William Sommerwerck wrote:
George M. Middius wrote:

William Sommerwerck said:

Under JA, the magazine gradually moved in the direction of "if it sounds
good, it is good". Any pretense to honoring the original meaning of
"high
fidelity" has been lost. Stereophile has no "objective" standards; it
exists
primarily to justify whatever purchase a particular reader wishes to
make.

You might think it odd, but that's exactly how Normal people make their
choices. If you value "realistic" sound, do you need some reviewer to
tell you whether a system delivers it? That judgment is as subjective as
"too much bass" or "great imaging".

If you value "good" sound, do you need some reviewer to tell you
whether a system delivers it? That judgment is as subjective as "too
much bass" or "great imaging".

You're missing the point of what I wrote and how Mr. Middius responded.
There's a vast gulf between buying something simply because you like it, and
having an "expert" justify your purchase.


What? "Middius" asked: "If you value 'realistic' sound, do you need
some reviewer to tell you whether a system delivers it?". I asked
essentially the same question, but changed 'realistic' sound (the old
SP paradigm) to 'good' sound (the new SP paradigm). IOW, if you do not
need a reviewer to tell you what sounds "realistic", why would you need
a reviewer to tell you what sounds "good"? At least "realistic" sound
has some sort of objective standard, so you have an idea of where the
reviewer is coming from. "Good" sound is *completely* subjective. What
sounds "good" to you (or JA or someone else) may not sound "good" to
me.