Why I wont be renewing my subscription
Hello there,
Hopefully this is the right place for this as I feel the need to get some things off my chest about what used to be my favourite AV magazine.
Firstly, some background... I've been reading What Hi-Fi since the early 90s. It was what guided me to my first Hi-Fi system, and I appreciated the informed advice that it gave me. I've had my subscription for a while now.
Recently though I've noticed that things have just gotten to such a low point, I feel I can no longer justify spending money on buying your magazine. Some of the reasons why I will outline below:
1) Poor technical understanding of equipment that is reviewed. For a magazine that is potentially advising people to part with vast sums of their own personal money, you seem to have no published or acknowledged technical standards. I believe you have stated that you use THX or DVE to optimise the displays you review by eye. Is there no-one at What Hi-fi who is ISF certified that can use the correct calibration equipment to ensure things have been calibrated to D65 standards? Is there anyone there who is HAA certified to ensure that the audio equipment you are testing has been set-up correctly too?
If the answer to this is "no" then how are you sure that problems you encounter during testing are faults of the product, or because you've set-up something incorrectly?
We want to see if products can be calibrated to a high standard, not how good they look out of the box. It doesn't need to go to the levels of showing us countless gamma and luminance charts... but some mention of it would be nice, even if it's just to see if you bothered to set these things up correctly!
Another item that highlighted What H-Fi's poor technical understanding, and change of paradigm, was the Audiolab 8000AP review. The AP was slated because 'Lacks the ability to decode high-definition audio soundtracks, which is unacceptable at this price level' for a unit that costs £1000. Which shows a total lack of understanding about these products. Not only Audiolab, but Arcam, Meridian, and numerous other top-end home cinema manufacturers have stated that LPCM is the optimum way to enjoy the HD sound formats. You let the player decode (decoding being a simple case of 'unzipping' an encoded audio file, it either works or it doesn't... no levels of quality of decoding) and then pass this information onto the DAC... whether that be in a processor, an amp, or whatever.
You then wrote about an Arcam processing unit: 'True, you won’t find the
cutting-edge decoding features present in many cheaper components, but
even so, living with this Arcam would never be hard work.' which you seem to find acceptable, even though the Arcam costs £3750. Totally illogical.
These products are not about having the latest fancy marketing speak, or lots of legacy inputs that are mostly redundant for people. They are purely about getting the best sound for you money. You seem to have lost this essential element in all the manufacturer marketing speak of 'deep colour' (makes no difference until films are made that way!) and other useless modes/features that most people don't need in order to hear brilliantly reproduced music or soundtracks. For the money, the Audiolab has yet to be beaten. You are doing the AV industry a huge travesty by not reviewing this product again, with your informed hat on.
2) Inconsistency and dubious reviews. One thing that is very annoying is the fact that you seem to change your mind on previous reviews. A prime example of this was last year when you compared a Samsung Q97 to a Panasonic PX70. At the end of the comparison you concluded that the Samsung gave you a slightly better picture for the money. However, in following months you awarded the PX70 the award for being the best television in this range. Yet again illogical.
What makes this further dubious is that when I spoke to a representative from Panasonic, AND later a representative from Samsung... they informed me that What H-Fi had never had a Panasonic PX70 in house to test! So how could you review this? Why would two totally seperate companies tell me the same thing? The Samsung representative even suggsted that this had caused the editorial changes seen at What Hi-Fi last year once it had been discovered. Is this what happened? If so, why was there no apology offered to the readership?
3) Bias that cannot be ignored. I've read over and over again how you claim that your advertisers do not affect what you review and how it rates. However this is not what the magazine reflects, except in a few rare circumstances.
A good example of this is Sony. Now they were the only BIG AV manufacturer at your What Hi-Fi live show this year. Your JVCs, Pioneers, Denon, Samsungs etc were all conspicuous by their absence (this begs the question why? Do they no longer have faith in What Hi-Fi either?). After this news was announced, suddenly all the Sony LCD televisions have started to get 5 star ratings. Now I have seen these sets in action, extensively. They are average, nothing more, nothing less. When you compare one of these to a (rightly) 5 star Pioneer Kuro, it's like night & day. The Kuro blows the Sony ranges away in every category. Every professional AV installer in the country knows this, and would never recommend a Sony as the display. They cost the same, or are even more expensive than the Kuros. So how can they be recommended at the same level? It just smacks of favouritism because Sony were kind enough to attend your event.
