Voodoo and Woowoo

I would like you as new editor to be far more critical of the voodoo and snake oil claims of the high-end audio industry, and of the skyrocketing prices for high-end audio components. You should also make Sound & Vision a journal for consumers and not solely an advertisement tool for the companies featured in the magazine.

H. Plebs Via email

Congratulations on the new job. I was very excited to see that you intend to add some focus on affordable stereo components. Frankly, I can’t stomach the woowoo that high end publications peddle. “While the playing is impeccable, the player seems exposed, even vulnerable.” Or how about a preamplifier that’s “more rosin, less wood; more core, less body” than another. Bleargh.

As a Stereophile- controlled property, I can’t expect Sound & Vision to even acknowledge what I mean. But let me convey to you that I am really excited about the possibility that the magazine will feature sensible commentary about sensible products. Don’t get me wrong— I’m currently eyeing a pair of JBL Everest DD67000S and may “settle” for 802D3s. But they won’t be driven by a $20,000 amp.

While I am hoping for a lot more color and subjective opinion than the late great Julian Hirsch tended toward, I also really hope that it will be grounded in good sense and be meaningful to people who recognize and regularly seek out superb sound but who don’t get psychotic about the deleterious effects of “cogging.”

There are enough audio publications doing a roaring trade in peddling elitist hooey, most of it as bogus and fraudulent as wine snobbery. It would be really refreshing if we could get some real, honest, meaningful opinions on reasonable audio equipment once again.

Harbir Singh Via email

Some of my pursuits are photography, bicycling, and shooting. Consequently, I subscribe to several magazines that feature reviews of higher-end products. Ever looked at a $7,000 beginners carbon bike? How about $4,000 for just the latest Nikon camera body? Try over $3,000 for a state-of-the-art .45.

What I’m asking for is some consideration for us folks who don’t have megabucks to spend. If you do a writeup on, say, a high-end receiver, please mention the other receivers in its family, along with their prices. Maybe test the top and bottom model all in one article?

As more and more stereo shops close, it becomes harder to do a “touchy feely” with audio gear. The internet may be great for some things, but I want to actually sit in a nicely set-up listening room to audition speakers. That’s become almost impossible to do.

So that is where you folks come in: to provide your testing ability for those of us who can’t physically touch and hear a component that we might buy.

Peter Wall Via email

I want to know if you plan to have occasional coverage and reviews of high-end components for the dreamers (like me!)?

John Barber Fort Lauderdale, FL

Like most of you, price is a main concern for any purchase I make, so I appreciate your perspective. Having tested and auditioned a wide range of AV products, I know full well there can be diminishing returns when it comes to pricey audio gear. On the flip side, there are many audio components out there that provide incredible value, and that’s the stuff I plan to feature in Sound & Vision. To that end, I’m introducing a new Top Value designation to augment the magazine’s Top Picks. (You’ll see it as a green badge in the product reviews.) That doesn’t mean we won’t occasionally cover pricier gear that pushes the state of the art— the dreamers need to be satisfied as well.

As for the advertising question, Sound & Vision has never been a tool for manufacturers in my opinion, though it’s true that ads help to keep the lights on here. We also aren’t “controlled” by Stereophile. (That’s a pretty wild idea, actually.) Though owned by the same company, Sound & Vision maintains a distinct separation from its high- end audio mag cousin, though you may see some overlap as we start to increase our coverage of more affordable two- channel gear.—