darrenyeats wrote:
I'll be sad if Stereophile disappear because they're one of the few
magazines doing measurements as part of their reviews.
My sentiment exactly... The measurements J.A. publishes are why I
subscribe. It would be say if the only audiophile magazine I can find
left at the
darrenyeats wrote:
I'll be sad if Stereophile disappear because they're one of the few
magazines doing measurements as part of their reviews.
Archimago wrote:
My sentiment exactly... The measurements J.A. publishes are why I
subscribe. It would be say if the only audiophile magazine I can
andy_c wrote:
I bookmarked one of the funnier posts I have seen on just this very
subject. It is '_here_'
(http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/lounge/146693-john-curls-blowtorch-preamplifier-part-ii-2454.html#post3092791)
(first one, by SY, JC=John Curl in the quote).
Exactly my point - while
ralphpnj wrote:
Come on gentlemen please tell me exactly what difference Stereophile's
holy measurements make? If the equipment under review and measurement
sounds great to the reviewer but has terrible measurements then JA (aka
clown in chief) writes some nonsense about how just because the
ralphpnj wrote:
Exactly my point - while Stereophile's measurements may be revealing and
useful to a knowledgeable reader who understands how to read and
interpret them, JA's remarks about how the measurements relate to the
equipment's sound are pure marketing BS.
The really silly part , he
I used to read What Hi-Fi? does that count? ;)
After having to replace the binding post on a speaker I got to see the
wiring inside and realised there was no point buying expensive cable
because KEF certainly don't use expensive cable inside their speakers.
Taking a hearing test I can only hear