HDMI cables that are recommended over others because they 'offer deeper colours and make the picture really stand/pop out'. How does an HDMI cable allow more of a colour, or different video information to pass through? Now I am not one of those people who believe non-stop that all HDMI cables are equal, as in each cable there is an analogue timing signal. However, the only thing this can affect is motion and timing (i.e. prevent break-up of the picture, or HDCP handshake loss). There is absolutely no scientific way that one HDMI cable can transfer colours with different saturations, hues, or luminances to another cable. How can you claim this is possible? Again I believe this is down to advertising bias, as there's no possible reason you could claim otherwise. If you disagree, how about you use the correct gear (a colorimeter and some software to read it) to show, with physical measurements, that a cable does affect the intensity of colour coming through from the source. Prove it and put your money where you mouth is, and end this debate for all your readers once and for all.
I really want to see What Hi-Fi get back to the roots that established it. Before I renew my subsciption again I would want to see evidence that you are testing these things correctly, that you are taking steps to ensure things are calibrated, and that we are getting fair and unbiased reviews and reporting. Please, please address all this and make What Hi-Fi the respectable magazine it once was. In doing so, you might attract all the big manufacturers back for your next live show in 2009!
All the best,
Eiren
bobbys:one thing for sure im looking forward to reading the replies.
Me too! It's a strongly but fairly worded email that deserves and (not doubt) will get a response. I'm not in the industry but I also hear whispers of bias towards to a certain manufacturer but of course they go unrepeated by me (having no evidence of such bias myself).
I'm on tenterhooks...
SouthaK:
bobbys:one thing for sure im looking forward to reading the replies.
Me too! It's a strongly but fairly worded email that deserves and (not doubt) will get a response. I'm not in the industry but I also hear whispers of bias towards to a certain manufacturer but of course they go unrepeated by me (having no evidence of such bias myself).
I'm on tenterhooks...
Everyone deserves their say but I'm going to say a couple of things about the OP's rant. Sony's more expensive than Kuros?? Kuros are plasmas, Sonys are LCD. They are rated as best LCD and best plasma. The Pioneers are clearly rated as the best screens.
I also think it's clear that the OP is not a subscriber and far more likely trying to throw a spanner at the WHF staff. I will now sit back and read the riposte.
A television is a television, LCD or plasma. As such they are comparable.
If anyone from What Hi-Fi wants to check my subscription status they're welcome to message me and I'll supply them my details.
What prompted me to write this was the latest edition of the magazine which I received through the post yesterday via my subscription.
I think the only comment I would make is the point on ISF calibration and other forms of calibration which can only be performed by specialists at a reasonably high cost - this is not in defence of the magazine (I'll leave that to them), but just my own view point. I would argue that, since very few people are ever likely to get this done, the majority of the review should be conducted assuming the device has only been calibrated by the user. So for example, with TVs, the THX Optimiser is a tool which is easily available to anybody and as such, a TV calibrated with this is more likely to be a closer match to what the person gets in their home. It is therefore much more relevant for this to be done and reviewed, compared to a review of a TV which has been professionally calibrated, since very few people would have this done.
Now of course, that doesn't mean the set shouldn't be calibrated in this way to see what improvements these make, and, if significant, this should be mentioned in the review as a way of getting a really great picture. Obviously though, the extra cost of the calibration then needs to be taken into account for the value for money rating, since a set which produces a great picture without this could therefore be better value...
Just my opinion.
Eiren:A television is a television, LCD or plasma. As such they are comparable.
come on get a grip a car is a car but there a big difference between a 4x4 and a mini
bobbys:
Eiren:A television is a television, LCD or plasma. As such they are comparable.
come on get a grip a car is a car but there a big difference between a 4x4 and a mini
In all fairness, a 37" plasma and a 37" LCD both have exactly the same job to do. Were as a mini and a 4x4 have completely different design and use intentions. So in no way is that an analogy of what Eiren said.
professorhat:I think the only comment I would make is the point on ISF calibration and other forms of calibration which can only be performed by specialists at a reasonably high cost - this is not in defence of the magazine (I'll leave that to them), but just my own view point. I would argue that, since very few people are ever likely to get this done, the majority of the review should be conducted assuming the device has only been calibrated by the user. So for example, with TVs, the THX Optimiser is a tool which is easily available to anybody and as such, a TV calibrated with this is more likely to be a closer match to what the person gets in their home. It is therefore much more relevant for this to be done and reviewed, compared to a review of a TV which has been professionally calibrated, since very few people would have this done.
