More HiFi+ snake oil promotion

Thats nothing compared to roasting his nuts over a Grande' Feugo'

 

Hmm...I wasn't expecting someone to suggest that at all...

I'm going to try some swaps when I get back home again (March 12th) and let you know what I find but I'm not going to be dumping any kit either way.

First of all, I got the Olsen blocks as much because I needed some quality blocks with surge protection as much as any potential sonic benefits. The only other blocks I have (you can hardly call them blocks they're so flimsy) are some cheapo plastic ones from the local DIY store.

The Eupens I did by for potential sonic benefit but even if it turns out I can't hear a difference they're staying, again, because they're nice quality, well built leads. I'm not averse to paying more for quality materials and build quality regardless of whether there's any sonic benefit there.

Cheapest analog ICs I have are the ones I'm using, my MF NuVistas with Bullets which cost me nothing apart from the price of the bullets which I soldered on myself. Already using the cheapest digital IC I have, a £25 IXOS TOSlink cable.

Cheapest speaker cable I have around is my Dynaudio OCOS which is currently in my second system. I already mentioned that I didn't hear any difference with it compared to the Isolda. The only FFRC I have left is a single 3m run I was using as a high level sub cable. The rest went in the bin

I'll have to speak to tones about where he gets his ear trumpets from then

Michael.

 

.....so you aren't going to do it properly then

I remember from the bake off at cookiemonsters that the dynaudio cable is pretty good. I am not surprised you didnt hear much difference between that and the Isolda.

 

I bought a job lot of ex-NHS ones. Had them gilded to overcome corrosion and thus the slowing down of the high frequency sound waves. It is now clear (see the authoritative article in the most recent edition of "Ear 'ere") that high frequency sound waves run along the surface of ear trumpets, so a corroded surface will cause a timing smear that will seriously mar your enjoyment. In addition, gold definitely adds to the quality of the perceived sound - no scientific explanation has been advanced for this phenomenon, but all aureophiles can testify to it, and most think that Double Deaf Testing is the boffins' way of trying to wriggle off the hook of something they can't explain.

One could of course go for solid gold, as sold by Aureophile Candy, but I can't justify the cost and they're too easily dented and scratched - and they weigh a ton! True aureophiles suspend them from the ceiling with mini-blocks and tackles, to adjust them to the correct height.

 

prehaps some mana may help Tones

 

You mean. I support my ear trumpet on it? Gosh darn it, Tone, why didn't I think of that?

 

I will admit, I'm in the 'cable believers' club, but not in the 'cables are acceptably priced' club. I brought a 2.5M pair of AudioQuest Argent speaker cables from Loot for £150 (RRP is £700), and plugged them in to my then system, an Alchemist Kraken pre/power combo and Mordaunt Short 206 speakers. I'll admit, I didn't expect to hear much in the way of a difference. I popped a CD on and pressed play and walked straight out of the room. Halfway down the hall, the music started. I turned right back round and walked back into the room - this wasn't the Hi-Fi I knew! It sounded 'better' in, to my ears at that time, better in every respect - performance had been moved up a significant notch, greater than I thought was possible from a cable change.
I flogged the cables when I changed to a Naim system, but I still maintain to this day cables make a difference. However, they are ridiculously system-dependent, and can therefore act as expensive tone controls - get the fundamental system you want then use cables to get the exact sound you want (note, by this I'm not saying any cable is any better than any other, just that they sound different because they do different things differently).
Do I think cables are worh the money? Hell no, they're a complete rip-off, because as someone has mentioned before there are two types of cable out there, mass-produced ones that aren't necessarily for audio (* point of note - legen had it that if you unwrap a Nordost El Dorado mains cable, there's a length or two of speaker cable contained within, but the power cable costs far less than the equivalent length of speaker cable*) and custom made ones such as Nordost which are produced in a small enough quantity that however 'good' they may sound, are always going to be expensive to produce because of the economics of scale.
Simon

 

Chris a reply to some of your points ...

