Likely none meet the criteria you described. However, my favorite audio reviews are on https://www.soundstage.com/
42 responses Add your response
I really enjoy the HiFi Advice site.......... http://www.hifi-advice.com/blog/ Really common sense in depth reviews. |
Human hearing is quite individualized, we are not clear on what all of it means and the measurements don't correlate to what people say they hear. Thus, personal opinion rules. Audio has no capacity for a photo finish, and even when we do know how it works in ultra fine detail, it will probably remain so. Audio leaves the literal of mind (in part or in total) in desire and type, who search frantically for black and white answers - hanging by their thumbs. They tend to find that a painful situation, so they strike out at it. Since the real issues are not all that clear, people tend to go back and push the same button over and over again, hoping for a different result. Not going to happen. |
Like David said, dailyaudiophile.com is the best source. The page compiles all the information from magazines, webpages and blogs dedicated to audio. I also like to read STEREO, a German magazine that is distributed for free, in English, via email. You just have to subscribe. TAS and Stereophile are classics that I follow and I personally hate the British magazines - some love them. The magazines from Hong Kong are simply fantastic (maybe the best) in terms of contents, but you would need to read in Chinese. |
I agree with the poster who said none. The best ever was probably Peter Aczel's The Audio Critic http://www.biline.ca/audio_critic/audio_critic_down.htm Hugely controversial unsurprisingly, much vilified but never refuted. It took me ages to accept what I was reading and even now I want to resist. However it's the only one that has stood the test of time for me. All the others I have read were mere entertainment, nothing more. However there is one UK magazine Hi-Fi Critic which purports to be free from bias (I doubt it) and advertising (which can only be good). It's still not hard hitting enough for my taste but you can a flavour of it here, https://www.hificritic. Or you might prefer one of the broadcast publications if you're happier with a more accurate and factual but drier presentation. |
@roberjerman, yes you're right. It's difficult to get past the feeling that audio journalism is still nothing more than a way to pay the bills. Most of it should be seen in a similar context to pornography, glossy images that are fun and easy on the eye but ultimately bear little relation to reality. In fact some people do refer to it as audio porn! |
roberjerman"The two Peters (Aczel and Moncrieff) remain the best objectivest reviewers in print to this day! And hated by the "golden ears" crowd!" This is completely false as anyone with any actual experience reading they're magazines knows while it is true that they called themselves objectivists they were both extremely subjective reviewers they dismissed all kinds of verifiable repeatable observable evidence because it did not fit with their belief system which was very much "faith based" and anyone who did not embrace promote and support they're faith was ridiculed and ostracized they portrayed themselves as exceptional tellers of the truth but in fact had very much Jim Jones like qualitys. They were cultists and hifi is full of people who want you to follow them blindly wherever they may lead. |
Peter Aczel was a man of strong views but he had an enormous amount of experience in audio. He could be described as the James Randi (supernatural sceptic/ buster) of the audio world. His views were never refuted and its unlikely they ever will be. I'm sure most people involved in Hi-Fi journalism/entertainment (?) would rather he was quietly forgotten. It's difficult to refute evidence of blind tests where the sound of a straightened coat hanger is indistinguishable from a pair of $2000 interconnects. Thank you for your work Peter. |
cd318"Peter Aczel was a man of strong views but he had an enormous amount of experience in audio. He could be described as the James Randi (supernatural sceptic/ buster) of the audio world. His views were never refuted and its unlikely they ever will be." His views were often refuted and his experiments which he presented as science were shown to be substantially flawed, erroneous and deceptive he was not a skeptic buster but an evangelist, cultist and self-proclaimed visionary who's goal was to sell magazines under the guise of science when in fact he was faith-based "fundamentalist" proselytizer and it is sad to say that he is not missed by anyone in the world of audio with the sole exception of those he duped so you might want to explore the facts that surround the myth he promoted and that you now seek to continue. |
cd318 Peter Aczel was a man of strong views but he had an enormous amount of experience in audio. He could be described as the James Randi (supernatural sceptic/ buster) of the audio world. His views were never refuted and its unlikely they ever will be. >>>>Whoa! What?! You’re saying Peter Aczel was like James Randi? James Randi was a fraud. He was a Las Vegas showman and accomplished pseudo skeptic. And I only mean that in the nicest way. He also tried to con a few audiophiles when he ran out of spoon benders to go after. Actually that’s a pretty good analogy, now that I think about it. |
Wow thermals1 That actually scared me a little when I read the OP cause I don't think the magazines are at the top of the listening food chain any more. That sounds horrible doesn't it? It's really hard to come from the golden era of HEA and feel that same vibe today through the HEA magazines, forums and trade shows. I would recommend joining a couple of audiophile forums that stay clear of internet trolling. Also consider getting some input from listeners from Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and that part of the world as they seem to be ahead of the listening curve over US listeners. Michael Green www.michaelgreenaudio.net |
Agree with the high value of 6moons for two reasons; First they offer the best pictures of the insides of the gear they review, I believe this may be a requirement (that they be allowed to post pictures of the insides) in order for them to review gear. I have a pet peeve with manufacturers who keep everything a secret (think Wizard of Oz - what are they hiding) and and I will not buy from those who "void the warranty" if the user opens the case. Second, Srajan does have quite a bit of experience with a wide-variety of gear and is a pretty good writer, even though some don't care for his color commentary. I like how he usually provides direct comparisons with similar gear, and gives his opinion, without necessarily promoting everything new as being better. When I purchased print magazines, I liked HiFi+ for the great pictures. |
Hi, I am also a sound lover who has been in the business for more than 20 years. There are a number of audio journals that I regularly follow: https://www.soundstagenetwork.com/ https://www.hificritic.com/ and https://goo.gl/86MZHC Hope they will be useful for you |
Ever notice how every Stereophile review is for one single item and it’s always awesome?Not every review is about one single item. See the Border Patrol DAC review. While they didn't review the Benchmark DAC3 HGC in this article, they did compare the DACs.. https://www.stereophile.com/content/borderpatrol-digital-analogue-converter-se |
| Post removed |
I've got a new publication to add to the list that is only 9 weeks old but pretty cool.
FutureAudiophile.com is designed to reach younger and more diverse audio enthusiasts. We've got two feature reviews per week, some really good featured news stories, monthly sweepstakes. More. It is 100% free to read. |