"Iain M Churches"

IMO, Stereophile crossed the "beyond worthless" threshold quite some
time ago. It is now simply an advertising vehicle for the
manufacturers. Period.

I don't have the opportunity to read Stereophile,



** Then for Christ's sake shut the **** up.




........... Phil

Phil Allison a écrit :
"Iain M Churches"


IMO, Stereophile crossed the "beyond worthless" threshold quite some
time ago. It is now simply an advertising vehicle for the
manufacturers. Period.

IMO, Stereophile crossed the "beyond worthless" threshold quite some
time ago. It is now simply an advertising vehicle for the
manufacturers. Period.


I don't have the opportunity to read Stereophile, as I live on the
other side of the world, but generally speaking, magazines on
any topic are only as good as their readership demands them
to be. If you are not satisfied, then a letter to the editor is the
best solution. Any editor who receives letters from dis-satisfied
readers in large numbers will certainly not ignore them.
But, an editor who receives little or no feedback will assume
that the readers are happy with the magazine, as long as
circulation figures are maintained.

Iain

** Then for Christ's sake shut the **** up.

.......... Phil

Phil you have no reason to be so rude with Iain.
He was just giving a opinion that I personnaly find correct. If your not
happy with what is writen in a magazine, just write a letter to the
editor to let him know. If nobody write to complain how would the editor
will know. And if people do write and nothing change in this magazine
just stop buying it. Magazine cannot live with publicity alone, they
need readers. If the readers go away so will the company that buy
publicity.

Regards

Jocelyn

"Jocelyn Major"

** What gives you the right to completely change someone's post before
adding your asinine reply ??

Wanna try again with the actual post ??

--------------------------------------------------------------------

"Iain M Churches"

IMO, Stereophile crossed the "beyond worthless" threshold quite some
time ago. It is now simply an advertising vehicle for the
manufacturers. Period.

I don't have the opportunity to read Stereophile,


** Then for Christ's sake shut the **** up.



........... Phil


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Phil Allison a écrit :
"Jocelyn Major"

** What gives you the right to completely change someone's post before
adding your asinine reply ??
???? I simply don't understand what is your problem.
I simply put back the text that *you* remove from Iain M Churches before
posting to make thing in the "correct" perpective.
Did you remove parts of Iain M Churches post simply to have a reason to
blast him?
Also what give *you* the right to remove part of Iain's post before
being rude with him?
Wanna try again with the actual post ??
Yes without any problem
--------------------------------------------------------------------

"Iain M Churches"


IMO, Stereophile crossed the "beyond worthless" threshold quite some
time ago. It is now simply an advertising vehicle for the
manufacturers. Period.

I don't have the opportunity to read Stereophile,



** Then for Christ's sake shut the **** up.



.......... Phil

Here is my text again!

Phil you *still* have no reason to be so rude with Iain (or anybody else).
He was just giving a opinion that I personnaly find correct. If your not
happy with what is writen in a magazine, just write a letter to the
editor to let him know. If nobody write to complain how would the editor
will know. And if people do write and nothing change in this magazine
just stop buying it. Magazine cannot live with publicity alone, they
need readers. If the readers go away so will the company that buy publicity.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I find it disturbing that on some newsgroup so many people are so quick
to either insult or give unneccessary rude comment. Why is it so
difficult for some to act like civilized people.

Iain simply said that he "did'nt have the opportunity to read
Stereophile" so what? But he also give a good point about readershio
that you simply did'nt include in your post just to be able to tell him
to shut the **** up. You where simply rude and unfear.

It is something that I see way to often. Because some people do not see
the other people they are writing they simply forget to be courteous.
Would you have said the same word to Iain if it was sitting next to you?

I don't think it is too difficult to be courteous with other. It is
simply what our parents teach us when we where young. I hope that you
did'nt forget? I am not blasting you, I never will. I simply tell you
that you where being unneccessary rude.

Regards

Jocelyn

Iain M Churches wrote:

I don't have the opportunity to read Stereophile, as I
live on the
other side of the world...

