• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

stereophile, why so few pictures?

jeremyjustic

jeremyjustic

Analog
so I will admit , I'm not a big fan of stereophile. I normally only pick it up when there is nothing else to buy. pickings were slim this month at the newsstand so I picked up this months issue, started to flip through it when it struck me, where are the photos? I was really interested in this months Munich show coverage, I have seen coverage in other magazines in years past and this show looks amazing. even stereophile claims it is only second to the ces show in vegas and that it is THE high end show to be at. in years past other magazines host a plethora of amazing photos of giant horns and bespoke tube gear. lots of REALLY cool stuff, so I was excited to see what stereophile captured. well in a word they got NOTHING! one small photo of the project guy standing in front of their two entry level turntables and another shot of people looking at records....that's it! a building full of the finest hi-fi in the world and they come back with zero pictures worth looking at. their show "coverage" reads like a list of gear, very little description, completely uninteresting.


so I have noticed the lack of photos in the past but show coverage like this is ridiculous. whats the point really, its like someone describing a beautiful woman in writing. who cares about your description , show us the photos!


stereophile should fire one of the fifteen boring writers they have and hire a photographer.


what do you guys think? I know it may be superficial to want more photos but I think it would go a long way in making stereophile a more enjoyable magazine.
 
Register to hide this ad
Certainly agree here. Not just show coverage but paragraphs of descriptions of how something is constructed when a few photos or drawings would clarify. One photo of something costing thousands of dollars seems cheap.
 
I don't mind the overall lack of pictures as much as the fact that the few pictures you get are often too "artistic" to show what the gear actually looks like.
 
There is often more in-depth show coverage online.

I don't mind a lack of pictures. If I like something, I google it and see what I need to see.
 
Try TONEAudio. TONS of pics, lots of giveaways on their online version and FB page, generally speaking, lots of useable stuff. All the back issues are immediately and readily accessible. Go for it.
 
I really enjoy Tone Audio. Moreso than Stereophile these days. I like bits and pieces of stereophile but they're admittedly too focused on the flavor of the month, except for Art Dudley's column and a little of their turntable coverage.
 
I have a subscription for $tereophile that's some ridiculous low price of $12 a year. So, I can forgive it's shortcomings and it's worth that for Art Dudley's column. Sadly, nothing in the magazine is close to the magnificence that Listener once possessed.
 
I don't understand why it's so hard to make a magazine about stereos entertaining.

Take the reviews of $100,000 speakers. I'm perfectly fine with their being speakers like that in this world. In fact, I LOVE that their are $100,000 speakers. But even in car magazines, the people driving/reviewing the exotic cars make reference to them being...exotic. Stereophile acts like this stuff is an everyday household item, like admitting that the price is high blows their cover or somehow lessens the appeal. Review the stuff and treat it with a sense of humility, humor, and CONTEXT. Have some perspective! It's such a turnoff.
 
There's something amiss when a magazine thinks its subscriber base can afford $100,000 speakers and $200,000 turntables, and has to scrape the bottom of the $12/year subscription barrel to maintain its subscriber numbers (which is what their ADVERTISING rates are based on).

...and then they have to pay Michael "the more it costs, the more I like it" Fremer, too.
 
Even at the $12/year subscription price, I abandoned Stereophool.
When they started reviewing audio gear, that costs way more than my automobiles, I decided I wasn't the type of reader they were looking for?


Steve
 
They review far more than $100,000 speakers. But yes, they review those, too. And I'm happy they do, I just wish they'd treat it with a sense of humor. They somehow manage to bore me, writing about one of the things I'm most interested in.
 
JohnVF said:
I don't understand why it's so hard to make a magazine about stereos entertaining.

Take the reviews of $100,000 speakers. I'm perfectly fine with their being speakers like that in this world. In fact, I LOVE that their are $100,000 speakers. But even in car magazines, the people driving/reviewing the exotic cars make reference to them being...exotic. Stereophile acts like this stuff is an everyday household item, like admitting that the price is high blows their cover or somehow lessens the appeal. Review the stuff and treat it with a sense of humility, humor, and CONTEXT. Have some perspective! It's such a turnoff.
Click to expand...

YES! exactly, thats why I like the brittish audio magazines, that brittish sensibility comes through and says " yes this is a $50,000 dollar amplifier, lets see if it is actually worth the money" where as stereophile seems to have the attitude of " off course its amazing , it cost $50,000". I also have no problem with high dollar gear, hell man , I wish I could afford it! If I had millions I would definitely be one of those guys with the custom built listening room with the million dollar system. I just think stereophiles attitude of " oh what , everyone doesnt have a $500,000 dollar system" is insulting.

GP49 said:
There's something amiss when a magazine thinks its subscriber base can afford $100,000 speakers and $200,000 turntables, and has to scrape the bottom of the $12/year subscription barrel to maintain its subscriber numbers (which is what their ADVERTISING rates are based on).

...and then they have to pay Michael "the more it costs, the more I like it" Fremer, too.
Click to expand...

hahahaha , that is a great point!
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the tip on Tone Audio, I will have to check it out.

In Canada Stereophile is $25 a year, if it were the same as in the US at $12 I'd consider it.
 
Seems you'd get your best answer by writing to the editor?

My guess.. .pictures cost money to print, and the more you print, the less profit you get...

EVERYTHING is all about the money...
 
well there you go. all I had to do was post one thread and they start posting more photos! Man that is some nice looking gear.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom