[95Dyna]

Just received my April issue yesterday.  The following Bryston products are recommended components:  Class A:  28B, BCD-1, BDA-1.  Class B: 4B SST, B-100 and, are you sitting down, 7B SST2.  Sadly there were no Bryston speakers, turntables or cables recommended.

Class B is defined by Stereophile in the following manner:  "the next best thing to the very best sound reproduction; Class B components generally cost less than Class A, but most class B componenets are still quite expensive."  Bottom line the 7BSST2 is a highly recommended component.  There are hundreds of amps that I don't see here meeting that definition.  Also note, the class B rating of the 4B is the SST and not the squared version.

Congratulations to Bryston.  This is quite a show.

[Stu Pitt]

Sadly there were no Bryston speakers, turntables or cables recommended.

That's where they lost all credibility to me.

[1ZIP]

....any doubt that the 4B SST2 would be Class A?  Also looks like Bryston needs to get busy on the BP 26.

[Phil A]

No surprise to me.  We all may complain on the length of time Bryston takes to get things to market but they do it the right way.

[jaxwired]

I love hifi mags and stereophile is a good one, I'm a subscriber, BUT reviews are mostly subjective.  Their ratings are useful as a buying guide starting point.  Beyond that I don't put too much stock in them.  Anyone that isn't happy without all class A stereophile kit is misguided to say the least.

[95Dyna]

I love hifi mags and stereophile is a good one, I'm a subscriber, BUT reviews are mostly subjective.  Their ratings are useful as a buying guide starting point.  Beyond that I don't put too much stock in them.  Anyone that isn't happy without all class A stereophile kit is misguided to say the least.

Yeah but where there's smoke there's fire.  If you have 6 of your products recommended by a publication there's a good possibility you're making some good stuff whether Bryston or otherwise e.g. Ayre, Cary, Simaudio, MAC et al.

[Napalm]

The 7B review is done by Michael Fremer.

"Furutech deMag record demagnetizer: $1980
"Who knew?!?" Like the Acoustic Revive RL-30 Mk.3, the deMag removed glare and enriched the midband of edgy-sounding LPs. Users should make sure the Furutech's uncovered surface is clean before putting freshly scrubbed vinyl on it, warned MF. (Vol.29 No.10) "

Otherwise I always read with interest John Atkinson's measurements and comments.

Nap. 

[jimdgoulding]

The 7B review is done by Michael Fremer.

"Furutech deMag record demagnetizer: $1980
"Who knew?!?" Like the Acoustic Revive RL-30 Mk.3, the deMag removed glare and enriched the midband of edgy-sounding LPs. Users should make sure the Furutech's uncovered surface is clean before putting freshly scrubbed vinyl on it, warned MF. (Vol.29 No.10) "

Otherwise I always read with interest John Atkinson's measurements and comments.

Nap. 

[Napalm]

   Here's more:

Acoustic Revive RL-30 Mk.3 record demagnetizer: $2350
The RL-30 Mk.3 removed the high-frequency glaze from harsh-sounding LPs to make a believer out of Mikey. "I'm sorry to report that demagnetizing LPs works-consistently and decidedly," he said. Its conservative looks and useful dustcover give it an edge over Furutech's De Mag, in MF's opinion. (Vol.29 No.10)

Nap. 

[jimdgoulding]

Nap.  I'm dumbfounded.  Still listening to music, tho, humble as it may be.

[vegasdave]

Yeah, I figured that. But, Bryston has a very good showing in that feature, so good for them. However, based on those recommendations, more people will buy the 4B because it's cheaper. That's unfortunate as the 7B is clearly the better amp.

[Phil A]

Jesus H.  I guess it's the nature of the profession but this may be the greatest insult to my intelligence yet.  My god, this is embarrassing . . I'm a subscriber!  This may be the new definition of patented sensationalism.  Congratulations  The editor let this pass?  If ever there was a doubt, whoa.  Oh, it's in the pressing process?  And we need an inexpensive (sic) product to correct that?  It gets worse by the moment.  Wait til the guys over at Audio Asylum get a hold of this.  Of course, they are such a minority compared to the naiveity of the majoriity.  See if I renew even at my $10.00 a year rate.

Like every other profession, there are good reviewers, bad reviewers. mediocre reviewers and those that may be good at certain things but probably don't know their own limits.  When my friend worked at the audio shop we delivered and set-up a system which included Maggie 1.6s and a Rel sub.  A reviewer from a known magazine lives next door.  My friend was furious when he had to go back and re-set up the sub the reviewer moved and hooked up wrong.  He decided behind the listening couch and 15 feet from the main speakers was best too.  I have another friend in the audio business who told me a story of a reviewer who didn't have any additional outlets to plug an amplifier in to review and dragged a 50 or 100 ft. 16 gauge outdoor extension cord in through a sliding glass door to perform the review.  Like someone said, these things are good as a shopping list to start looking.  Unfortunately many take them as absolutes.  I've been in stores where people refused to listen to something merely due to the fact in wasn't on Stereophile's list.  If you need someone to listen for you and spend your money for you, I wonder what else one can or can't do on their own

[sfmusiclover]

Thank you for the good post, Phil A.

Thanks to a patient co-owner of a stereo shop in the late 70's, I learned to be patient and to discover my preferences before sinking in the cash. It took years (10+ yrs) of listening at dealers and friends and reading to understand what I value and then years of slow accumulation (starting cheap) to arrive at a system that is worth keeping for life. It turns out that Stereophile did little to help my search because what I could hear and what I value often did not match their choices.

A long time friend and colleague takes an opposite approach. He changes his components about every two years based on Stereophile recommendation listing. "Old" ones are sold online when he purchases new ones. He constantly and excitedly talks about new gear he wants to acquire even before the currently "new" gear is used. He derives enjoyment from using and listening to different components.

Neither one of us is right or wrong, we just have different hobbies. I prefer to finally have a system that plays good music for my listening enjoyment. He prefers trying out different "high end" components picked off Stereophile listing and talking about them.

The point here is that we each need to know our own listening goals and then do what is appropriate to achieve those goals. If we simply let a magazine that accepts advertisements to influence our purchase decisions without appropriate understanding of our hobbies, then we are indeed letting others dictate how we spend our money.

[andy_c]

Jesus H.  I guess it's the nature of the profession but this may be the greatest insult to my intelligence yet.  My god, this is embarrassing . . I'm a subscriber!

How about this one here?

There is a difference and it is obvious and it is immediate. The applause at the very beginning of the LP sounds more like real applause, more like pairs of human hands coming together to make sound, and less like Styrofoam or static. JA walks into the room and announces, "There's more bass, too!" I'm not sure that JA's even aware of what we've changed. It sounds as though we've listened to two different pressings of the same album.

So not only did the LP demagnetizer make a difference according to them, but the difference was so obvious it could be heard from the other room by John Atkinson as having "more bass".

After finding out they had no less than two LP demagnetizers on their recommended components list I decided not to renew.

[95Dyna]

Guys, please.  My intentions for this thread were not to set off a littany of complaints about Stereophile, a review within Stereophile, reviewers in general or some nonsense about a record demagnatizer (where did that come from?).  I simpley wanted to congratulate Bryston for having 6 products recognized in a respected publication including one most here didn't think the magazine had any respect for. Some of these posts are just plain looney.  jimdgoulding, what in the world are you talking about or saying?

[jaxwired]

That's nothing.  I've read multiple hifi mags review how hifi racks "sound".  That's right, this rack has really tight bass and this one has delicate mids.  Please.  Even worse, another hifi mag wrote a review about a year ago about how the shape of the hifi racks top changed the sound.  The rack had several shapes to choose from for the top shelf and based on which one was used, the sound changed noticably. 

Gotta apply some common sense to this stuff.  Also, anyone that is in complete denial that their brain and ears can play tricks on them is a fool and just asking to have their pocket picked.  Sure are alot of people that seem to give their own brains and ears the same credit for reliability as an oscilloscope.

Hey I've got some jax beaks for sale for $100 a pop and some cable lifters too.  They will look a lot like legos, but don't let that fool you.  This stuff is proprietary and amazing.  I've come up with a way to get the electrons to do the can can on their way down the cable.  Pretty special....

[jimdgoulding]

Guys, please.  My intentions for this thread were not to set off a littany of complaints about Stereophile, a review within Stereophile, reviewers in general or some nonsense about a record demagnatizer (where did that come from?).  I simpley wanted to congratulate Bryston for having 6 products recognized in a respected publication including one most here didn't think the magazine had any respect for. Some of these posts are just plain looney.  jimdgoulding, what in the world are you talking about or saying?

Sorry, old sport, t'was an impulse response about the other thing mentioned, certainly not anything Bryston.  I know better than to get so offended- it was written in a popular magazine, after all- just forgot at the hour.  I've removed it.

[95Dyna]

That's nothing.  I've read multiple hifi mags review how hifi racks "sound".  That's right, this rack has really tight bass and this one has delicate mids.  Please.  Even worse, another hifi mag wrote a review about a year ago about how the shape of the hifi racks top changed the sound.  The rack had several shapes to choose from for the top shelf and based on which one was used, the sound changed noticably. 

Gotta apply some common sense to this stuff.  Also, anyone that is in complete denial that their brain and ears can play tricks on them is a fool and just asking to have their pocket picked.  Sure are alot of people that seem to give their own brains and ears the same credit for reliability as an oscilloscope.

Hey I've got some jax beaks for sale for $100 a pop and some cable lifters too.  They will look a lot like legos, but don't let that fool you.  This stuff is proprietary and amazing.  I've come up with a way to get the electrons to do the can can on their way down the cable.  Pretty special....

jaxwired,

I have to know, did you completely miss my post just prior to this or are you blowing me off?  The post explains why I started this thread and your post just continues down the path that is not with the spirit of the thread.  Some of you guys are just insufferable in your self absorbed disregard for the authors of threads.  If you guys want to bad mouth industry publications please start your own thread for this is not what I intended.

Regards,

Bill

[jaxwired]

Hey Bill,

Sorry.  Didn't mean to upset you or disregard your comments.  To be honest, I'm surprised you feel so protective about your thread staying on subject.  I don't think my post will reflect on you.  I'm the culprit. 

But, now that I know your a bit senstive to this I will try and honor your request to stay on point. 

 

[Napalm]

Sorry Bill,

We were being upset by the reviewer's error in stating that Bryston amplifiers are class B. We all know that they are class AB.

Nap.