>>> In response to ReJoyce request to submit all criticism to HIFI+ - ...
I would say that this is a public forum, and no thread is ever edited that I have seen - unless it is nasty or vindictive in some way. A letter to hifi+ will be subject to the editorial control of the recipient himself!! - who can edit a letter, and put any kind of reply he/she would want to with no fear of retort/reply being published.

The idea of writing to the magazine is to ensure that as many readers as possibe feedback their opinions of the magazine. If Ian is thinking of cancelling his subscription for a given reason he should let that reason be known, if enough people have trhe same opinion something should and will change. If Roy doesn't see a majority of correspondance pointing in one way he is unlikey to change anything imho.


>>> I would instead ask RG to defend himself here on the forum, and explain why his reviews exagerate benefits above and beyond any semblance of reality.

I guess his answer would be "I didn't" its hardly going to be constructive. I will say again that Roy is nothing if not consistent.


>>> In regard of the ''argos catalogue'' I was referring to ''Audiophile Candy'' magazine. If you havent seen it - its a shopping catalogue for hifi bits.

Hadn't seen it.


>>> RG reccomends specific products WITHIN THIS FREE CATALOGUE - therefore to my mind compromising his journalistic integrity. He appears to be a 'gun for hire' instead of an independant journalist/editor.

Can't quite see that. To me this is like a manufacturer using a quote from a review.


>>> I also find Paul Messengers columns more grounded and sensible, like Ian does.

I have heard more than one person (this also gets levelled at my scribblings) criticise Pauls reviews because "he doesn't ever seem to get excited about anything and always sits on the fence". So for them some of Roy's enthusiasm is welcome. I think because Roy has to write so much the overal balance can slip.


>>> Another ''feature'' of HIFI+ that hasnt been mentioned before (but is SO TRUE)... WHEN they find themselves in the unfortunate position of having to say something less than positive about a product - we always get '' Its a bad review sample, there is a flaw'' .... and then a month or so later ... ''Problem fixed!! it really is an AMAZING PRODUCT!''???

I only think that happened once. There have been occasions where bad reviews have stuck.


>>> I dont believe any assertion that review samples are so frequently poor, and point the finger instead at a journalistic RELUCTANCE to say anything bad, even when vindicated.

Some review samples are poor. They are often the distributors dem box and as such have been hawked around the country which always results in a problem eventually. HiFi isn't designed to be portable.
I think that if a sample is faulty that is criticism itself and should warn any customer to check they are getting a good one.


>>> RG's response in the past to such claims as those made by myself and others always goes along the lines of '' its HIFI+'s policy to only review components which it can reccomend, so therefore there are never any bad reviews''.
This above view is hysterically limited IMO. Even when cherry-picking, the best of products show severe limitations. I can name limitations with ANY product Ive ever tried, including a few ''award winners'' on the HIFI+ circuit. If I can do such a simple thing, why cant hifi+?????

Most reviews do talk about the limitations in a product. I don't think there have been that many reviews where no negative is discussed. But for a product to be reviewed the positives have to outweigh the negatives by a decent amount.

Cheers

Jason


PS. There is a reluctance to criticise but only in the sense that it is 1. too easy 2. Is generally pretty boring 3. is totally subjective anyway! The editorial policy isn't just to review somethign that + likes but to only review equipment that one of the reviewers likes. This is a subtle but important difference and explains why some boxes that I can't see the point of get reviewed positively by other writers (and vice versa of course).

 

Cable Prices

Whilst there are plenty of examples of over-priced cables out there, ultimately it's down to the end user to buy them - if they aren't worth the money, then don't!

Is that so hard to do?


I can't see any reason to get excited about the fact that there are companies who've realised they can form a viable business selling ludicrously expensive cables to well-heeled jewellery freaks. There's numerous other products in life doing the same things, none of which are remotely essential.

If your cables don't make a diference then sell the bloody things, or don't buy them in the first place!