I've always thought the UK was a lot more cosmopolitan than
that.

"Arny Krueger"
Iain M Churches wrote:

I don't have the opportunity to read Stereophile, as I
live on the other side of the world...

I've always thought the UK was a lot more cosmopolitan than
that.



** Iain M Quarterwit lives permanently in a Twilight Zone on the other side
of some parallel universe populated with autistic alien cretins.





............... Phil

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 10:02:18 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Iain M Churches wrote:

I don't have the opportunity to read Stereophile, as I
live on the
other side of the world...

I've always thought the UK was a lot more cosmopolitan than
that.

But Finland is probably not so "cosmopolitan"...

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 10:02:18 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Iain M Churches wrote:

I don't have the opportunity to read Stereophile, as I
live on the
other side of the world...

I've always thought the UK was a lot more cosmopolitan than
that.

But Finland is probably not so "cosmopolitan"...

Or perhaps more so:-)
In addition to the English language mags, we also have
Swedish, German, Danish, Norwegian, Finnish and
even Russian periodicals which are probably not
available in the US or the UK.

Having heard so much about Stereophile, I would
certainly like to see a copy.

Iain

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:40:18 +0300, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 10:02:18 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Iain M Churches wrote:

I don't have the opportunity to read Stereophile, as I
live on the
other side of the world...

I've always thought the UK was a lot more cosmopolitan than
that.

But Finland is probably not so "cosmopolitan"...

Or perhaps more so:-)

That's why I put the word in parentheses g.

For Arnold, I suspect that cosmopolitan means more strip malls and the
abillity to get a Starbucks' coffee.

Of course, he can't even read headers these days and his
internet/computer expertise seems to be limited to throwing some
boards in a box and selling them door to door as "enterprise systems".

In addition to the English language mags, we also have
Swedish, German, Danish, Norwegian, Finnish and
even Russian periodicals which are probably not
available in the US or the UK.

You even have a reindeer or two.

I don't have the opportunity to read Stereophile, as I

live on the

other side of the world...


I've always thought the UK was a lot more cosmopolitan than
that.


Maybe he can't read it because competing mags blow it
out of the water and bookstores don't bother stocking it...

"Iain M Churches" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...

jeffc wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Given that SP subscriptions are cheap, I may subscribe again
eventually.

It's a catch 22. Magazines that charge very low prices for
subscriptions
do
so for one reason - to get higher circulation. Do you really think
they
can
hire a staff of expert, objective reviewers, print a glossy magazine,
and
mail it to your house for $1 each month? Ha! Of course not. All
their
money comes from ads. Higher circulation = more ad money. More ad
money
means less objective reviews. Less objective reviews means less
circulation, unless they lower the cost. etc., until they pay you to
take
the magazine, at which point it becomes beyond worthless.


IMO, Stereophile crossed the "beyond worthless" threshold quite some
time ago. It is now simply an advertising vehicle for the
manufacturers. Period.

I don't have the opportunity to read Stereophile, as I live on the
other side of the world, but generally speaking, magazines on
any topic are only as good as their readership demands them
to be. If you are not satisfied, then a letter to the editor is the
best solution. Any editor who receives letters from dis-satisfied
readers in large numbers will certainly not ignore them.
But, an editor who receives little or no feedback will assume
that the readers are happy with the magazine, as long as
circulation figures are maintained.

Iain

Iain,
Writing letters to the editor complaining about Stereophile is a sort of
a sport, and surprisingly, Atkinson publishes many of them.

"Robert Morein" wrote in message
...

"Iain M Churches" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
ups.com...

jeffc wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Given that SP subscriptions are cheap, I may subscribe again
eventually.

It's a catch 22. Magazines that charge very low prices for
subscriptions
do
so for one reason - to get higher circulation. Do you really think
they
can
hire a staff of expert, objective reviewers, print a glossy magazine,
and
mail it to your house for $1 each month? Ha! Of course not. All
their
money comes from ads. Higher circulation = more ad money. More ad
money
means less objective reviews. Less objective reviews means less
circulation, unless they lower the cost. etc., until they pay you to
take
the magazine, at which point it becomes beyond worthless.


IMO, Stereophile crossed the "beyond worthless" threshold quite some
time ago. It is now simply an advertising vehicle for the
manufacturers. Period.

I don't have the opportunity to read Stereophile, as I live on the
other side of the world, but generally speaking, magazines on
any topic are only as good as their readership demands them
to be. If you are not satisfied, then a letter to the editor is the
best solution. Any editor who receives letters from dis-satisfied
readers in large numbers will certainly not ignore them.
But, an editor who receives little or no feedback will assume
that the readers are happy with the magazine, as long as
circulation figures are maintained.

Iain

Iain,
Writing letters to the editor complaining about Stereophile is a sort
of
a sport, and surprisingly, Atkinson publishes many of them.

Robert,
Why is that surprising? I see it as an open approach, which few
editors would choose to follow. Have the readers ever told the
magazine what they would like/expect it to be?
It is clear that no magazine can please everyone.

Iain

Writing letters to the editor complaining about Stereophile is a sort
of a sport, and surprisingly, Atkinson publishes many of them.

Stereophile is one of the few magazines that publishes (it seems) virtually
every coherent letter it receives. Whether JA is trying to provide an open
forum, or he just wants additional pages to justify additional advertising,
I don't know. Probably both.

Stereophile is a corporate sell-out rag, designed to give raving reviews of
all of its advertisers

don't feed the trolls by responding to any Stereophile related post

just killfile the sender

cowboy wrote:
Stereophile is a corporate sell-out rag, designed to give raving reviews of
all of its advertisers


Succinct and to the point. The best summation of Stereophile in years!
:-))

On 6/20/05 5:38 PM, in article , "cowboy"
wrote:

don't feed the trolls by responding to any Stereophile related post
just killfile the sender

Cowboy, that's like putting up a screen to hide folks dumping trash on the
street in front of your house... Better , it'd help if folks paid attention
to where they sent posts, and weren;t just unconscionably inconsiderate by
continuing to crosspost across groups that have NO desire for this thread!
Let's edit those crosspost headers!
Thanks!

If you are not satisfied, then a letter to the editor is the
best solution. Any editor who receives letters from dis-satisfied
readers in large numbers will certainly not ignore them.

Such letter writers likely represent ten other unhappy readers.
Most people will just stop buying the product and buy from
the competition. And not bother complaining, as they figure
that it would just be a waste of time. So an editor who
gets unhappy letters from 5% of his readership should know that
it means that another 50% are also unhappy. Or make that a
smaller number, as they probably no longer read the mag. But
add them back in if the editor wants to fix the problem.

"Iain M Churches" wrote in message
...
Any editor who receives letters from dis-satisfied
readers in large numbers will certainly not ignore them.
But, an editor who receives little or no feedback will assume
that the readers are happy with the magazine, as long as
circulation figures are maintained.

Right, so what good does it do to listen to the readers? All that matters
is the circulation numbers. If it drops, lower the subscription price.

"jeffc" wrote in message
m...

"Iain M Churches" wrote in message
...
Any editor who receives letters from dis-satisfied
readers in large numbers will certainly not ignore them.
But, an editor who receives little or no feedback will assume
that the readers are happy with the magazine, as long as
circulation figures are maintained.

Right, so what good does it do to listen to the readers? All that matters
is the circulation numbers. If it drops, lower the subscription price.

I really don't believe that any editor worth his salt is
interested only in the size of the circulation. I am sure journalists
and editors read other publications, and can judge from them
the standing of their own magazine. The public are quick to
complain, but to the wrong people:-)

Iain

Iain M Churches wrote:

I really don't believe that any editor worth his salt is
interested only in the size of the circulation. I am sure journalists
and editors read other publications, and can judge from them
the standing of their own magazine. The public are quick to
complain, but to the wrong people:-)

There are editors like that. For a while I wrote some articles for a
now-defunct electronics magazine. I remember the editor giving me an
assignment, and I pointed out that RF Design had done an identical article
the previous month. He said, "Our readers don't read RF Design. It's
a totally different group of people." I'm not sure how true that really
was. This is another example of editors who misjudge the positioning and
standing.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

wrote:
IMO, Stereophile crossed the "beyond worthless" threshold quite some
time ago. It is now simply an advertising vehicle for the
manufacturers. Period.


IMO, most "electronic related" magazines are not what they used to be
pre 1980. They are all dumbed down for observers and not doers, and
foster a culture of end-users as opposed to true amateurs (lovers of
the hobby). I think it stems from the fact that the American male,
(with the exception of folks on groups like this), are no longer
do-it-yourselfers. By the time I was 7 I already knew how to square a
board, solder a wire, drill a hole, dismantle a 5 tube radio, etc.
Today boys grow up playing and watching video and not building or
dismantleing equipment. They get no feel for how things work, they
just see the output. I remember when every issue of Popular Science
had an electronic project to build, and when hi-fi magazines regularly
had speaker projects, or pre-amp projects, or whatever. Stereophile is
a classic case of this dumbing down effect, a magazine run by marketers
for folks with lots of money who couldnt fix a lamp cord and regularly
cross-thread their toothpaste caps. You know a good magazine by how
long it takes you to read it, when my Stereophile arrives I'm usually
done with it in 7 minutes, same old dribble over and over. When my
copy of Circuit Cellar arrives I'm with it all month because of it's
depth. When I did'nt renew my last Stereophile subscription they just
extended it for free, they must be desparate to keep their subsription
numbers up.

RickH wrote:


snipped


When I did'nt renew my last Stereophile subscription they just
extended it for free, they must be desparate to keep their subsription
numbers up.


That's it.....Stereophile has crossed over into "junk mail" status. I
wonder if these guys know of this:

http://www.accessabc.com/

IOW, is Atkinson scamming the advertisers as well as the readers? Does
unpaid circulation count?

On 17 Jun 2005 08:13:24 -0700, "RickH"
wrote:

wrote:
IMO, Stereophile crossed the "beyond worthless" threshold quite some
time ago. It is now simply an advertising vehicle for the
manufacturers. Period.


IMO, most "electronic related" magazines are not what they used to be
pre 1980. They are all dumbed down for observers and not doers, and
foster a culture of end-users as opposed to true amateurs (lovers of
the hobby). I think it stems from the fact that the American male,
(with the exception of folks on groups like this), are no longer
do-it-yourselfers. By the time I was 7 I already knew how to square a
board, solder a wire, drill a hole, dismantle a 5 tube radio, etc.
Today boys grow up playing and watching video and not building or
dismantleing equipment. They get no feel for how things work, they
just see the output. I remember when every issue of Popular Science
had an electronic project to build, and when hi-fi magazines regularly
had speaker projects, or pre-amp projects, or whatever. Stereophile is
a classic case of this dumbing down effect, a magazine run by marketers
for folks with lots of money who couldnt fix a lamp cord and regularly
cross-thread their toothpaste caps. You know a good magazine by how
long it takes you to read it, when my Stereophile arrives I'm usually
done with it in 7 minutes, same old dribble over and over. When my
copy of Circuit Cellar arrives I'm with it all month because of it's
depth. When I did'nt renew my last Stereophile subscription they just
extended it for free, they must be desparate to keep their subsription
numbers up.

All of this is just a sign of the times. You can thank microprcessors
and convenience for the "dumbing down" effect. You can thank the
"black box" aspect of audio these days. I think it's supposed to be
called "progress". For bench hobbyists, there are still specialty
low-circulation mags like Circuit Cellar And Vacuum Tube Valley that
they can subscribe to.

I think that you are feeling nostalgia for your youth, when in
actuality, things are quite different now and the mass market 'zines
have evoloved to meet the needs of the 21st century.

Nothing wrong with being nostalgic, mind you. However, I think that
you were in the minority, even in those days. And you still have
options to fill your need. Obviously, you don't have any use for a
review-type magazine, which is cool.

dave weil wrote:

All of this is just a sign of the times. You can thank microprcessors
and convenience for the "dumbing down" effect. You can thank the
"black box" aspect of audio these days. I think it's supposed to be
called "progress". For bench hobbyists, there are still specialty
low-circulation mags like Circuit Cellar And Vacuum Tube Valley that
they can subscribe to.

I don't at all! Microprocessors just give you more great opportunities
for homebrewing! The amount of stuff that you can pack inside a little
box with an 8051 in there is amazing, and it doesn't take much more than
a cheap PC and a ROM burner to do it. We even have things like the BASIC
Stamp which allow you to homebrew your own microcontroller-based devices
with debugging on the fly and hardly any external equipment. Fifty bucks
and a PC with Hyperterminal and you're on your way to building some amazing
stuff.

Modern ASICs are even more fun! One guy with a 486 machine from the
thrift store can layout enormously complex digital circuits. Hell, you
could make your own microprocessor on an inexpensive FPGA today.

We won't even talk about some of the wonderful stuff you can do with
modern linear components for hardly any money. There is some stuff
in a typical junked VCR that I'd have given my eyeteeth for as a kid.

I think that you are feeling nostalgia for your youth, when in
actuality, things are quite different now and the mass market 'zines
have evoloved to meet the needs of the 21st century.

I am not nostalgic, I am peeved. Modern technology has made homebrewing
easier and it has given us a huge set of powerful tools to make sophisticated
electronic systems on a low budget with hardly any infrastructure. If
anything, the DIY phenomenon should be taking off. But it's dying. Why?

Nothing wrong with being nostalgic, mind you. However, I think that
you were in the minority, even in those days. And you still have
options to fill your need. Obviously, you don't have any use for a
review-type magazine, which is cool.

I think that homebrew electronics is far less mainstream than it was
in the sixties and seventies. Hell, you don't even see kids building
up PCs from boards any more. We won't even talk about the death of
hotrodding.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 17 Jun 2005 11:50:26 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

dave weil wrote:

All of this is just a sign of the times. You can thank microprcessors
and convenience for the "dumbing down" effect. You can thank the
"black box" aspect of audio these days. I think it's supposed to be
called "progress". For bench hobbyists, there are still specialty
low-circulation mags like Circuit Cellar And Vacuum Tube Valley that
they can subscribe to.

I don't at all! Microprocessors just give you more great opportunities
for homebrewing! The amount of stuff that you can pack inside a little
box with an 8051 in there is amazing, and it doesn't take much more than
a cheap PC and a ROM burner to do it. We even have things like the BASIC
Stamp which allow you to homebrew your own microcontroller-based devices
with debugging on the fly and hardly any external equipment. Fifty bucks
and a PC with Hyperterminal and you're on your way to building some amazing
stuff.

Modern ASICs are even more fun! One guy with a 486 machine from the
thrift store can layout enormously complex digital circuits. Hell, you
could make your own microprocessor on an inexpensive FPGA today.

We won't even talk about some of the wonderful stuff you can do with
modern linear components for hardly any money. There is some stuff
in a typical junked VCR that I'd have given my eyeteeth for as a kid.

That's just your inner geek talking. I wouldn't be surprised if the
same percentage of "consumers" are doing the same things that you are
talking about as built radios when you were growing up.

My best friend growing up was such a geek. His room always smelled
like solder. He was always building stuff and was always trying to
teach me about it and I learned a bit about it myself (yes, I built a
couple of kits in my time, mostly through his prodding). Yet, he was
about the only kid I knew who was into breadboarding. If anyone else
was into that sort of thing, it was regarding cars, not amplifiers.
His hobby served him well. He's now vice-president of engineering for
a leading communications company specializing in broadcast, wireless
and microwave techology. Previously, he was involved in satellite
technology. He has a few patents to his name. But he came by his hobby
in a way that most don't - his dad was a TV repairman.

