[Kevin Haskins]

Hi Kevin:

No sweat and no offense taken.  I just find that the more transparent we can be,
hopefully the more questions get answered.

We've certainly tried to keep it as above board as possible. 

 I think that you could probably ask anyone that we work with what
their experience has been with us and find out it's been positive.
There are always that 5% that you can never make happy, but
we keep trying!

And there are some odd birds in this industry, me included.    

You never will get 100% of the people happy and there will always be people who think you are on the take.   Some of that is just noise... but I'm not talking about noise.   Big B. had a story, that I'm assuming he didn't fabricate.   I've had some first hand experience and most people in the industry have had bad experiences with one publication or another.   

My only point is that the incidence of it is higher than the noise floor. 

[martyo]

Thanks Jeff for your insightful reply. Just wanted to say that I wasn't talking about your publication in regards to RMAF. Seriously, I really don't normally read hi-fi mags and actually have never read yours.

[bz79]

Thanks for the write-up Jeff! 

I enjoyed reading that. 

[woodsyi]

Seriously, I really don't normally read hi-fi mags and actually have never read yours.

Are you trying to make him feel good? 

[Kevin Haskins]

Seriously, I really don't normally read hi-fi mags and actually have never read yours.

Are you trying to make him feel good? 

Hey... I don't either but I download and read Tone every once in awhile!     

I've scanned Stereophile and TAS at the Barnes & Noble but I don't subscribe.   I like looking at the pictures.   

[WGH]

We have it much easier being a PDF, so that we can expand and contract as we need to...

Jeff,

A little off topic, but I would spend more time reading Tone Audio and looking at the ads if I also had a hard copy to pick up, dog ear, and loan to friends. I have been wondering for a while if you ever looked into using a print-on-demand service? Sure I can put the pdf on a disk and take it to a local copy center and have it printed and bound, but I never get around to it and clicking on a button would be so much easier.

Readers would have the option of the free download or a hard copy delivered. I have no idea about what costs and postage would be, so this idea might not be workable at all, this is just an idea I had while sanding ( which I have been doing a lot of lately).

wgh

[saisunil]

Nice write-up Tonepub ...

Also it is nice when people from various aspects of this audio industry share their concerns - so that we may all develop better understanding and appreciation of many forces involved.

I think - there are two major aspects in play here:
1. Ad $s
2. Writing a fair report / conclusion / rating / ranking etc. of the audio item under review

1. Sure people have to run their business - pay bills, make profit but as Tonepub mentioned - there are ethical ways of doing business. Writing of a review should be independent of solicitation of ad $.
2. Writing a fair report of the performance of the audio article in review is what readers care about and is the primary purpose of the publication anyway.

I have read reviews in magazines where the tile would say something like "The Best CD Player, Loudspeaker, Amp etc." and when you read the article - you read description of serious flaws stated by the reviewer and yet the title is misleading. The worse ones are those that say it is the best but the article is mostly uninformative.

On the other hand gear can be and is most of the time system and room dependant and most often ignored can be dependant on reviewer's taste / mood. In other words reviewing can be a hard job when the reviewer does not have access to an audio lab with a vast array of accessories and a lot of time.

So readers have responsibility too in trying to soft chaff from grain.

Tonepub is write that people should not go out and buy gear based on a review.
But the fact is that we (I have done that) do go out and buy stuff based on reviews including CDs.
Most people (audiophiles included) do not have enough time and most likely are not near a dealer that may carry the said audio item. A lot of dealers are not interested in serving clients who want to listen to some gear without committing. (That is a whole another discussion)

I am the new born reviewer - with just one review thus far .
My personal head-fi journey lead me to writing this review when Stereo Mojo Editor approached me. I know that writing this review was hard and long with a lot of personal money invested in it (I did it at my will and it is a hobby after all.)
What might take a reader 10 minutes to read may have taken the reviewer 10 to 100 hours of time to put it together.

Good discussion and may it lead to better understanding so that more people lead a more ethical life not just realted to audio magazines.

Cheers
Sunil.

[miklorsmith]

I don't know what the advertising policy is at 6moons and I write for them.  I honestly have no idea.  I assume the other writers aside from Srajan are similarly ignorant. 

