Upcoming Looking Back feature, March issue

[Andrew]

Hi all, as we did last year, we're busy compiling a list of the reviewers' favourite pieces of equipment from 2007, which will be featured in our March issue.

What I'd like to ask is for feedback from the Forum members on this subject:

What did readers think of the reviews from last year? Good, bad, indifferent?

Any features that stood out, any equipment reviewed that in particular was of interest? 

Did anyone buy equipment based on reviews – if so, did the review turn out to be accurate?

Feel free to be honest - this is good feedback for us. All we ask is that if you're critical, tell is why you feel that way so we can try and fix things our end.

[Cleansound]

Andrew

I bought my two Graham Slee phonostages based on Deon's review and I couldn't agree more with him.
Thanks to my friend Joel and his persistency with power cables I have also gone and done some cable upgrades and I am very happy.
AVSA works for me and I highly regard Mr. Schoeman's comments.
I have been an avid reader of the mag since around 1992 if I remeber correctly,the cover had a pair of B.W. Matrix speakers with a little lion cub.
Great mag,keep it up guys 

[Viagara]

I did not buy any equipment based on reviews from 2007, but purchases made in 2005 and 2006 were largely influenced by reviews by Deon and Joel and their reviews were spot on.

I don't always agree with everything in the reviews, but I do feel that they are honest and convey the reviewer's impression of the product under review.

[jamster]

Andrew

I bought my two Graham Slee phonostages based on Deon's review and I couldn't agree more with him.
Thanks to my friend Joel and his persistency with power cables I have also gone and done some cable upgrades and I am very happy.
AVSA works for me and I highly regard Mr. Schoeman's comments.
I have been an avid reader of the mag since around 1992 if I remeber correctly,the cover had a pair of B.W. Matrix speakers with a little lion cub.
Great mag,keep it up guys 

I think what you are referring to was a set of Wilson Cubs with a lion cub. I was at that shoot - awesome. Turned out so well that Dave WIlson used it in international publicity.

[Cleansound]

Jamster

You are 100 % correct I saw that issue last night going through some of my older mags.
The B.W. one had a brownish cover with some very thick and fancy curtains in the background.

[RR]

I think what you are referring to was a set of Wilson Cubs with a lion cub. I was at that shoot - awesome. Turned out so well that Dave WIlson used it in international publicity.

I also still remember that one. Again the review by Deon was spot on, the speakers are good but on the bright side of neutral, quite some way on that side actually. Deon had a polite way of putting it, but between the lines we could read it. I tried some 2nd hand Wilson Cubs years later as a possible upgrade and came to the conclusion that such an aggressive speaker is not my cup of tea.

However, the aggressive nature could easily have been my own ancillaries, so consulting Deon's review again confirmed my suspisions. That was of GREAT help.

PS. I'm sure the Cubs are good in some systems, just not for me.

[jamster]

I also still remember that one. Again the review by Deon was spot on, the speakers are good but on the bright side of neutral, quite some way on that side actually. Deon had a polite way of putting it, but between the lines we could read it. I tried some 2nd hand Wilson Cubs years later as a possible upgrade and came to the conclusion that such an aggressive speaker is not my cup of tea.

However, the aggressive nature could easily have been my own ancillaries, so consulting Deon's review again confirmed my suspisions. That was of GREAT help.

PS. I'm sure the Cubs are good in some systems, just not for me.

Owned a set for a while - a ridiculously revealing speaker. Quite possibly the most accurate I have ever heard - slaughtered bad systems and recordings, made good ones sound great. Spoiled me for other systems - everthing else sound blunt and muffled in comarison (although once I got used to other speakers I couldn't listen to the Cubs, they sounded bright and hard). Would have kept them, but they needed a sub, and at that point I wasn't prepared to invest another R40k for somehing up to that standard.

[DevillEars]

What I'd like to ask is for feedback from the Forum members on this subject:

• What did readers think of the reviews from last year? Good, bad, indifferent?
• Any features that stood out, any equipment reviewed that in particular was of interest?
• Did anyone buy equipment based on reviews – if so, did the review turn out to be accurate?

2007 Reviews:

Let me preface this by outlining requirements for a "useful review":

• An idea of the sound quality on offer - good points/bad points/summary
• An idea of the build quality/engineering - strong points/weak points/summary
• An idea of the ease of use/ergonomics - liked/disliked/summary
• An idea of the context of the review - other components/music used/room characteristics/reviewer preferences

The rationale behind the above list is to try to understand the "trade-offs" of the reviewed component (nothing is perfect) - hence the pro/con approach; to understand the "value" aspect of sound+build versus price; and to understand  how easy it would be to "live with" the item.