Frankly, and this is an aesthetic consideration, there isn't as much
fascinating about plugging in little black boxes into a socket as
there is building point-to-point wiring with sockets holding glowing
glass bottles. And it's not nearly as lucrative as geeking out in the
computer industry.

I think that you are feeling nostalgia for your youth, when in
actuality, things are quite different now and the mass market 'zines
have evoloved to meet the needs of the 21st century.

I am not nostalgic, I am peeved. Modern technology has made homebrewing
easier and it has given us a huge set of powerful tools to make sophisticated
electronic systems on a low budget with hardly any infrastructure. If
anything, the DIY phenomenon should be taking off. But it's dying. Why?

Because, the geeks have gone more toward the SOFTWARE side of things.
It's sexier and more lucrative, by a wide margin.

Nothing wrong with being nostalgic, mind you. However, I think that
you were in the minority, even in those days. And you still have
options to fill your need. Obviously, you don't have any use for a
review-type magazine, which is cool.

I think that homebrew electronics is far less mainstream than it was
in the sixties and seventies.

Absolutely. That was my point. but I think you're still overestimating
the number of people who were heavily involved in it in the 60s and
70s. I'd say the vast majority of people interested in the hobby were
STILL just end users for all intents and purposes.

Hell, you don't even see kids building up PCs from boards any more.

Why should they? Their older bothers and sisters made it pretty much
unnecessary. In the late 50s and 60s, there was still an incentive to
build your own amplifier. Now, why bother? There are probably still a
few kids who "take apart VCRs" to see how they work. When they can
find one, that is chuckle.

We won't even talk about the death of
hotrodding.

I almost mentioned shadetree mechanics, but it's still a lot more
alive than you might suspect. There are LOTS of kids who are into
tricking out their compact cars and turning them into pocket rockets.
But it IS very difficult to do many of the things to new cars, since
they aren't very user-friendly these days. It's all "plug 'n play
these days.

Hey, it's guys like Ferstler that are probably loving the fact that
everything is black boxes these days. After all, how many of you guys
built toasters when you were growing up?

On 2005-06-17, Scott Dorsey wrote:

I am not nostalgic, I am peeved. Modern technology has made
homebrewing easier and it has given us a huge set of powerful
tools to make sophisticated electronic systems on a low budget
with hardly any infrastructure. If anything, the DIY
phenomenon should be taking off. But it's dying. Why?

Synth DIY is alive and well. Perhaps not as many practitioners
as in the seventies but it's on the rise, as far as I can tell.

--
André Majorel URL:http://www.teaser.fr/~amajorel/
(Counterfeit: )
What worries me is not the violence of the few, but the
indifference of the many. -- M. L. King

It's the education sytem, or as I call it, "The dumb-sizing of
America". Most of these kids can't even write their names, much less
being interested in anything outside of peer pleasure.

It's already like that old Sci Fi movie, "Why do you keep the old guys
around?" "Because they know how to fix the machines".

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades
Fixing the machines

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On 17 Jun 2005 08:13:24 -0700, "RickH"
wrote:

wrote:
IMO, Stereophile crossed the "beyond worthless" threshold quite some
time ago. It is now simply an advertising vehicle for the
manufacturers. Period.


IMO, most "electronic related" magazines are not what they used to be
pre 1980. They are all dumbed down for observers and not doers, and
foster a culture of end-users as opposed to true amateurs (lovers of
the hobby). I think it stems from the fact that the American male,
(with the exception of folks on groups like this), are no longer
do-it-yourselfers. By the time I was 7 I already knew how to square a
board, solder a wire, drill a hole, dismantle a 5 tube radio, etc.
Today boys grow up playing and watching video and not building or
dismantleing equipment. They get no feel for how things work, they
just see the output. I remember when every issue of Popular Science
had an electronic project to build, and when hi-fi magazines regularly
had speaker projects, or pre-amp projects, or whatever. Stereophile is
a classic case of this dumbing down effect, a magazine run by marketers
for folks with lots of money who couldnt fix a lamp cord and regularly
cross-thread their toothpaste caps. You know a good magazine by how
long it takes you to read it, when my Stereophile arrives I'm usually
done with it in 7 minutes, same old dribble over and over. When my
copy of Circuit Cellar arrives I'm with it all month because of it's
depth. When I did'nt renew my last Stereophile subscription they just
extended it for free, they must be desparate to keep their subsription
numbers up.

