and I'm quite sure that he has saved me from countless headaches and over-spending on mismatched gear over the years.

About enjoying the music over the gear, isn't it amazing how many musicians don't really care too much about getting better sound quality from their hifi rigs? Maybe because they know how playback equipment falls so short of the actual sound of the music at its moment of creation? (That's my theory and I'm sticking with it...)

The Hifi Five videos are most enjoyable. It's nice to get that bird's-eye view of how the guys on the other side of the transaction are feeling about the industry. Very eye-opening at times. Good stuff!

 

[BendingWave]

Thank you for your comments and for joining us. A reviewer is by definition a critic. Some fail at this and IMO are reporters. If you can find someone that values the same things that you do then listening to them can help. If you read a restaurant review and go there and it sucks you probably shouldn't listen to that person again. This is true with audio as well. The validity of reviews is only in the hands of those that accept their conclusions. My question however is what are their goals and their standards? Can they all have different ones? How and why?
IMO this is just be able to get more gear which means more money from advertising.
I know I am prejudiced but a good dealer is a valuable resource since you can go there and see if he/she can produce good sound. If they can then that's a good start for a buyer, if they can't then you should probably go elsewhere.

Personally I love music, the gear is just a tool.

 

[Michaels HiFi]

Regarding growing through failure. It might not be the only way to learn, but in my experience it is certainly the best way.

I agree with this 10000% - whether it be in audio or how I am teaching myself how to refinish vintage audio pieces, I LOVE the experimenting part.

To me it's better than simply reading on a FB page or forum.

Sure I read and watch videos, but then I actually TRY the things they say will work AND the things they say won't. Why? That way I understand how it all works to end up with better results than simply doing what some guy tells me to do.

Here's a perfect example of a before, during and after refinishing job of a case that is almost 100 years old.

Everything I did to this was technically the "wrong" way vs. what the wood groups said to do.

I couldn't be more pleased with the results.

 

[JCS123]

Nice work, Michael!

 

[Kramer64]

If advertising brings no return, there is no reason for a business to buy ads. Sensible business decision.

I'm a subscriber and a consumer and I do care about the long term loans (gifts), trips, huge discounts and other undisclosed conflicts. Reviews are written, presumably, to influence the reader's buying decisions. The very word "review" implies a completely candid assessment-that's not what we get. It comes down to whether the mags consider themselves to be involved in journalism, and I've heard reviewers refer to themselves as "journalists." A journalist's duty is to the readers and to fully candid reporting. If the real purpose is simply to market whatever is being reviewed, fair enough, just be up front about it. At a very minimum, disclose all the various forms of consideration given to the reviewers so that readers can make an informed decision. What possibly is the harm in that?