I pick my review assignments (or should say try to pick) from what I'm interested in.  If I want to do a review, I ask the chief and he says "go for it" (so far).

It's possible advertising has a role to play some places but to the foot-soldier in my shoes, not at all.

[Wayner]

saisunil brought up a sore spot with me. Why do all the mags even have to rate anything? TASi has their stupid top list, Stereopile has their recommended components. That is where people end up in each others pockets.

Review the product, call a straight shot on the pros and cons of the product and leave it at that. The reader has a brain, he can draw his own conclusions. We don't need the authors opinions or embellishments.

Just like every other publication or radio/news broadcast, journalists have gone from telling the just the facts to creative writing and always having to tell a damn story. One I usually don't care for.

My 2 cent worth  

[TONEPUB]

We have it much easier being a PDF, so that we can expand and contract as we need to...

Jeff,

A little off topic, but I would spend more time reading Tone Audio and looking at the ads if I also had a hard copy to pick up, dog ear, and loan to friends. I have been wondering for a while if you ever looked into using a print-on-demand service? Sure I can put the pdf on a disk and take it to a local copy center and have it printed and bound, but I never get around to it and clicking on a button would be so much easier.

Readers would have the option of the free download or a hard copy delivered. I have no idea about what costs and postage would be, so this idea might not be workable at all, this is just an idea I had while sanding ( which I have been doing a lot of lately).

wgh

Hi there:

We have looked into it but the cost for a single issue would be about 25 bucks and we use so much
black and moody photography, the look and feel would not translate well enough to be worth that.

The main reason we didn't go to print in the first place, beyond the environmental reasons
is cost; to the end user, to our advertisers and to us.

Our ad rates are about 20% of what Stereophile and TAS charge, because we don't have to
print and mail 80 thousand magazines every month. Because of that, you can have our content
for free and our advertisers don't need to pay so much to get additional coverage.

The fact that our ad rates are lower, makes it easier for us to serve both masters again.
If I know losing four pages of Wilson ads isn't going to seriously affect the bottom line,
it's a lot easier to be more forthcoming in a review. We've even made it a point to tell our
advertisers that no one can have more than two pages to keep it a bit more open.

As much as I would love to do a print version of TONE and see it on the shelf at
Barnes and Noble, it doesn't make any sense for the 21st century and our business
model.  One of my music writers works for one of the top three ad agencies in the
world and always tells me about their Monday morning meetings.

They always start with;  "we have to get out of print now..."

So for now, unfortunately I don't ever see it going to print.  But if Apple or someone
makes a Tablet PC sized version of the Air Book, it will be pretty close...

[Rick Craig]

I'd like to hear your thoughts, but in the mean time I do have some of my own. Ethics these days, most anywhere, can be put on the list of "things that aren't what they used to be".

This year we attended our first RMAF. We were there to hear speakers. Afterwards, as the reviews from audio magazines started showing up in posts or via links in posts here on the circle, I couldn't believe some of the glowing reviews written about products that were very average at best. My un-audiofool wife had to leave a couple of the rooms because the highs (or upper midrange) hurt her ears. Her comments on a couple of the highly touted speakers we specifically went to hear was "our stuff at home sounds much better". (Mid-fi Carver ALS Platinum's). Many of the rooms we visited a few times to see if there would be a different impression. Some of these manufacturers I contacted directly at the show or later via email or pm. A couple acknowledged problems such as the guy setting them up (an EE)wasn't really familiar with them, another was the $20K amps used were underpowered. The interesting thing about these were the GLOWING reviews by the magazines. Granted on one, the reviewer acknowledged the underpowering but concluded from ? that they MUST be awesome. As I'm reading reviews and looking at company websites I begin to notice lists of "friends" that include the same publications that just gave them the reviews.

Over on the AVA site awhile back an editor of one of these publication's was lamenting why Frank wouldn't let his mag review his gear but would TAS, especially when Frank's affordable gear clearly fit right into his publications niche. Then he went on to slam and misrepresent Frank. If you won't let his mag review your gear you get slammed.

I've seen where a reviewer sends the speaker he's reviewing to the designer for a frequency response graph.

I'm not saying that anyone is necessarily dishonest but ethically it doesn't float. It looks like a "club" and when you're in, you're in.

Generally, I don't read them, but I was curious after RMAF. I have bought only one since the 70's when I used to subscribe to TAS, and that was recently when TAS reviewed most of the gear I now have. It wasn't to make a purchase, just to read their take on what I already own.

Thanks Rick, I've been wanting to express this for awhile.

I appreciate your input. Some of the show feedback makes me  too! But I don't think it's always due to ulterior motives because the same thing happens with audiophiles at the shows. You can have two people listening to the same system / music at the same time and walk away with opposite opinions.

[kbuzz3]

Heres' my two cents-

If you read the obvious HE magazines for a long period of time you begin to see patterns that --true or not, i dont know--which as they say in legal ethics "give the appearence of impropriety."  This is why i for one am skeptical about certain reviewers/reviews. While i understand for the print mags, its a buisness I also believe that to retain integrity one should AVOID any and all appearence of any quid pro quo at all costs.  IMHO this is and has not "actively" done. This is gives rise to the long term skeptism and reocurring theme of audio mags and ethics.  The occasional editorials on the subject are superficial at best.  Rather then reguritate many of the past arguments, here are my suggestions:

1) Reviews should not be reviewing products while on "trips" to european countries where the wine and food are often superior.  Period

2) Other then to highlight or explain a truly new approach or technology Mags should avoid interviews with the manufacuter in the same issue as a review (im sure many would disagree with this)

3) Editors should limit the amount of reviews for a particular maker per year-  see, e.g. Stereophile and musical fidelity, cary et al etc. (disclaimer I have never heard a product by either) 

4)A maker who advertises should be noted in the the review somehow ...

5) A mag should not accept an ad for the "first time" or the first in a long time in an issue that happens to be reveiwing thier product. Ive seen this and it bugs the @#$%%$ at me. This is rather obvious because the ads in the print mags tend to be the same year after year.

6) It may be bad buisness but I for one would like to see a mag point out  a product if it is egregiously overrated, awful sounding or just plain bad. In other words, how bout a negative review- at least if confirmed by one or two other reviewers.   

7) In referrence to 6 and to be fair, if a writer says a product does not excell in a room or particular set up-it should be manditory that the piece be tried in other systems and locales to confirm.

heres a radical suggestion. How about some kind of generic "value" scale.  Does a certain product outperform others in there class on a dollar basis?  Id love to see where "magico" would fit in on had and say king rex or trends on the other.

9) Place of manufacture- is the item made under fair labor conditions?

This is just my rambling but i think it has merit.  I have bashed stereophile in AA over the years but i still enjoy leafing through it.  However, how come reviewers dont seem to interviewing makers in harsh locales.....lets see an audes (estonia) or less loss (poland) inteview in Janurary. Or about interview with an interview gaza strip or irqaqui manufacturer. (joke)

[acresm22]

1) Reviews should not be reviewing products while on "trips" to european countries where the wine and food are often superior.  Period

3) Editors should limit the amount of reviews for a particular maker per year-  see, e.g. Stereophile and musical fidelity, cary et al etc. (disclaimer I have never heard a product by either) 

Ah kbuzz, aren't you being kinda hard on good ol Sam Tellig? 

[kbuzz3]

1) Reviews should not be reviewing products while on "trips" to european countries where the wine and food are often superior.  Period

3) Editors should limit the amount of reviews for a particular maker per year-  see, e.g. Stereophile and musical fidelity, cary et al etc. (disclaimer I have never heard a product by either) 

Ah kbuzz, aren't you being kinda hard on good ol Sam Tellig? 

nah hes just the most obvious offender. ITs definately more broad based....for the record, i posted not to be harsh but only to affectuate a kind of change for those of us who remeber the great days of smaller mags, nice paper stock, easy to carry, odd photos on the back cover, reviews that compared products to those that came before them on an evolutionary scale and long long esoteric and wonderful footnotes in audio mags. (notice i did not mention ads)

PS i really enjoy tone....love the bargin basement and classic audio mentions. 

[Rick Craig]

Hope Rick doesn't mind me posting here on this subject, about which I have some knowledge.

The number one thing to avoid as a manufacturer dealing with audio journalists is BAD PRESS.  Audiophiles delight in the negative and will quicly strike your product from the "short list" if they read so much as a sniffle about it, anywhere.  This is why it pays not to make enemies with the magazines and e-reviewers. 

And yet I have many issues with reviewers, going back three decades when I first started out.  In olden days reviews and advertising went together like milk and cookies.  I think things have changed today (at least I hope so).  My very first published review in a mainstream publication (Audio, April 1980 issue) cost me a pair of my flagship speakers, to Bert Whyte, who later sold them to one of his friends.  I didn't complain, since it put me on the map.  Bert solicited a review pair after seeing my classified in his magazine. 

And so it went.  If you advertised you could get a review.  I never got a bad one, though others did (DCM and Polk come to mind).  One magazine (the dearly departed "FI") actually squelched a finished writeup by a major reviewer because I was NOT an advertiser.  This after I had sent samples, visited the man to set him up and make sure all was well, and he had written 3000 words which he submitted to me for comment.

In recent years I have received reviews from pubs in which I don't advertise, thank you very much.  Still I do have issues with the ethics of some reviewers.  A recent speaker shootout published online (I was not one of the manufacturers involved) exemplifies IMHO how not to do things.  I won't go into details, but I feel the losers in that "blind" comparison got a raw deal and should have complained.

Occasionally I ignore or poilitely decline a review request from journalists whose ethics are in question.  I suggest other manufacturers use extreme caution dealing with the press.  The recent comments in TAS by J Valin concerning Ayre products were entirely uncalled for and unsupported, for example.  This was because Charles Hansen had made comments critical of Mr. Valin elsewhere.

Be very, very careful out there!

Rick, feel free to move this if you want.  BTW I consider Rick one of audio's true Good Guys and wish him continued success.

B Cheney
Pres, VMPS Ribbon


www.vmpsaudio.com
(this signature required by the mods here)

No problem - you're welcome to join in on this thread and thanks for your kind words about me.

[TONEPUB]

Heres' my two cents-

If you read the obvious HE magazines for a long period of time you begin to see patterns that --true or not, i dont know--which as they say in legal ethics "give the appearence of impropriety."  This is why i for one am skeptical about certain reviewers/reviews. While i understand for the print mags, its a buisness I also believe that to retain integrity one should AVOID any and all appearence of any quid pro quo at all costs.  IMHO this is and has not "actively" done. This is gives rise to the long term skeptism and reocurring theme of audio mags and ethics.  The occasional editorials on the subject are superficial at best.  Rather then reguritate many of the past arguments, here are my suggestions:

1) Reviews should not be reviewing products while on "trips" to european countries where the wine and food are often superior.  Period

Can't afford that yet, but I'm sure it's so said writer can write off "Travel Expenses".  I get your point, but I've always enjoyed Sam's columns, so it doesn't bother me...

2) Other then to highlight or explain a truly new approach or technology Mags should avoid interviews with the manufacuter in the same issue as a review (im sure many would disagree with this)

The reason we have done this is because we always felt it made a better tie in with a product review....
however, we have something up our sleeves we hope you will enjoy as we go forward, so stay tuned

3) Editors should limit the amount of reviews for a particular maker per year-  see, e.g. Stereophile and musical fidelity, cary et al etc. (disclaimer I have never heard a product by either) 

So far, I've tried to keep it to three or less, but sometimes it depends on how much new stuff a mfr releases in a year.  CJ had nothing new for five years and then they had about ten new products.  They probably won't have anything again for five years, and they always want buzz when a product has been released.  That one's a toss up.

4)A maker who advertises should be noted in the the review somehow ...

Don't see why that matters, it doesn't affect our judgement in the least and you can go to the index on the back page

5) A mag should not accept an ad for the "first time" or the first in a long time in an issue that happens to be reveiwing thier product. Ive seen this and it bugs the @#$%%$ at me. This is rather obvious because the ads in the print mags tend to be the same year after year.

Don't see why this matters because of above.  Some mfrs have feelings about it either way, they agree with you, or they want the ad to start running when a review comes out because again, when there is buzz generated for the product that's the time to sell it.  You can't blame these guys for wanting to stay in business...

6) It may be bad buisness but I for one would like to see a mag point out  a product if it is egregiously overrated, awful sounding or just plain bad. In other words, how bout a negative review- at least if confirmed by one or two other reviewers.   

We have done just that with the Continuum review that will be in the new issue.  The negative review is a waste of time.  Why should I spend 2-500 hours of listening time and ask (and pay) another reviewer on my staff to do the same with something we all know doesn't pass muster just so we can say we publish negative reviews?  If we don't like something, we send it back.  We have too much good gear to get through in a years time.

7) In referrence to 6 and to be fair, if a writer says a product does not excell in a room or particular set up-it should be manditory that the piece be tried in other systems and locales to confirm.

We have done that often.  Some speakers don't work well with a tube amplifier, or vice versa.  Or a big room or small.  The SimAudio I-7 amp we have in right now won't push a set of Magnepan 3.6's that the reviewer has, but I had great luck with it here with six other sets of speakers, as did another reviewer with his DeVore 9's.  So it's critical to let a potential buyer know that this amp is not the hot setup with a pair of Magnepans.

Good case in point was when we wrote up the Penaudio Serenades and I said they did not respond well with tubes.  When I met the mfr at CES I thought he was going to be pissed at me and he said "No problem, I hate tubes.  I voiced the speakers on a CJ Premier 350, that's why they sounded great in your system".  Again, important stuff to pass on in case the potential buyer has a tube power amp.  We try to identify this stuff as often as possible.

heres a radical suggestion. How about some kind of generic "value" scale.  Does a certain product outperform others in there class on a dollar basis?  Id love to see where "magico" would fit in on had and say king rex or trends on the other.

That's always tough, because value is subjective.  I know Jerry Seinfeld peripherally from my connections in the automotive world and he called me up to tell me he "stole" a vintage Porsche 917 race car for "only" 1.6 million dollars.  It's a different thing to everyone.  We do base our awards for the most part on the gear we've listened to the year though that does go above and beyond the call of duty for the money.

9) Place of manufacture- is the item made under fair labor conditions?

No way of knowing with the Chinese stuff.  How would we ever be able to check that?

This is just my rambling but i think it has merit.  I have bashed stereophile in AA over the years but i still enjoy leafing through it.  However, how come reviewers dont seem to interviewing makers in harsh locales.....lets see an audes (estonia) or less loss (poland) inteview in Janurary. Or about interview with an interview gaza strip or irqaqui manufacturer. (joke)

Tried to get less loss's DAC in.  He's not interested in sending me one.  I've heard nothing but great stuff about it and would love to review it.
Can't win em all over...  But we keep trying


Either way, the dialog is good.  While we don't implement every suggestion, it always gets thrown up for discussion and we try to pay attention to what our readers are interested in. Keep suggesting and we'll keep pondering...

[Rick Craig]

I too am very interested in what you have to say....

I appreciate your input and it's good to hear from a publisher's perspective. The look of your e-magazine is first-rate and I like that you have a big focus on the music (which without that my company or your magazine wouldn't exist).

[Rick Craig]

Is this a topic that's of interest to anyone? I have some thoughts I would like to share when I get a chance.

I've been waiting for you to say something all day....and this was it???? 

I appreciate your input. Some of the show feedback makes me  too! But I don't think it's always due to ulterior motives because the same thing happens with audiophiles at the shows. You can have two people listening to the same system / music at the same time and walk away with opposite opinions.

I hope you got more than that Rick...

I guess what set me off is that it's been five years ago on this very day that I loaned you that $20,000 reference system and you still haven't returned it. 

Seriously, it was a number of recent events that made me bring up the issue. Before I start pointing fingers let me say that most of my experiences with reviewers and publishers have been positive. What frustrates me is that the way some continue to operate and I think in the long run it's bad for everyone in the business - ethical magazines and manufacturers as well as audiophiles.