For those companies that do take it seriously, you all need to get a grip of the commercial reality of high-end audio. The volume is bugger-all, hence there's no chance to get good volume pricing. The MOQ on a single run of cable runs to kilometres in many cases, most of which you won't sell for years, hence the prices - to claw back investment.

Try and work out what it would cost to shut down a cable manufacturing run, to produce a few metres of samples for R&D purposes - that sort of thing doesn't come cheap, which is why most don't do it

Those that do can afford to do so as they make it a mandatory purchase (e.g. Naim).

Andy.

 

Spot on, Andy

 

Michael,

Let me start by saying that I agree with your healthy scepticism. Especially regarding prices of some of the cables and ...err... other weird & wonderful things.

Just one thing I noticed the other day. During some late night headphone listening I found myself tapping my finger on the headphone cable. I noticed that the taps could clearly be 'heard' through the headphones. Holding the cable, even lightly, just before the point where the individual wires split and then tapping the cable before this point, the effect was eliminated. Having read Paul Messengers review of the Vertex cables, complete with sand filled boxes, I wondered if this was a similar effect that they were trying to achieve, albeit on a reduced (microphonic?) scale. I suppose it must follow that as there is a mechanical connection between cable and speaker and amp, then any vibration within any part of the chain will be transferred to the others. Of course, the $64K question is, is this an audilble effect? And, if it is, could the effect be eliminated by merely clamping the cable just before connection to speaker/amp, as with the headphone example above.

Or, of course, it could all be complete BS. I haven't made up my mind as yet.

 

yep
It's all BS, as was succesfuly proven to me yesterday by a competant naysayer. cables PAH!
ill be using a walkman in future, at least its easier to carry upstairs

 

Whatever cables Paul Messenger may write about, he always seems to come back to bog standard NAC A5 for his own use. Possibly a case of "do as I do" rather than "do as I say"

On the occasions Mr. Messenger does get enthusiastic I find he has an enviable talent of being right. He was almost alone in the early days in claiming that an LP12 was better than the decks most people were using and that Naim were better than other solid state amps people were then using. This at a time when both ideas were almost laughable to the establishment. Since then he has got on to Mana, Densen, Croft, Laverdin, Royd, and others and IMO calls it right every time. The rare times he does get very enthusiatic, particularly about a speaker, it is always worth a listen. There will be something special about it.

 

I've experienced that before too with headphones but what you're hearing is not coming through the headphone transducers but merely the headphone casing (you'd hear the same thing even if the headphones weren't connected to anything).

The level of vibration that a speaker cable might transmit must be miniscule and I certainly can't see it having any effect.

Michael.

 

yep,the Audi TT,Audi S3,BMW Z3,BMW 3 series Compact,and many many more

If people want to buy these placebos then fair enough,I like it when I see a TT,it makes me feel smug knowing I haven't got one,same with cables,the well-heeled jewelry freaks keep the cost of normal stuff down for the rest of us,sjust as the million pound house market is as important to the house market as first time buyers.

 

....an excerpt from hifi+ magazine...

Roy Gregory
Magazine Editor
Hi-Fi Experience:
Since 1986, I have worked in the hi-fi industry, holding positions in retail, with distributors and manufacturers, and as a free-lance journalist.



Since 1986?!?!? isnt that a little........shite?

 

18 years experience seems fair enough to me...

 

Hi Chris,

I don't understand what you are getting at here.

SCIDB

 

I agree about the Audi TT & BMW Z3 - cars for fashion victims only.

I regarded the BMW compact as a truncated abomination until I had a lift in a diesel one recently. It goes very well, bags of torque and great fun, but it does look awful.

Can't see what's wrong with the Audi S3.

I used to drive a Saab, good cars, but now I'm a total git.

 

I think the S3 is a decent balance of style vs content even if it is pretty much a Golf 1.8T with a bigger Turbo. If Audi tweak the new 3.2 V6 for the next S3 is would be more interesting.

The others I completely agree are unworthy targets of desire. Not sure about Saabs though. The 93 is just a restyled Vectra isnt it?