I think we take any mag reviews far too seriously in general. Personally I subsricbe to both for a variety of reasons and have issues with both. On TAS, a) no measurements: while I am not a measurements guy mostly due to my own ignorance, I see why some would want it and to rule it out I think is a mistake on TAS. But perhaps more importantly, I hate the whole pontification on what constitutes what is the absolute sound itself or conceptual flights they frequently go on about. To me at least, its a bunch of intellectual masturbation that is driven by self narcissism. Amateur philosophy is not what I am looking for. Now not all reviewers like that at TAS and even those who are do not always write in such manner. But as mag, they do have that tendency...and Hifi Plus I find tends to go into that direction too frequently as well.
Stereophile does not go in that direction and the writing style is more to my taste. But I agree with what is being implied here in that its choice of equipment to be reviewed could be much more varied and falls behind TAS. And all reviewers should really avoid hyerbole and point the relative weaknesses with more clarity IMO.
At the end of day, what I personally I look for in these mags and any others is simple a) technological trends b) a basic idea of how the equipment works (functionality etc) and an idea how it sounds, what are the strengths and weaknesses to consider.
One thing. I do love Stereophile's special articles in a particular artist or musical genre. Through it I gotten to know and find out more...and ultimately led to further investigation/enjoyment of the Italian jazz scene as well as current New Orleans music post Katrina. Surprisingly these reports I find are better written and researched with greater variety than most mags dedicated to just music. I wish they did more. Perhaps it because in these reports, there are no commercial interests involved?
Stereophile does not go in that direction and the writing style is more to my taste. But I agree with what is being implied here in that its choice of equipment to be reviewed could be much more varied and falls behind TAS. And all reviewers should really avoid hyerbole and point the relative weaknesses with more clarity IMO.
At the end of day, what I personally I look for in these mags and any others is simple a) technological trends b) a basic idea of how the equipment works (functionality etc) and an idea how it sounds, what are the strengths and weaknesses to consider.
One thing. I do love Stereophile's special articles in a particular artist or musical genre. Through it I gotten to know and find out more...and ultimately led to further investigation/enjoyment of the Italian jazz scene as well as current New Orleans music post Katrina. Surprisingly these reports I find are better written and researched with greater variety than most mags dedicated to just music. I wish they did more. Perhaps it because in these reports, there are no commercial interests involved?