Now of course, that doesn't mean the set shouldn't be calibrated in this way to see what improvements these make, and, if significant, this should be mentioned in the review as a way of getting a really great picture. Obviously though, the extra cost of the calibration then needs to be taken into account for the value for money rating, since a set which produces a great picture without this could therefore be better value...
Just my opinion.
That's certainly true to an extent, however everyone can pick up a relatively cheap (<£100) meter themselves, and free software, and get a far more accurate set-up than going by eye.
Most people just buy the sets and leave them as set straight out of the box. What Hi-Fi should really be advocating people getting the most out of their sets, which they do. However, people want to know just how good the sets are pushed to their full capabilities.
If What Hi-Fi did this they would know that the latest Panasonic Viera sets have omitted several essential picture controls that are needed to get an accurate picture from. There's no controls for setting the greyscale on them at all! Readers need to know these things, and because What Hi-Fi is not calibrating them correctly... they'll never get to hear of this until they've bought it!
I can't find the thread, but I thought that two of the staffers were ISF certified......
lets be fair here
Eiren:We want to see if products can be calibrated to a high standard, not how good they look out of the box.
I've been reading the magazine since about 2000 and the magazine has always given the advice that you shouldn't settle for the out of the box calibration, as it is set up for the sho room floor (i.e. contrast too bright etc...)
Eiren:Hi-Fi live show this year. Your JVCs, Pioneers, Denon, Samsungs etc were all conspicuous by their absence (this begs the question why? Do they no longer have faith in What Hi-Fi either?)
The credit crunch is going to have a severe effect on the sales of luxury goods. Many companies are tightening there belts in order to weather the storm. Whether it is wise to cut marketing budgets is another mater though.
Eiren:After this news was announced, suddenly all the Sony LCD televisions have started to get 5 star ratings.
Maybe there products are good at the moment.
Eiren:HDMI cables that are recommended over others because they 'offer deeper colours and make the picture really stand/pop out'. How does an HDMI cable allow more of a colour, or different video information to pass through?
Try it and decide for yourself. it worked for me. DTS HD Master audio is 24MBPS. That is 24 million pieces of information passed down a cable every second. That is ALOT. Just as in analogue cables where detail is lost through loss of information, it will take an exceptional cable to get that much information sent through without any errors at all. My understanding is that the players have error correction to try and cope with this loss of data.
JohnDuncan:I can't find the thread, but I thought that two of the staffers were ISF certified......
I remember that too- it was a post by Clare defending another attack on WHF,but I cannot find it either.I am sure if this is the case it will be on here shortly.
Oh my God! It was a toss up between reading the first post or watching Gone With The Wind so I chose the latter instead
JohnDuncan:I can't find the thread, but I thought that two of the staffers were ISF certified......
Found it ( yes it is slow at work today) here
I'm on the road right now, so can't dwell on an equally lengthy response. Key points:
1) Yes, ISF skills on team
2) TV/AV part of Sony were NOT exhibiting at our Show - only the VAIO and PlayStation 3 divisions. Biggest TV presence was from LG - someone who's never won a TV Award from us and rarely get a great rating, as regular readers will know.
3) We definitely had that Panasonic TV in for review - do you think manufacturers know everything about our reviewing? Again, as regular readers here and in the magazine will know ,we often buy kit if it's not supplied.
4) Our tests do not contradict each other - we test everything consisently on a performance per pound basis, and comparatively. That means a product's star rating and market-ranking can change along with its price and new entrants coming into the arena.
Sorry you no long want to subscribe. I hope many others will continue to benefit from the genuine desire our dedicated team has to communicate news, reviews and advice via the magazine and here online.
I will return later with a more detailed response...
Oh, and we gave Panasonic, Samsung and Pioneer Awards this year, too, including saying that technically the Kuro is the best TV set you can buy - but we're also real-world enough to know that not everyone can afford the money or space for 50in+ plasma TVs. So, the Pioneer got a best in class (Best 50in+ TV), but we're not going to ignore 26-50in sets and take a 'Kuro or nothing' stance.
one thing for sure im looking forward to reading the replies.