The Magazines Subforum?

[Negotiableterms]

We're considering starting up a subforum inside TOL to discuss the contents of The Absolute Sound, Stereophile, and the other major magazines. There could be a thread for each magazine each month, containing discussion on that month's articles, in addition to threads on particular topics.

Discussion topics could include gear, trends, music, or anything that arises from the magazines' content. You can agree, disagree, point out they're right, or wrong, contradicting themselves, or on the wrong topic altogether.

NOTE: No discussion of the magazines themselves would be permitted. All the usual gripes would be prohibited. This means all posts about the magazines being biased, having conflicts of interest, only covering expensive new gear, not being knowledgeable, carrying ads, etc., etc., would be deleted, and the poster could lose TOL privileges.

The goal here is to talk about what's going on today in audio, not gripe about the industry. If you hate them that much, don't look into the forum.

With the same rules for this thread, what do people think? Will you participate?

 

[JohnVF]

I would participate. I read the magazines monthly. Usually TAS, Stereophile, and a few of the British magazines, too.

 

[marantzfan]

I'm game. I read TAS and Stereophile. :yes:

 

[chicks]

Will you participate?

Sure, if TAC is included. :yes:

 

[Negotiableterms]

Sure, if TAC is included. :yes:

Remember that the TOL rules will apply in this forum, meaning that a lot of TAC's favorite topics are prohibited. Their actual reviews of gear, without the usual controversies, will be fair game.

 

[ehoove]

I'm in! Stereophile and TAS!
Regards,
Jim

 

[RichPA]

Count me in, I'm a magazine junkie. Can we include online review magazines (not other forums, actual review mags)?

 

[Art K.]

Sounds good to me.

 

[Ausjoe]

Sounds good to me.

+1. A new (sub)forum to be a threadkiller in. What more could I ask for!

 

[Duckzilla]

I'm in, just as long as each month doesn't de-volve into a "review-the-reviewer" segment. I get TAS, Stereophile, Hi Fi News and Hi Fi World, my fave. Is there a prize for starting the thread that spawned this one? Just asking!

 

[Dr Tinear]

Remember that the TOL rules will apply in this forum, meaning that a lot of TAC's favorite topics are prohibited. Their actual reviews of gear, without the usual controversies, will be fair game.

Perhaps the proposed sub-forum should go somewhere other than TOL, then ... or perhaps discussion of TAS and Stereophile content should also be restricted to their reviews, excluding other editorial content.

 

[Negotiableterms]

Perhaps the proposed sub-forum should go somewhere other than TOL, then ... or perhaps discussion of TAS and Stereophile content should also be restricted to their reviews, excluding other editorial content.

Outside of TOL, this forum would never make it past the first thread.

All magazines will be treated equally. TAS and Stereophile are by far the largest, and so would have their own recurring monthly threads, but any magazine would be welcome, print or electronic.

Other editorial content can include lots of stuff that isn't prohibited, like discussion of industry trends, which developments are important, etc. etc.

NB: Dave (Grumpy) hasn't considered this idea yet. The point of this thread is to run it up the flagpole.

 

[Bigerik]

Remember that the TOL rules will apply in this forum, meaning that a lot of TAC's favorite topics are prohibited. Their actual reviews of gear, without the usual controversies, will be fair game.

Does The Audio Critic even review gear?

 

[Negotiableterms]

Does The Audio Critic even review gear?

I'm not a reader, but I believe they do. From what little I've seen, it's mostly speakers. The problem is that they seldom get off their soapbox, which will make discussion of their stuff difficult.

 

[Duckzilla]

I'm not a reader, but I believe they do. From what little I've seen, it's mostly speakers. The problem is that they seldom get off their soapbox, which will make discussion of their stuff difficult.

Indeed. I question why they even review amps when they all sound the same. (That's them, not me).

 

[Billfort]

I don't buy magazines near as much as I used to but I'd be interested in this forum.

(except for Audio Critic threads )

 

[JohnVF]

Even our thread about the magazines has been taken over by The Audio Critic

Is that publication even still publishing?

 

[Dr Tinear]

Even our thread about the magazines has been taken over by The Audio Critic

Is that publication even still publishing?

I have no idea. They still have a Web site with a number of back issues available for free download. To me, Peter Aczel's rants are entertaining for about two or three issues and become tiresome and predictable after that point, so I never subscribed to the print magazine. The only articles I found useful were David Rich's circuit design critiques of electronics that the magazine tested.

Back to the current question in this thread ... I'm concerned that the restrictive terms of TOL would put a significant damper on the discussion in a Magazines sub-forum, so I wouldn't be likely to spend much time looking at threads in it.

 

[Bigerik]

I have no idea. They still have a Web site with a number of back issues available for free download. To me, Peter Aczel's rants are entertaining for about two or three issues and become tiresome and predictable after that point, so I never subscribed to the print magazine. The only articles I found useful were David Rich's circuit design critiques of electronics that the magazine tested.

Back to the current question in this thread ... I'm concerned that the restrictive terms of TOL would put a significant damper on the discussion in a Magazines sub-forum, so I wouldn't be likely to spend much time looking at threads in it.

TOL's rules are not restrictive. They are actually liberating. They exist to allow discourse, not stifle it.

You must not have been around in the days before TOL, when discussion of the subject matter in TOL simply was not possible in AK. Any time it would pop up, it would always turn into a flame war. Always.

TOL was the great experiment in AK. And it has worked beyond anyones wildest expectations.

 

[Art K.]

TOL's rules are not restrictive. They are actually liberating. They exist to allow discourse, not stifle it.

You must not have been around in the days before TOL, when discussion of the subject matter in TOL simply was not possible in AK. Any time it would pop up, it would always turn into a flame war. Always.

TOL was the great experiment in AK. And it has worked beyond anyones wildest expectations.

Well said, Erik.