Stereophile Recommended Components: Fall 2018 Edition

Thanks Joe. Always enjoy looking at the list.

Unfortunate that the list seems somewhat stagnant. Also, it includes hardware that has been discontinued - e.g. VPI Direct Classic, VPI HRX and VPI Classic 3.
 
I like the recommended list as long as my Vandy 7 amps and speakers remain on it.;) I got annoyed with them when they removed the Revel Salon 2’s, an all-time great speaker.

Ken
 
IMO the list is becoming less and less relevant. Still enjoy reading the Stereophile though.
 
As with the “Absolute Joke” all the issues are becoming “recommended components”. Sure beats writing new stuff every time. Renewed both subscriptions and sorry I did. My bad.....
 
At the risk of giving away my age, no component listing comes close to the annual “Audio” mag listing. I also enjoyed the “Stereo Review” listing before “Audio” was arround. In my book Julian Hirsch and Len Feldman were the best. The problem with Stereophile is they only list what they reviewed. The newbe would miss out on lots of great gear if they only considered what Stereophile reviewed. Terrific jumping off points like Rotel, Creek, Boston Acoustics and Totem. I have recommended some great non-audiophile systems with Rotel. It is so reliable, friends still have the same Rotel components 30 years later. Guess what? Stereophile is not the last word by far.
 
Joseph R. said:
At the risk of giving away my age, no component listing comes close to the annual “Audio” mag listing. I also enjoyed the “Stereo Review” listing before “Audio” was arround. In my book Julian Hirsch and Len Feldman were the best. The problem with Stereophile is they only list what they reviewed. The newbe would miss out on lots of great gear if they only considered what Stereophile reviewed. Terrific jumping off points like Rotel, Creek, Boston Acoustics and Totem. I have recommended some great non-audiophile systems with Rotel. It is so reliable, friends still have the same Rotel components 30 years later. Guess what? Stereophile is not the last word by far.
Click to expand...

They do only list what they've reviewed, but it is hard to recommend something that you haven't listened to and they do spend alot of time reviewing gear. Sure Stereophile isn't the last word, but it is a word. A voice for the guy who doesn't have that brick and morter shop to go to and listen for himself. My last few pieces of gear I've bought without listening to them. I've read the reviews and talked online to owners of the gear I'm interested in. I believe that 2 of my components are or were on Stereophile's recommended components at one time on another, so I also believe it's not the end all and do all of stereo gear.
 
Jack in Wilmington said:
, so I also believe it's not the end all and do all of stereo gear.
Click to expand...

Jack: I am in agreement with your take on the lack of brick and mortar audio stores. And I often hear gear at friends homes to determine what I may buy in the future. But I have been noticing lately that manufacturers that normally do not advertise in Stereophile, have full page adds in the issues in which their review appears. Stereophile looses points with me in the credibility department when I see this. In speaking with some manufacturers, they have expressed either they advertise or their gear does not get reviewed. I mostly use audio shows to hear equipment. I try mostly to buy equipment with a return policy of some sort. Most stuff I do return.
 
I'm big on return policies also. Lately I've done a lot of business with companies that take my old gear in trade and that's worked out well.

Now you mention manufacturers that advertise only when their gear is reviewed. Do they pay to have their gear reviewed? I was wondering how that whole thing worked.
 
I don’t believe any manufacturer pays for a review. I believe they request their product be reviewed or a reviewer may hear an interesting new piece at a show and ask to review it.
 
I too have never heard payola was involved. But I have heard from manufacturer’s that they felt pressure to buy add copy when up for a review. When I asked a few manufacturer’s why they were never considered for a Stereophile review, their response was “they cannot afford to advertise”.

Looking at it from another point if view, how can Stereophile give an unfavorable review to a company who consistantly purchases pages of advertising space ? Kind of like cutting off your nose....

In my humble opinion (for what it’s worth), that is why the overwhelming amount of reviews are favorable. Look back to the J. Gordon Holt days and you can see the different balance of reviews. Why does Stereophile give some manufacturers a second chance to deliver a faulty component but not to others ? In the recent Audio Research amplifier review the Dan D’Agostino amplifier clearly outperformed the AR. The review then became a review of both the AR preamp mating with the AR power amplifier. Of course the Dan D’Agostino power amp did not have the same synergy as the AR pair. What gives ?
 
CPP said:
That's the way I understand it.
Click to expand...

Well call me a cynic.

There are ways of paying without paying. There are "extended loans" to reviewers. Rather not name names but I went through this with one reviewer years ago who had many "extended loans" of equipment that lasted for the life cycle of the equipment. Not just speakers either; but many products. Look at some of the equipment these reviewers have if they list what they have in their "reviewing studios", often nothing more than a room filled with garbage.

Then there are the dinners, paying to go the factories, etc.

Then of course, I don't buy the coincidence of the biggest, best and most often run ads are those from those products that have provided all the perks I list above receiving the BEST EVER reviews.

Those who have been into this as long as me (since 81) have witnessed it from the beginning of the high end.

These Golden Ear Reviews, Recommended Components, etc to me really have limited value, other than enjoyment. As it pertains to Stereophile, I no longer even look to see what is listed as, from my perch, that part of the magazine is nothing but a filler, often outdated, with barely a justification of it's classification an often no real review. Another gimmick to me are these "Best In Show". Amazing how these reviewers all list the same equipment, albeit in different order usually totally contrary to what most people in attendance hear.

Just to drive a point home, at Munich, one reviewer gave "The Most Coveted" product at the show, the D'Agostino Relentless amplifier, even though the thing wasn't hooked up to anything and had never been heard by anyone. My questions as to "why" went unanswered.

As I said, I am a cynic, put almost no trust in what these reviewers write but admit I do subscribe to most of them to look at the new and old toys to see what is coming to market.
 
It's sad that "printed" lists are viewed as less reliable than something on the web. I pity future generations of audiophiles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top