All of this is just a sign of the times. You can thank microprcessors
and convenience for the "dumbing down" effect. You can thank the
"black box" aspect of audio these days. I think it's supposed to be
called "progress". For bench hobbyists, there are still specialty
low-circulation mags like Circuit Cellar And Vacuum Tube Valley that
they can subscribe to.

I think that you are feeling nostalgia for your youth, when in
actuality, things are quite different now and the mass market 'zines
have evoloved to meet the needs of the 21st century.

Nothing wrong with being nostalgic, mind you. However, I think that
you were in the minority, even in those days. And you still have
options to fill your need. Obviously, you don't have any use for a
review-type magazine, which is cool.

You are right, Dave. Things have changed, even nostalgia is not
what it used to be:-)

Iain

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 18:54:21 +0300, "Iain M Churches"
wrote:

You are right, Dave. Things have changed, even nostalgia is not
what it used to be:-)

Don't I know it.

I saw Cheap Trick the other day for the first time in 25 years and
they only played an hour g.

They ROCKED though! I guess I'm spoiled since most artists I seem to
see these days play close to 2 hours, if not more.

On 6/17/05 11:54 AM, in article , "Iain M
Churches" wrote:

You are right, Dave. Things have changed, even nostalgia is not
what it used to be:-)

Sigh... Ok, let's all clean up after whoever thought it fun to crosspost
this all over hell and back...
Fix those crosspost address headers before hitting SEND kids!
It's Easy!
It's Fun!
It's the Right Thing To Do!

Thanks!

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 23:00:08 GMT, SSJVCmag
wrote:

On 6/17/05 11:54 AM, in article , "Iain M
Churches" wrote:

You are right, Dave. Things have changed, even nostalgia is not
what it used to be:-)

Sigh... Ok, let's all clean up after whoever thought it fun to crosspost
this all over hell and back...
Fix those crosspost address headers before hitting SEND kids!
It's Easy!
It's Fun!
It's the Right Thing To Do!

Thanks!

Still crossposting I see...

Not much on the "cleaning up", I see...

dave weil wrote:


snipped

Obviously, you don't have any use for a
review-type magazine, which is cool.


Not when it prints reviews meant not to inform, but to drive sales. :-(

On 6/17/05 11:56 AM, in article
, "
wrote:


Not when it prints reviews meant not to inform, but to drive sales. :-(

Sigh... Ok, let's all clean up after whoever thought it fun to crosspost
this all over hell and back...
Fix those crosspost address headers before hitting SEND kids!
It's Easy!
It's Fun!
It's the Right Thing To Do!

Thanks!

dave weil wrote:
options to fill your need. Obviously, you don't have any use for a
review-type magazine, which is cool.

I do read the ranting letters to the editor in it though. I think any
magazine that even mentions a tube is a good thing because it will
create a demand for quality current-production tubes, as NOS wont last
forever. Stereophile just needs to dedicate at least one article a
month to the amateurs (in the classic definition), and not just
consumers in the form of all subjective reviews.

On 17 Jun 2005 09:03:38 -0700, "RickH"
wrote:



dave weil wrote:
options to fill your need. Obviously, you don't have any use for a
review-type magazine, which is cool.

I do read the ranting letters to the editor in it though. I think any
magazine that even mentions a tube is a good thing because it will
create a demand for quality current-production tubes, as NOS wont last
forever. Stereophile just needs to dedicate at least one article a
month to the amateurs (in the classic definition), and not just
consumers in the form of all subjective reviews.

That isn't a bad idea. It's probably harder to find good topics for
such an article than in the old days though.

