Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
Arny Krueger a écrit :
I'm surprised that our resident worshippers of vinylism such as sockpuppet wheel have no comment on the horrendous amounts of audible distortion that this review shows. Given that he lists no other music player in his main system, one has to wonder exactly how profound the ear damage he must have, actually is. Scott "high-IQ" Wheeler has explicitly written that he likes distortion, in fact he is desperately looking for distortion. ;-) This explains why he likes venyls, I'm sure that now he is very interested in this turntable. In fact Scott Wheeler only likes distortion and very expensive equipment that he can show to his friends on "awesome days" (lol). Scott Wheeler is ignorant and incult but he loves to exhibit his money... :-) |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
Arny Krueger a écrit :
I'm surprised that our resident worshippers of vinylism such as sockpuppet wheel have no comment on the horrendous amounts of audible distortion that this review shows. Given that he lists no other music player in his main system, one has to wonder exactly how profound the ear damage he must have, actually is. Scott "high-IQ" Wheeler has explicitly written that he likes distortion, in fact he is desperately looking for distortion. ;-) This explains why he likes venyls, I'm sure that now he is very interested in this turntable. In fact Scott Wheeler only likes distortion and very expensive equipment that he can show to his friends on "awesome days" (lol). Scott Wheeler is ignorant and incult but he loves to exhibit his money... :-) |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:wSqJb.45880$m83.5386@fed1read01... http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/gen...es/298159.html Is Stereophile now largely fund by advertising rather than subscibers? This has never been the case ScottW. Stereophile, like all consumer magazines from the Economist to Sound & Vision, sells subscriptions at a loss. (Newstand revenue, however, is a significant source of revenue.) If this guys post is true, Stereophile subsciption revenue has gone from almost $2.4M to less than $100K. This is is simply not the case ScottW. If you are really interested, then the ABC, who audits Stereophile's circulation numbers, tracks the average annual subs price as well as the breakdown between subs and newstand circ. The historical trend could thus be calculated. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:wSqJb.45880$m83.5386@fed1read01... http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/gen...es/298159.html Is Stereophile now largely fund by advertising rather than subscibers? This has never been the case ScottW. Stereophile, like all consumer magazines from the Economist to Sound & Vision, sells subscriptions at a loss. (Newstand revenue, however, is a significant source of revenue.) If this guys post is true, Stereophile subsciption revenue has gone from almost $2.4M to less than $100K. This is is simply not the case ScottW. If you are really interested, then the ABC, who audits Stereophile's circulation numbers, tracks the average annual subs price as well as the breakdown between subs and newstand circ. The historical trend could thus be calculated. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"ScottW" wrote in message
news:wSqJb.45880$m83.5386@fed1read01... http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/gen...es/298159.html Is Stereophile now largely fund by advertising rather than subscibers? This has never been the case ScottW. Stereophile, like all consumer magazines from the Economist to Sound & Vision, sells subscriptions at a loss. (Newstand revenue, however, is a significant source of revenue.) If this guys post is true, Stereophile subsciption revenue has gone from almost $2.4M to less than $100K. This is is simply not the case ScottW. If you are really interested, then the ABC, who audits Stereophile's circulation numbers, tracks the average annual subs price as well as the breakdown between subs and newstand circ. The historical trend could thus be calculated. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Arny Krueger" wrote in
message ... "John Atkinson" wrote in message om The subject of Stereophile's circulation arose on r.a.o. and r.a.t. today, the context being how a mainly 2-channel audio magazine can survive in today's complicated media market. BTW, one has to act whether this recisitation of the circulation controversy is just another lame attempt to distract attention from Atkinson's highly questionable and technically deficient Linn LP-12 review. http://www.stereophile.com/analogsourcereviews/1103linn No, Mr. Krueger, As I said in the posting that started this thread, I posted the historical data for Stereophile's circulation to a comment from Rusty Boudreaux (in message ) that he had "noticed the drop on [Stereophile]'s gov't filing page for circulation," while _you_, Mr. Krueger, had stated (in message ) that you thought "there is plenty of evidence that Stereophile's magazine sales are shrinking at a rate that should and probably does greatly concern [John] Atkinson." By your logic, Mr. Krueger, it was _you_ were trying to divert attention away from the Linn review :-) (Or perhaps the shenanigans on your website.) "The measured playback frequency was 998.5Hz, but as I don't know the accuracy of the tone recorded on the test LP (HFS 81, produced by the late John Wright for the long-defunct UK magazine Hi-Fi Sound), the 1.5Hz difference can't be used to judge the LP12's speed accuracy." Odd Atkinson can't find a test record with accurate tones. No, Mr. Krueger, I have plenty of test LPs. But there is no way of knowing a) that the signal source used to prepare the master was set precisely to the specified frequency and b) that the cutting lathe was turning at precisely the correct speed. All the reviewer can do, therefore, is specify the test record used and the result obtained. A strobe, BTW, indicated that the Linn did turn at 33.33 rpm. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Arny Krueger" wrote in
