It would be interesting after reading a review say on an A/V-Amp-HiFi/Amp what speakers-players were used with that system, I understand that you do cover complete system reviews, but if reviewing say a Onkyo amp, just put at the end..Reviewed with X-Speakers and Y-Blu-ray player, just makes that more interesting and informative. Maybe.....
L-R Mordaunt Short Avant 153 in-walls. Avant 165 Centre in-wall.QED Cables. Pioneer surrounds Pioneer SC-2022 Receiver
My system http://www.whathifi.com/forum/your-system/lounge-tart-uppt-1
I think this TV review is like gadget show/Stuff with its comment about design:
How can that be a stunning design?
Main AV Setup: Panasonic 50VT65 TV, Pioneer Bdp-lx71, Pioneer Vsx-lx70, B&W FPM Series, B&W PV1, Optimum AV300 AV Stand, QED Silver Anniversary XT Speaker Cable & Chord Silver Plus HDMI Cables. Gadgets: iPad 4 & iPhone 4S.
I know this is an old thread, but having quickly glanced over the contents of the latest issue, I have to agree...it's all phones !!!
I may be old-school (although I do own an AV amp and surround sound system) but lately there only ever seems to be hi-end hi-fi components beyond the reach of most, or pnones or TV's...very little affordable hi-fi? Is this the way things are going or am I just getting old and left behind in this digital age ?! (I'm only 47 !!) lol
PC/iTunes - 1TB HD - Aureon dual USB/Optical output - CA 650R - Denon DVD1920 - Wii - SkyHD+/Iomega Director plus multimedia - MS10i fronts - Mission dipolar rears - Lecron hi level fronts & centre sats - Thatcable & Monster HDMI - TCI Coral optical - QED speaker cable - Tacima CS929 mains conditioner
I wonder whether the mag might restructure its TV reviews.
Of late, WHF TV reviews work through design, connections, smart features, and countless other peripheral concerns before getting to the crux of the matter and discussing picture quality.
At times this most critical information almost feels like an afterthought. I know the mag is catering to a wide readership, and that certain readers have a greater interest in a TV's applications than myself, but the most fundamental information should be prioritised in the review.
A TV's primary job remains putting a picture on-screen, even in an age of convergent media and expanded functionality.
Hardware: Panasonic TX-P50VT65B (calibrated); Cambridge Audio Azur 651BD; Yamaha RX-A810; Teac PD-H600; PS3; B&W 601 & 600LCR (series 3); Q Acoustics QAV (rear)
Furniture and Accessories: BLOK Classix 3000 Oak AV Cabinet; Atacama Nexus 6 (atabite metal filled); 3D3 A1112
I think that's a logical way of reviewing strapped. Start talking about it when you take it out of the box, look around for connections and then switch the TV on to comment on the picture quality.
My Home Cinema Pioneer KRP 500A, Yamaha RX-V1900, MA Radius R225HD LCR, R90HD rears, AW12 sub, Panasonic BD60, PS3, Boxee Box, Sky HD, Boxee Box, Logitech Harmony One, Logitech PS3 Adapter, Sonos ZP90
Bedroom Samsung UE32C6510, PS3 slim white, Apple TV, Sonos S5, Sonos ZP90, Audioengine 2, Oppo OPDV971H
Miscellaneous: Synology DS212J + 2 X WD Red 2TB drives, WD 1TB NAS, Sonos ZoneBridge, BT HH3 as modem & AirPort Extreme router
To each their own. I've been taught to put the most important information up front rather than tucking it away further down an article. I firmly believe this is the most effective way to write. While some may take vicarious pleasure in unboxing descriptions, I'd rather watch a TV than unpack it.
In some reviews, the number of words devoted to smart features and connections exceeds commentary on image quality. If unpacking and connectivity details were at the very least more tersely dispatched, it'd allow for more thorough discussion of the most important aspect of performance.
It's principally an observation about emphasis. You're of course entitled to disagree.
© 2014 Haymarket Publishing