"RickH" wrote in message
oups.com...


dave weil wrote:
options to fill your need. Obviously, you don't have any use for a
review-type magazine, which is cool.

I do read the ranting letters to the editor in it though. I think any
magazine that even mentions a tube is a good thing because it will
create a demand for quality current-production tubes, as NOS wont last
forever. Stereophile just needs to dedicate at least one article a
month to the amateurs (in the classic definition), and not just
consumers in the form of all subjective reviews.


Now we are getting the-)

Iain

"RickH" said:


I do read the ranting letters to the editor in it though. I think any
magazine that even mentions a tube is a good thing because it will
create a demand for quality current-production tubes, as NOS wont last
forever. Stereophile just needs to dedicate at least one article a
month to the amateurs (in the classic definition), and not just
consumers in the form of all subjective reviews.


The market for tubes will shrink, and the largest chunk of them will
be sold to guitar players.

That means that only mainstream tubes like EL83, EL34, ECC83 et al
will continue to be made.

Until DSP takes it all over.........

--

"Audio as a serious hobby is going down the tubes."
- Howard Ferstler, 25/4/2005

RickH wrote:
wrote:
IMO, Stereophile crossed the "beyond worthless" threshold
quite some
time ago. It is now simply an advertising vehicle for the
manufacturers. Period.


IMO, most "electronic related" magazines are not what they
used to be
pre 1980. They are all dumbed down for observers and not
doers, and
foster a culture of end-users as opposed to true amateurs
(lovers of
the hobby). I think it stems from the fact that the
American male,
(with the exception of folks on groups like this), are no
longer
do-it-yourselfers.

No do-it-yourselfers? What about Home Depot, etc?

No audio do-it-yourselfers?

That's a bit more comples to explain.

By the time I was 7 I already knew how to square a
board, solder a wire, drill a hole, dismantle a 5 tube
radio, etc.

But, you didn't know how to dismantle a computer, because
there probably were no computers in your house to dismantle.

Modern kids are probably operating at the same level of
complexity that you did, but that complexity takes many
different forms.

Today boys grow up playing and watching video and not
building or
dismantleing equipment.

There have been more than a few paradigm shifts.

They get no feel for how things work, they just see the
output.

Just understanding the output can be a technical task.

I remember when every issue of Popular Science
had an electronic project to build,

Actually several projects, maybe 1-2 major ones, 2-3 minor
ones and then a bunch of trivial ones.

and when hi-fi magazines regularly had speaker projects,
or pre-amp projects, or whatever.

Home construction of audio gear started out with practical,
mostly economic justifications. Low-cost overseas production
of finished products elimianted quite a bit of that. OTOH,
there's more complexity to hooking up the speakers in a 5.1
system then there was to building a 3-way speaker from my
boyhood days.

Stereophile is a classic case of this dumbing down
effect, a magazine run by
marketers for folks with lots of money who couldnt fix a
lamp cord
and regularly cross-thread their toothpaste caps.

So much for them.

You know a good
magazine by how long it takes you to read it, when my
Stereophile
arrives I'm usually done with it in 7 minutes, same old
dribble over
and over.

Blame that on authors like Fremer.

When my copy of Circuit Cellar arrives I'm with it all
month because of it's depth.

Fun!

When I did'nt renew my last Stereophile
subscription they just extended it for free, they must be
desparate
to keep their subsription numbers up.

Intersting.

RickH wrote:

IMO, most "electronic related" magazines are not what they used to be
pre 1980. They are all dumbed down for observers and not doers, and
foster a culture of end-users as opposed to true amateurs (lovers of
the hobby).

I wonder if fitness magazines are any different. Or glamour, or....

IMO, most "electronic related" magazines are not what they used to be
pre 1980. They are all dumbed down for observers and not doers, and
foster a culture of end-users as opposed to true amateurs (lovers of
the hobby). I think it stems from the fact that the American male,
(with the exception of folks on groups like this), are no longer
do-it-yourselfers. [...]

In the 1980s they all went from building things to programming computers.
Then they went from programming computers to just playing computer games.