message ... "John Atkinson" wrote in message om The subject of Stereophile's circulation arose on r.a.o. and r.a.t. today, the context being how a mainly 2-channel audio magazine can survive in today's complicated media market. BTW, one has to act whether this recisitation of the circulation controversy is just another lame attempt to distract attention from Atkinson's highly questionable and technically deficient Linn LP-12 review. http://www.stereophile.com/analogsourcereviews/1103linn No, Mr. Krueger, As I said in the posting that started this thread, I posted the historical data for Stereophile's circulation to a comment from Rusty Boudreaux (in message ) that he had "noticed the drop on [Stereophile]'s gov't filing page for circulation," while _you_, Mr. Krueger, had stated (in message ) that you thought "there is plenty of evidence that Stereophile's magazine sales are shrinking at a rate that should and probably does greatly concern [John] Atkinson." By your logic, Mr. Krueger, it was _you_ were trying to divert attention away from the Linn review :-) (Or perhaps the shenanigans on your website.) "The measured playback frequency was 998.5Hz, but as I don't know the accuracy of the tone recorded on the test LP (HFS 81, produced by the late John Wright for the long-defunct UK magazine Hi-Fi Sound), the 1.5Hz difference can't be used to judge the LP12's speed accuracy." Odd Atkinson can't find a test record with accurate tones. No, Mr. Krueger, I have plenty of test LPs. But there is no way of knowing a) that the signal source used to prepare the master was set precisely to the specified frequency and b) that the cutting lathe was turning at precisely the correct speed. All the reviewer can do, therefore, is specify the test record used and the result obtained. A strobe, BTW, indicated that the Linn did turn at 33.33 rpm. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Arny Krueger" wrote in
message ... "John Atkinson" wrote in message om The subject of Stereophile's circulation arose on r.a.o. and r.a.t. today, the context being how a mainly 2-channel audio magazine can survive in today's complicated media market. BTW, one has to act whether this recisitation of the circulation controversy is just another lame attempt to distract attention from Atkinson's highly questionable and technically deficient Linn LP-12 review. http://www.stereophile.com/analogsourcereviews/1103linn No, Mr. Krueger, As I said in the posting that started this thread, I posted the historical data for Stereophile's circulation to a comment from Rusty Boudreaux (in message ) that he had "noticed the drop on [Stereophile]'s gov't filing page for circulation," while _you_, Mr. Krueger, had stated (in message ) that you thought "there is plenty of evidence that Stereophile's magazine sales are shrinking at a rate that should and probably does greatly concern [John] Atkinson." By your logic, Mr. Krueger, it was _you_ were trying to divert attention away from the Linn review :-) (Or perhaps the shenanigans on your website.) "The measured playback frequency was 998.5Hz, but as I don't know the accuracy of the tone recorded on the test LP (HFS 81, produced by the late John Wright for the long-defunct UK magazine Hi-Fi Sound), the 1.5Hz difference can't be used to judge the LP12's speed accuracy." Odd Atkinson can't find a test record with accurate tones. No, Mr. Krueger, I have plenty of test LPs. But there is no way of knowing a) that the signal source used to prepare the master was set precisely to the specified frequency and b) that the cutting lathe was turning at precisely the correct speed. All the reviewer can do, therefore, is specify the test record used and the result obtained. A strobe, BTW, indicated that the Linn did turn at 33.33 rpm. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Arny Krueger" wrote in
message ... "John Atkinson" wrote in message om Arny Krueger had stated (in message ) that he thought "there is plenty of evidence that Stereophile's magazine sales are shrinking at a rate that should and probably does greatly concern [John] Atkinson." However, it is fair to point out that Mr. Krueger offered _no_ such "evidence," nor does he have any. Sure I do, its right below. By which I assume Mr. Krueger is referring to these figures: 2002: 82,932 2003: 81,668 Tell me if I'm wrong, but don't these figures say that the magazine's circulation is shrinking? By just 1250 over a 2-year period Mr. Krueger. Please don't now try to pretend you meant just "shrinking" when you wrote in message ) that you thought "there is plenty of evidence that Stereophile's magazine sales are shrinking at a rate that should and probably does greatly concern [John] Atkinson." My "no evidence" comment referred to the entirety of your statement.. Mr. Krueger. The relatively small drop 2002-2003 or even the larger one 2000-2003 do not concern me, "greatly" or otherwise, and you have no evidence that it does. The circulation we have guaranteed in this period (our so-called "rate base") is 80,000. As long as our actual circulation is greater than than, there is no reason for concern. And as I have stated in another recent posting, over the same period our website, www.stereophile.com, has grown to 200,000 unique visitors per month. So it could be argued that Stereophile's "mindshare." its influence if you wish, has grown significantly. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Arny Krueger" wrote in
message ... "John Atkinson" wrote in message om Arny Krueger had stated (in message ) that he thought "there is plenty of evidence that Stereophile's magazine sales are shrinking at a rate that should and probably does greatly concern [John] Atkinson." However, it is fair to point out that Mr. Krueger offered _no_ such "evidence," nor does he have any. Sure I do, its right below. By which I assume Mr. Krueger is referring to these figures: 2002: 82,932 2003: 81,668 Tell me if I'm wrong, but don't these figures say that the magazine's circulation is shrinking? By just 1250 over a 2-year period Mr. Krueger. Please don't now try to pretend you meant just "shrinking" when you wrote in message ) that you thought "there is plenty of evidence that Stereophile's magazine sales are shrinking at a rate that should and probably does greatly concern [John] Atkinson." My "no evidence" comment referred to the entirety of your statement.. Mr. Krueger. The relatively small drop 2002-2003 or even the larger one 2000-2003 do not concern me, "greatly" or otherwise, and you have no evidence that it does. The circulation we have guaranteed in this period (our so-called "rate base") is 80,000. As long as our actual circulation is greater than than, there is no reason for concern. And as I have stated in another recent posting, over the same period our website, www.stereophile.com, has grown to 200,000 unique visitors per month. So it could be argued that Stereophile's "mindshare." its influence if you wish, has grown significantly. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Arny Krueger" wrote in
message ... "John Atkinson" wrote in message om Arny Krueger had stated (in message ) that he thought "there is plenty of evidence that Stereophile's magazine sales are shrinking at a rate that should and probably does greatly concern [John] Atkinson." However, it is fair to point out that Mr. Krueger offered _no_ such "evidence," nor does he have any. Sure I do, its right below. By which I assume Mr. Krueger is referring to these figures: 2002: 82,932 2003: 81,668 Tell me if I'm wrong, but don't these figures say that the magazine's circulation is shrinking? By just 1250 over a 2-year period Mr. Krueger. Please don't now try to pretend you meant just "shrinking" when you wrote in message ) that you thought "there is plenty of evidence that Stereophile's magazine sales are shrinking at a rate that should and probably does greatly concern [John] Atkinson." My "no evidence" comment referred to the entirety of your statement.. Mr. Krueger. The relatively small drop 2002-2003 or even the larger one 2000-2003 do not concern me, "greatly" or otherwise, and you have no evidence that it does. The circulation we have guaranteed in this period (our so-called "rate base") is 80,000. As long as our actual circulation is greater than than, there is no reason for concern. And as I have stated in another recent posting, over the same period our website, www.stereophile.com, has grown to 200,000 unique visitors per month. So it could be argued that Stereophile's "mindshare." its influence if you wish, has grown significantly. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"ScottW" wrote in message news:YWtJb.45990$m83.5645@fed1read01... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... I'd be more interested in comments to this post on audioasylum. http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/gen...es/298159.html Is Stereophile now largely fund by advertising rather than subscibers? I see 12 months subscriptions for less than $1 per issue. If this guys post is true, Stereophile subsciption revenue has gone from almost $2.4M to less than $100K. ScottW You are making quite an unreasonable extrapolation based upon one case, even if it were true. Don't let your hatreds interfere with your common sense. No you sound like Sanders. I don't "hate" Stereophile. I do hate people telling me I hate things I don't hate. You should understand that unless you really hate homosexuals. Now explain what is unreasonable. I've seen a couple of post indicate Stereophile subscription rates were $35 a year and now are about $12. 3 years subscriptions are much less and have to be less than the cost of delivering the magazine. What is the unreasonable extrapolation? ScottW They were never a 'solid' $35 per year. Introductory rates were always between $12 and $15 per year since I first subscribed in 1988. The first renewal offer you would get would be $35. If you would hold out, you would eventually get an offer for $15, but would have to miss an issue. Point is, you need to 'average' the subscription price to get the right ratio between first timers and reups. And calculate in those that might buy a single issue for about $6 at the local stereo salon. My discussion was "subscription revenue". Your assertion is that Stereophile never had substantial subscription revenues. I find that difficult to believe as I understant did not have any advertising revenue. I figured you knew this, and were ignoring it to make a point. I think the point is valid, Stereophiles subscription revenue has declined though perhaps not as dramatically as I said. Which is worse? To decline subscription revenue by ~$2.3M or having never made the $2.3M? Anyway, they changed their business model to rely on advertising revenue. If you didn't know this, you have my apologies. No problem, hope you get some snow . Only the naive paid the $35 reup. Likely it was a small percentage of overall subscriptions. This is similar to subscription policies for many other magazines. A low intro, and a more expensive reup, which can readily be circumvented. Your 12:1 ratio for loss of subscription ratioincome does not stand. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"ScottW" wrote in message news:YWtJb.45990$m83.5645@fed1read01... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... I'd be more interested in comments to this post on audioasylum. http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/gen...es/298159.html Is Stereophile now largely fund by advertising rather than subscibers? I see 12 months subscriptions for less than $1 per issue. If this guys post is true, Stereophile subsciption revenue has gone from almost $2.4M to less than $100K. ScottW You are making quite an unreasonable extrapolation based upon one case, even if it were true. Don't let your hatreds interfere with your common sense. No you sound like Sanders. I don't "hate" Stereophile. I do hate people telling me I hate things I don't hate. You should understand that unless you really hate homosexuals. Now explain what is unreasonable. I've seen a couple of post indicate Stereophile subscription rates were $35 a year and now are about $12. 