Coming back to AVSA 2007 reviews, what I found to be fairly consistent omissions were:

• No "For/Against/Sum-Up"
• Little or no contextual info re system/music/room

In many reviews, an excessive number of "column-inches" were "wasted" in waffle which really did not contribute any useful information, with the result that the space allocated to the actual review was restricted to the point where the review was all but useless.

The concept of a sidebar/panel containing bulleted high-/low-lights and a summary was very well used in the UK Car magazine with their "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" section - with one example still top-of-mind:

The car: Some big Cadillac

• For: Big!
• Against: Big!
• Sum-Up: As flash as a rat with a gold tooth

Which does raise one other aspect of AVSA reviews - they tend to be a bit too serious and lack the "lighter touch" that can make reading more enjoyable and more memorable.

Highlights of AVSA 2007?

• Technical write-ups
• Reader's system article (only one, sadly)

Purchases based on any reviews?

None

Overall?

In the context of AVSA serving a rather small market and with its scope covering equipment in the stereo audio, HT/AV and lifestyle areas plus software in 2-channel audio and HT movies, the occasional digression into digital photography (still or movie) strikes me as being ill-advised - there are other local magazines that deal quite well with these aspects and, by including this type of review, the essence of the magazine (AVSA) is diluted.

I was going to raise the issue of blatant and derisive "anti-vinyl" sentiments being not in the best interests of AVSA's relationship with a fair chunk of the readership, but have decided not to do so... 

So, in summary, given the three options in terms of SA audio magazines (AVSA/Multimedia/What HiFi), AVSA is probably the most useful.

[Cleansound]

The concept of a sidebar/panel containing bulleted high-/low-lights and a summary was very well used in the UK Car magazine with their "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" section - with one example still top-of-mind:seless.


I was going to raise the issue of blatant and derisive "anti-vinyl" sentiments being not in the best interests of AVSA's relationship with a fair chunk of the readership, but have decided not to do so... 

Issue number 1 here:I remeber AVSA doing something similiar years ago however not quite to that extent.

Number 2:It's too late to make mention 
Now where is "Binary Kelly"

[Gliding Dutchman]

Now where is "Binary Kelly"

Whahahahahaha!! Best one yet Ant!!

[Cleansound]

Have you seen his FISHY signature 
Sorry I am off topic here but I just couldn't resist 

[Viagara]

Have you seen his FISHY signature 
Sorry I am off topic here but I just couldn't resist 

1001 0110 1101 0011 ?

Leave William alone, he is enjoying his Summer Siesta

[Shonver]

I agree with most of what devillears said.

I was going to raise the issue of blatant and derisive "anti-vinyl" sentiments being not in the best interests of AVSA's relationship with a fair chunk of the readership, but have decided not to do so... 

I see no harm if it's done tongue-in-cheek. One can never take oneself too seriously.

I'd like to add 2 more requests:

1) Include some diy audio articles
2) Do some more "The Local Scene" articles on local manufacturers/developers/consultants to let the readers know we're also players in the AV market.

[jamster]

2007 Reviews:

<snip>

In many reviews, an excessive number of "column-inches" were "wasted" in waffle which really did not contribute any useful information, with the result that the space allocated to the actual review was restricted to the point where the review was all but useless.

<snip>

Which does raise one other aspect of AVSA reviews - they tend to be a bit too serious and lack the "lighter touch" that can make reading more enjoyable and more memorable.

So you want an entertaining aspect, but there can be no waffle?

Far be it from me to be the mag's sole defender, but I will say that my view is that in today's internet age, where most factual information is easily accessible online, I enjoy reading (and writing) stories with a 'hook', a little lead-in story that in some way contextualises the product and/or reviewers state of mind.

As for summing the component up in two clever one liners, while fun to read (and write) others poking fun, this sort of flippant criticism doesn't do the component, or the readers, any justice IMO.

[BigWoodenSpoon]

As for summing the component up in two clever one liners, while fun to read (and write) others poking fun, this sort of flippant criticism doesn't do the component, or the readers, any justice IMO.

Agreed...... Leave that to the manufacturer advert sponsored international mags to do. Bleeeeaaah !!!