Recently I read a gushing speaker review from a reviewer who had approached me a few years back. This guy has had free loaners for so long that he's never had to buy speakers. No sooner had he asked me for a pair of speakers to review - the next words out of his mouth were "3-6 months and a large discount if I decide to keep them". I politely declined and never heard back from anyone at that magazine.

Basically the same thing happened with another magazine, two different reviewers asking up front for large discounts. Apparently these people don't understand that I can't give away something for less than I have invested in it. With all of the price gouging in the high end market it's automatically assumed you're selling at ridiculous margins. Obviously they don't care how some internet-direct businesses operate.

Some of the other problems I've noticed have already been mentioned in the thread so I don't need to bring them up again. To be fair not all of the problem is with the magazines. The lack of accountability rests on the manufacturers as well that allow the bribery to continue. The temptation will always be there because the magazines need advertising revenue and this is even more true as we migrate from subscription-based print magazines to e-mags with no paid subscribers.

I realize that publishers and reviewers need to make a living like anyone else and they walk a fine line between pleasing readers and manufacturers. They have to deal with manufacturers who whine and complain if a review isn't pristine even when it may be very fair and objective. And then there's the rear-end kissers and manipulators who work behind the scenes to make sure everything published has the correct "spin" applied to make their products look good. What they don't realize is that you don't have to sell your soul to the devil to succeed in the audio business.

One of the reasons I appreciate Audio Circle is that it gives small manufacturers like us an opportunity to advertise without having to be concerned about all of the above. I also enjoy the personal interaction with customers as well as anyone else - even if they never buy a thing from me. This is a great platform to have open discussions like this and I appreciate the posts here in this thread.

[TONEPUB]

I too am very interested in what you have to say....

I appreciate your input and it's good to hear from a publisher's perspective. The look of your e-magazine is first-rate and I like that you have a big focus on the music (which without that my company or your magazine wouldn't exist).

Thanks...

The main reason we have such a big focus on music is that all of us on the staff came
to the high end world many years ago because we loved music and felt that a good system
allows you to enjoy music more.

There are two other reasons we want so much music in the magazine and they are
both selfish.  I'm always trying to find more music to listen to, so having such a
wide range of musical tastes on the staff really opens that up quite a bit.

Lastly, I'm not trying to be disrespectful to TAS or Stereophile, but after 40 years
they still don't have 100 thousand readers and TAS doesn't have half that.  Nothing
wrong with that, but when you consider PASTE has about 500 thousand readers,
SPIN has about 800 thousand and Rolling Stone has 2 million, that tells me that
there are a ton of people out there that love music, but don't even know our world exists.

My thought by putting the music first is that even if some of our readers come to
TONE to just read about music, sooner or later everyone needs SOMETHING to
play their music on.  If we can get the bigger numbers that a music magazine will
command, my hope is that we can pull more of those people into the high end
audio world too....

If the industry doesn't stay healthy, I don't have a job!

So, I hope it works that way....

[chrismercurio]

Ethics and reviews in general....

Reviews: Formulaic at best! They start out with background on the manufacturer, move to a mild technical overview on the product (even more mild if that company is cagey about details, you know who they are...), move on to their review setup and how it sounded for the first few hours and how it sounded after 200, then comparisons that don't mean much unless you heard their system on a regular basis. If it is really expensive they generally end with how the five or six figure product is a value proposition.

Ethics: I like Jeff chiming in on this and talking about the correlation between dollars, products reviewed, and the deviation between the two at Tone. It is nice to know. As for the other press giants.....the lines are a little blurry. I think JA's wife at Stereophile still runs the ad department. Seperation of church and state anyone?

I am sure I sound jaded, but most reviews don't deviate from this much. I still enjoy this hobby, but reviews are IMO a bunch of BS. I have sold hifi off and on for ~10 years....and if you read reviews long enough and listen to a lot of stuff that is reviewed, you will most likely be left scratching your head wondering what the other guy was listening to. I know my expectations are FAR TOO HIGH when I expect an actual opinion about a products' sound. Most of what I get is a politicized answer to avoid hurting anyone's feelings, the advertising budget, or the bottom line.

Curmudgeony and only 30....

C