3 years subscriptions are much less and have to be less than the cost of delivering the magazine. What is the unreasonable extrapolation? ScottW They were never a 'solid' $35 per year. Introductory rates were always between $12 and $15 per year since I first subscribed in 1988. The first renewal offer you would get would be $35. If you would hold out, you would eventually get an offer for $15, but would have to miss an issue. Point is, you need to 'average' the subscription price to get the right ratio between first timers and reups. And calculate in those that might buy a single issue for about $6 at the local stereo salon. My discussion was "subscription revenue". Your assertion is that Stereophile never had substantial subscription revenues. I find that difficult to believe as I understant did not have any advertising revenue. I figured you knew this, and were ignoring it to make a point. I think the point is valid, Stereophiles subscription revenue has declined though perhaps not as dramatically as I said. Which is worse? To decline subscription revenue by ~$2.3M or having never made the $2.3M? Anyway, they changed their business model to rely on advertising revenue. If you didn't know this, you have my apologies. No problem, hope you get some snow . Only the naive paid the $35 reup. Likely it was a small percentage of overall subscriptions. This is similar to subscription policies for many other magazines. A low intro, and a more expensive reup, which can readily be circumvented. Your 12:1 ratio for loss of subscription ratioincome does not stand. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"ScottW" wrote in message news:YWtJb.45990$m83.5645@fed1read01... "Sockpuppet Yustabe" wrote in message ... I'd be more interested in comments to this post on audioasylum. http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/gen...es/298159.html Is Stereophile now largely fund by advertising rather than subscibers? I see 12 months subscriptions for less than $1 per issue. If this guys post is true, Stereophile subsciption revenue has gone from almost $2.4M to less than $100K. ScottW You are making quite an unreasonable extrapolation based upon one case, even if it were true. Don't let your hatreds interfere with your common sense. No you sound like Sanders. I don't "hate" Stereophile. I do hate people telling me I hate things I don't hate. You should understand that unless you really hate homosexuals. Now explain what is unreasonable. I've seen a couple of post indicate Stereophile subscription rates were $35 a year and now are about $12. 3 years subscriptions are much less and have to be less than the cost of delivering the magazine. What is the unreasonable extrapolation? ScottW They were never a 'solid' $35 per year. Introductory rates were always between $12 and $15 per year since I first subscribed in 1988. The first renewal offer you would get would be $35. If you would hold out, you would eventually get an offer for $15, but would have to miss an issue. Point is, you need to 'average' the subscription price to get the right ratio between first timers and reups. And calculate in those that might buy a single issue for about $6 at the local stereo salon. My discussion was "subscription revenue". Your assertion is that Stereophile never had substantial subscription revenues. I find that difficult to believe as I understant did not have any advertising revenue. I figured you knew this, and were ignoring it to make a point. I think the point is valid, Stereophiles subscription revenue has declined though perhaps not as dramatically as I said. Which is worse? To decline subscription revenue by ~$2.3M or having never made the $2.3M? Anyway, they changed their business model to rely on advertising revenue. If you didn't know this, you have my apologies. No problem, hope you get some snow . Only the naive paid the $35 reup. Likely it was a small percentage of overall subscriptions. This is similar to subscription policies for many other magazines. A low intro, and a more expensive reup, which can readily be circumvented. Your 12:1 ratio for loss of subscription ratioincome does not stand. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"George M. Middius" wrote in message ... Scott Gardner said to ****-for-Brains: Tell me if I'm wrong, but don't these figures say that the magazine's circulation is shrinking? I think this is one of those issues that depends on presentation. How about this: Everybody agree that Stereophile's circulation has dropped, however Turdborg wants to define "drop". We can further stipulate that said drop is the direct result of Arnii Krooger's machinations on Usenet, including his exhaustive tests of obsolete soundcards. Once we do this, maybe Krooger will feel he's achieved his life's work. What can he possibly do to top that? ;-) It wasn't Arny that did it. It was Ferstler's wreckng ball. Now that the monster is dismantled, JA can expect circulation to rise to record levels! ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"George M. Middius" wrote in message ... Scott Gardner said to ****-for-Brains: Tell me if I'm wrong, but don't these figures say that the magazine's circulation is shrinking? I think this is one of those issues that depends on presentation. How about this: Everybody agree that Stereophile's circulation has dropped, however Turdborg wants to define "drop". We can further stipulate that said drop is the direct result of Arnii Krooger's machinations on Usenet, including his exhaustive tests of obsolete soundcards. Once we do this, maybe Krooger will feel he's achieved his life's work. What can he possibly do to top that? ;-) It wasn't Arny that did it. It was Ferstler's wreckng ball. Now that the monster is dismantled, JA can expect circulation to rise to record levels! ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"George M. Middius" wrote in message ... Scott Gardner said to ****-for-Brains: Tell me if I'm wrong, but don't these figures say that the magazine's circulation is shrinking? I think this is one of those issues that depends on presentation. How about this: Everybody agree that Stereophile's circulation has dropped, however Turdborg wants to define "drop". We can further stipulate that said drop is the direct result of Arnii Krooger's machinations on Usenet, including his exhaustive tests of obsolete soundcards. Once we do this, maybe Krooger will feel he's achieved his life's work. What can he possibly do to top that? ;-) It wasn't Arny that did it. It was Ferstler's wreckng ball. Now that the monster is dismantled, JA can expect circulation to rise to record levels! ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Goofball_star_dot_etal" wrote in message ... On 3 Jan 2004 05:52:39 -0800, (John Atkinson) wrote: No, Mr. Krueger, I have plenty of test LPs. But there is no way of knowing a) that the signal source used to prepare the master was set precisely to the specified frequency and b) that the cutting lathe was turning at precisely the correct speed. All the reviewer can do, therefore, is specify the test record used and the result obtained. A strobe, BTW, indicated that the Linn did turn at 33.33 rpm. This is not actually true. You don't need to know the frequency of the signal source _and_ the speed of the cutting lathe. You _just_ need to know the number of cycles/ revolution and this is something that can easily be measured using just the LP and a soundcard and some sort of audio editor. The sound card does not need an accurate timebase either. If you don't follow, you could search google groups for "John's dad say : "Ratiometric measurement lot better than kick in balls." You can't tell rotational accuracy if the test record has more w/f than the table under test. I think that this may well be the case, we are talking about very small values here. The strobe may also not be accurate enough. The only way to do this would be to set up some kind detector on the platter itself and this could measure the accuracy of rotation. The effects of the tone arm, and cartridge however cannot be determined this way. The crux of the problem is that turntable performance can only be measured in a partial way. Even if the exact same test record were used to compare tables, the combination of effects could mask defects, or exaggerate them. The net result however is as you say, a lot better than a kick anywhere Carl |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Goofball_star_dot_etal" wrote in message ... On 3 Jan 2004 05:52:39 -0800, (John Atkinson) wrote: No, Mr. Krueger, I have plenty of test LPs. But there is no way of knowing a) that the signal source used to prepare the master was set precisely to the specified frequency and b) that the cutting lathe was turning at precisely the correct speed. All the reviewer can do, therefore, is specify the test record used and the result obtained. A strobe, BTW, indicated that the Linn did turn at 33.33 rpm. This is not actually true. You don't need to know the frequency of the signal source _and_ the speed of the cutting lathe. You _just_ need to know the number of cycles/ revolution and this is something that can easily be measured using just the LP and a soundcard and some sort of audio editor. The sound card does not need an accurate timebase either. If you don't follow, you could search google groups for "John's dad say : "Ratiometric measurement lot better than kick in balls." You can't tell rotational accuracy if the test record has more w/f than the table under test. I think that this may well be the case, we are talking about very small values here. The strobe may also not be accurate enough. The only way to do this would be to set up some kind detector on the platter itself and this could measure the accuracy of rotation. The effects of the tone arm, and cartridge however cannot be determined this way. The crux of the problem is that turntable performance can only be measured in a partial way. Even if the exact same test record were used to compare tables, the combination of effects could mask defects, or exaggerate them. The net result however is as you say, a lot better than a kick anywhere Carl |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Mark A" wrote in message
... Those are not circulation numbers. Those are subscription numbers that do not include in-store sales. Hi Mark, please note that they _are_ circulation numbers. They are the total paid sales from all sources, whether subs or newsstand, plus the complimentary circ (writers and advertisers). They do not include returns, unsold copies, and office copies. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Mark A" wrote in message
... Those are not circulation numbers. Those are subscription numbers that do not include in-store sales. Hi Mark, please note that they _are_ circulation numbers. They are the total paid sales from all sources, whether subs or newsstand, plus the complimentary circ (writers and advertisers). They do not include returns, unsold copies, and office copies. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Mark A" wrote in message
