We had a lot of participation here a few weeks ago with fastfreds post on audio reviewers and fuses. http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=127160.0
Where is everyone?
First of all I want to thank you for your compliment on the success of my post on the future
of hi/end audio & a rant on honesty in reviewing. I think I’ve listed the evolution of all the different posts
on tuning fuses below. It happens that when you posted the Tuning Fuses thread I recalled reading
the same post myself and like you wondered why no mention had been made about how well said fuses
did their job ie. the protection of an electronic device from china/syndrome. That’s when I pm’d you about
posting my rant.
I have to apologize for lack of attention to the forums, with the explanation that I was beginning to
suffer from burnout or maybe the correct word is confusion. I was taking an hour or 2 during the
course of the day to review all the threads I’ve been participating in & found myself responding to replies
from one forum lets say B). I think in one or two cases I may have responded in the wrong thread lets
B)The future of hi/end audio & a rant on honesty in reviewing (tuning fuses)
C)Debunking Tuning Fuses et al.
D)Responses from makers and magazines on Tuning Fuses
Sorry about the length of my reply. Please consider the following when you read the rest of my reply.
In the interest of streamlining the tuning fuses issue. I’m wondering if the rant should be closed and a new
topic started to continue monitoring the online audiophile press.
Proposed new title: The Future of Hi/End Audio……Honesty in the Audiophile Press ( topic of your choice )
I think when I first started the the rant on honesty in reviewing, ( “tuning fuses” ) was for me a topic to start an
ongoing general discussion regarding snake oil type products in general. I also mentioned that it would be nice to
find an online or print journal which did honest reviews of audio equipment & lamented the fact that reviews from
any free online review journal which received advertising from audio manufacturers couldn’t trusted.
During my confusion/burnout period, I browsed the net for audiophile sites which I wasn’t aware of before, and reviewed
ones I hadn’t been on for awhile. If there are those out there who think Roger was picking on any one check out this link
to Arthur Salvatore’s web site High End Audio ( http://www.high-endaudio.com
). Another site about honest audio reporting
is Roger Russell’s wonderfull web page about McIntosh Labs. ( http://www.roger-russell.com
) this part of this site is a must
read for anyone shopping for a source of info on wire & wire technology a must read >( http://www.roger-russell.com/wire/wire.htm
). < a must read!!!!!
For those who don’t know, Roger was a design engineer for McIntosh Labs. McIntosh labs by the way is a company where
science & honesty in advertising went hand in hand (my opinion), at least in Roger Russell's day they were. The essays in that wire link
give a complete history of speaker wire & audiophile cabling in general from McIntosh Labs point of view all the way back to the 1960’s.
An audio circle built around R. Russell’s & A. Salvatore’s sites might be the way to approach the dishonest reviewing.
Another thing I learned is that no amount of scientific proof seems to work on those brainwashed by the audiophile press.
If you read back issues of The Audio Critic ( check their PDF back issues ) it seems their raison/d’etre was the debunking of audiophile
myths. Their back issue downloads go back to 1991. I also know that Audio Critic has some skeleton’s in it’s closet. A good read nevertheless
Here’s an excerpt from their their site I find to be quite comical.
Should a speaker system or an amplifier be reviewed like a restaurant, or like an engineering design?
† † † The mussels were a little rubbery in texture, but the Chablis sauce was beautifully herbed. My
companion ordered the trout, which I also tasted and found seductively mesquite-perfumed though
slightly underdone. The accompanying asparagus tips were lightly drizzled with an amusing vinaigrette.
† † † The highs were somewhat chalky, but the upper midrange was wonderfully liquid, and there was
palpable air around the woodwinds. The lower mids had satisfactory bloom; the bass, however, could have
benefited from a little more rhythm and pace. Front-to-back depth yielded a Row G perspective.
...................................... Fred Petersen ( fastfred )