... Those are not circulation numbers. Those are subscription numbers that do not include in-store sales. Hi Mark, please note that they _are_ circulation numbers. They are the total paid sales from all sources, whether subs or newsstand, plus the complimentary circ (writers and advertisers). They do not include returns, unsold copies, and office copies. John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"John Atkinson" wrote 1994: 71,040 1995: 79,332 1996: 85,808 1997: 87,219 1998: 83,921 1999: 85,224 2000: 91,384 2001: 84,987 2002: 82,932 2003: 81,668 Please note that there are many factors which contribute to a magazine's paid circulation, and that to draw any general conclusion concerning any specific factor will almost certainly be incorrect. Agreed. Regardless, I hope that this puts the matter of Stereophile's purported circulation problems to rest. I think that age demographics would indicate a new paradigm is in play. Here are the 1994 demographics reported by Stereophile: Median age (1994): 41 Under 30 - 12.5% 30-49 - 65.8% 50-64 - 17.0 65 or over 4.7% Sex: 98.1% Male 1.9% Female A significant portion of the Baby Boomers, now ten years later, have peaked in income and are heading for retirement. Half of the over 65 group are dead now, too. Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. The average length of time a subscriber has been a reader of Stereophile was (1994) 4.8 years. Over the last ten years that is almost a 100% turnover. Without new hobbyists entering into high end audio the days of Stereophile and TAS are numbered. Again, I think the draw (paradigm change/demographics) is toward HT and less interest in high end audio. So what are you planning for your next career, John ? |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"John Atkinson" wrote 1994: 71,040 1995: 79,332 1996: 85,808 1997: 87,219 1998: 83,921 1999: 85,224 2000: 91,384 2001: 84,987 2002: 82,932 2003: 81,668 Please note that there are many factors which contribute to a magazine's paid circulation, and that to draw any general conclusion concerning any specific factor will almost certainly be incorrect. Agreed. Regardless, I hope that this puts the matter of Stereophile's purported circulation problems to rest. I think that age demographics would indicate a new paradigm is in play. Here are the 1994 demographics reported by Stereophile: Median age (1994): 41 Under 30 - 12.5% 30-49 - 65.8% 50-64 - 17.0 65 or over 4.7% Sex: 98.1% Male 1.9% Female A significant portion of the Baby Boomers, now ten years later, have peaked in income and are heading for retirement. Half of the over 65 group are dead now, too. Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. The average length of time a subscriber has been a reader of Stereophile was (1994) 4.8 years. Over the last ten years that is almost a 100% turnover. Without new hobbyists entering into high end audio the days of Stereophile and TAS are numbered. Again, I think the draw (paradigm change/demographics) is toward HT and less interest in high end audio. So what are you planning for your next career, John ? |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"John Atkinson" wrote 1994: 71,040 1995: 79,332 1996: 85,808 1997: 87,219 1998: 83,921 1999: 85,224 2000: 91,384 2001: 84,987 2002: 82,932 2003: 81,668 Please note that there are many factors which contribute to a magazine's paid circulation, and that to draw any general conclusion concerning any specific factor will almost certainly be incorrect. Agreed. Regardless, I hope that this puts the matter of Stereophile's purported circulation problems to rest. I think that age demographics would indicate a new paradigm is in play. Here are the 1994 demographics reported by Stereophile: Median age (1994): 41 Under 30 - 12.5% 30-49 - 65.8% 50-64 - 17.0 65 or over 4.7% Sex: 98.1% Male 1.9% Female A significant portion of the Baby Boomers, now ten years later, have peaked in income and are heading for retirement. Half of the over 65 group are dead now, too. Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. The average length of time a subscriber has been a reader of Stereophile was (1994) 4.8 years. Over the last ten years that is almost a 100% turnover. Without new hobbyists entering into high end audio the days of Stereophile and TAS are numbered. Again, I think the draw (paradigm change/demographics) is toward HT and less interest in high end audio. So what are you planning for your next career, John ? |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Powell" wrote in message
... So what are you planning for your next career, John ? Do you expect John to live forever? |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Powell" wrote in message
... So what are you planning for your next career, John ? Do you expect John to live forever? |
#109
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Powell" wrote in message
... So what are you planning for your next career, John ? Do you expect John to live forever? |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Powell" wrote in message ... "John Atkinson" wrote 1994: 71,040 1995: 79,332 1996: 85,808 1997: 87,219 1998: 83,921 1999: 85,224 2000: 91,384 2001: 84,987 2002: 82,932 2003: 81,668 Please note that there are many factors which contribute to a magazine's paid circulation, and that to draw any general conclusion concerning any specific factor will almost certainly be incorrect. Agreed. Regardless, I hope that this puts the matter of Stereophile's purported circulation problems to rest. I think that age demographics would indicate a new paradigm is in play. Here are the 1994 demographics reported by Stereophile: Median age (1994): 41 Under 30 - 12.5% 30-49 - 65.8% 50-64 - 17.0 65 or over 4.7% Sex: 98.1% Male 1.9% Female A significant portion of the Baby Boomers, now ten years later, have peaked in income and are heading for retirement. Half of the over 65 group are dead now, too. Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. The average length of time a subscriber has been a reader of Stereophile was (1994) 4.8 years. Over the last ten years that is almost a 100% turnover. Without new hobbyists entering into high end audio the days of Stereophile and TAS are numbered. Again, I think the draw (paradigm change/demographics) is toward HT and less interest in high end audio. So what are you planning for your next career, John ? Let's just assume he grows older with the rest of us, and someday, he will retire, and eventually expire, like we all will. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Powell" wrote in message ... "John Atkinson" wrote 1994: 71,040 1995: 79,332 1996: 85,808 1997: 87,219 1998: 83,921 1999: 85,224 2000: 91,384 2001: 84,987 2002: 82,932 2003: 81,668 Please note that there are many factors which contribute to a magazine's paid circulation, and that to draw any general conclusion concerning any specific factor will almost certainly be incorrect. Agreed. Regardless, I hope that this puts the matter of Stereophile's purported circulation problems to rest. I think that age demographics would indicate a new paradigm is in play. Here are the 1994 demographics reported by Stereophile: Median age (1994): 41 Under 30 - 12.5% 30-49 - 65.8% 50-64 - 17.0 65 or over 4.7% Sex: 98.1% Male 1.9% Female A significant portion of the Baby Boomers, now ten years later, have peaked in income and are heading for retirement. Half of the over 65 group are dead now, too. Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. The average length of time a subscriber has been a reader of Stereophile was (1994) 4.8 years. Over the last ten years that is almost a 100% turnover. Without new hobbyists entering into high end audio the days of Stereophile and TAS are numbered. Again, I think the draw (paradigm change/demographics) is toward HT and less interest in high end audio. So what are you planning for your next career, John ? Let's just assume he grows older with the rest of us, and someday, he will retire, and eventually expire, like we all will. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Powell" wrote in message ... "John Atkinson" wrote 1994: 71,040 1995: 79,332 1996: 85,808 1997: 87,219 1998: 83,921 1999: 85,224 2000: 91,384 2001: 84,987 2002: 82,932 2003: 81,668 Please note that there are many factors which contribute to a magazine's paid circulation, and that to draw any general conclusion concerning any specific factor will almost certainly be incorrect. Agreed. Regardless, I hope that this puts the matter of Stereophile's purported circulation problems to rest. I think that age demographics would indicate a new paradigm is in play. Here are the 1994 demographics reported by Stereophile: Median age (1994): 41 Under 30 - 12.5% 30-49 - 65.8% 50-64 - 17.0 65 or over 4.7% Sex: 98.1% Male 1.9% Female A significant portion of the Baby Boomers, now ten years later, have peaked in income and are heading for retirement. Half of the over 65 group are dead now, too. Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. The average length of time a subscriber has been a reader of Stereophile was (1994) 4.8 years. Over the last ten years that is almost a 100% turnover. Without new hobbyists entering into high end audio the days of Stereophile and TAS are numbered. Again, I think the draw (paradigm change/demographics) is toward HT and less interest in high end audio. So what are you planning for your next career, John ? Let's just assume he grows older with the rest of us, and someday, he will retire, and eventually expire, like we all will. ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Powell" wrote in message ...
Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. Actually no. The HT magazines in general are not maintaining readership as well as Stsreophile. S&V, foe xample, recently dropped its ratebase by a significant amount. So what are you planning for your next career, John ? I kinda fancy pool attendant at the Cancun Club Med. Either that or Howard Dean's White House Chief of Staff. :-) John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Powell" wrote in message ...
Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. Actually no. The HT magazines in general are not maintaining readership as well as Stsreophile. S&V, foe xample, recently dropped its ratebase by a significant amount. So what are you planning for your next career, John ? I kinda fancy pool attendant at the Cancun Club Med. Either that or Howard Dean's White House Chief of Staff. :-) John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Powell" wrote in message ...
Based on the current demographics of the age groups I suspect that HT magazines are attracting the larger portion (30 - 49 years) of new subscribers over Stereophile. Actually no. The HT magazines in general are not maintaining readership as well as Stsreophile. S&V, foe xample, recently dropped its ratebase by a significant amount. So what are you planning for your next career, John ? I kinda fancy pool attendant at the Cancun Club Med. Either that or Howard Dean's White House Chief of Staff. :-) John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
ow (Goofball_star_dot_etal) wrote in message
... On 3 Jan 2004 05:52:39 -0800, (John Atkinson) wrote: All the reviewer can do, therefore, is specify the test record used and the result obtained. This is not actually true. You don't need to know the frequency of the signal source _and_ the speed of the cutting lathe. You _just_ need to know the number of cycles/ revolution and this is something that can easily be measured using just the LP and a soundcard and some sort of audio editor. Thanks David. I'll fool around with this technique. But it does look as if the 1kHz tone on HFS81 is rather approximate. :-) If you don't follow, you could search google groups for "John's dad say : "Ratiometric measurement lot better than kick in balls." That John's dad, he's one wise fella. Know if he's looking for a gig? John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
ow (Goofball_star_dot_etal) wrote in message
... On 3 Jan 2004 05:52:39 -0800, (John Atkinson) wrote: All the reviewer can do, therefore, is specify the test record used and the result obtained. This is not actually true. You don't need to know the frequency of the signal source _and_ the speed of the cutting lathe. You _just_ need to know the number of cycles/ revolution and this is something that can easily be measured using just the LP and a soundcard and some sort of audio editor. Thanks David. I'll fool around with this technique. But it does look as if the 1kHz tone on HFS81 is rather approximate. :-) If you don't follow, you could search google groups for "John's dad say : "Ratiometric measurement lot better than kick in balls." That John's dad, he's one wise fella. Know if he's looking for a gig? John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
ow (Goofball_star_dot_etal) wrote in message
... On 3 Jan 2004 05:52:39 -0800, (John Atkinson) wrote: All the reviewer can do, therefore, is specify the test record used and the result obtained. This is not actually true. You don't need to know the frequency of the signal source _and_ the speed of the cutting lathe. You _just_ need to know the number of cycles/ revolution and this is something that can easily be measured using just the LP and a soundcard and some sort of audio editor. Thanks David. I'll fool around with this technique. But it does look as if the 1kHz tone on HFS81 is rather approximate. :-) If you don't follow, you could search google groups for "John's dad say : "Ratiometric measurement lot better than kick in balls." That John's dad, he's one wise fella. Know if he's looking for a gig? John Atkinson Editor, Stereophile |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Goofball_star_dot_etal" wrote in message ... On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 18:13:50 GMT, "cwvalle" wrote: You can't tell rotational accuracy if the test record has more w/f than the table under test. True. However the measurements I just mentioned show a peak to peak speed variation of 1.2 Hz in 303.8 =0.004 This mainly at the rotational frequency and could be accouted for by the LP off-centre 2 thou/ inch of radius say 10 thou at radius of 5 inches. The rest of the w/f above the second harmonic of this are down in the region of 1/10th to 1/100th of this, say +/- 0.0002. This test record is not that bad. . . I think that this may well be the case, we are talking about very small values here. The strobe may also not be accurate enough. The only way to do this would be to set up some kind detector on the platter itself and this could measure the accuracy of rotation. There is more than one way to skin a cat. The effects of the tone arm, and cartridge however cannot be determined this way. In the example I showed (300_1-fmfft.jpg) there is very little FM to be seen at the tone arm resonant frequency of around 10 Hz The crux of the problem is that turntable performance can only be measured in a partial way. Even if the exact same test record were used to compare tables, the combination of effects could mask defects, or exaggerate them. The net result however is as you say, a lot better than a kick anywhere I would be delighted to process your test tone with my polar plotted FM detector(tm). I expect to see a flower shape with petals corresponding to the number of poles but we may never know. You might not like what you would see but at least it would test your and other's beliefs mentioned in Message-ID: If I were you I would chicken out. . . On the other hand the width of the plot published in Stereophile might just be due to a hole in a record being off-centre. I do not have the WAV file that I sent to JA and he used to produce that graph. I can make another one if you want. I have several test records Command Stereo Check Out - CSC 100 Telarc Digital Omnidisc - DG-10073, '74 The Telarc is the one I use as a standard, and is the one i used to make the WAV file I sent to JA I have a CBS STR 100, 102 but I dont know where it is right now There is no way I chicken out. Not now not ever Specify your email and you will get a tone my email is |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
Magazine Statitistics
"Goofball_star_dot_etal" wrote in message ... On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 18:13:50 GMT, "cwvalle" wrote: You can't tell rotational accuracy if the test record has more w/f than the table under test. True. However the measurements I just mentioned show a peak to peak speed variation of 1.2 Hz in 303.8 =0.004 This mainly at the rotational frequency and could be accouted for by the LP off-centre 2 thou/ inch of radius say 10 thou at radius of 5 inches. The rest of the w/f above the second harmonic of this are down in the region of 1/10th to 1/100th of this, say +/- 0.0002. This test record is not that bad. . . I think that this may well be the case, we are talking about very small values here. The strobe may also not be accurate enough. The only way to do this would be to set up some kind detector on the platter itself and this could measure the accuracy of rotation. There is more than one way to skin a cat. The effects of the tone arm, and cartridge however cannot be determined this way. In the example I showed (300_1-fmfft.jpg) there is very little FM to be seen at the tone arm resonant frequency of around 10 Hz The crux of the problem is that turntable performance can only be measured in a partial way. Even if the exact same test record were used to compare tables, the combination of effects could mask defects, or exaggerate them. The net result however is as you say, a lot better than a kick anywhere I would be delighted to process your test tone with my polar plotted FM detector(tm). I expect to see a flower shape with petals corresponding to the number of poles but we may never know. You might not like what you would see but at least it would test your and other's beliefs mentioned in Message-ID: If I were you I would chicken out. . . On the other hand the width of the plot published in Stereophile might just be due to a hole in a record being off-centre. I do not have the WAV file that I sent to JA and he used to produce that graph. I can make another one if you want. I have several test records Command Stereo Check Out - CSC 100 Telarc Digital Omnidisc - DG-10073, '74 The Telarc is the one I use as a standard, and is the one i used to make the WAV file I sent to JA I have a CBS STR 100, 102 but I dont know where it is right now There is no way I chicken out. Not now not ever Specify your email and you will get a tone my email is |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Magazine Statitistics | Audio Opinions | |||
Saddam/Time Magazine | Pro Audio | |||
Remove magazine from Sony CDX-656 changer | Car Audio | |||
- TAS magazine Website Updated - | Audio Opinions | |||
FA: Matrix sound design magazine (this might interest some of you) | Pro Audio |