Have your say & ask the experts

fr0g:

I would like to see reviews of more stuff that wasn't volunteered by the manufacturer

We'll hotwire an old Range Rover and get ram-raiding. Anything for our readers...

professorhat:

amer187:

hot chcks

Yum... you're right though, probably better off on cookery magazines and the like rather than WHF...

Erm Avid use a hot chick to advertise their turntable. It kind of detracts from the 'sound quality is everything' message that most people seek for top level hif. Just my opinion, she looks great but it doesn't do much for me on their products if they have to use a bikini -clad lovely to support their product. Now if that were for a Club 18-30 holiday...

Andrew Everard:

fr0g:

I would like to see reviews of more stuff that wasn't volunteered by the manufacturer

We'll hotwire an old Range Rover and get ram-raiding. Anything for our readers...

Good man Andrew, I've been waiting for you to say that. Could you get me a Krell pre/power (not fussy on which model). That will probably just about fit in the boot.

Since it seems that reviewers and some tech people think there are subtle differences with things like HDMI cables and HDMI amplifier inputs, which seem to go beyond just a lower of higher error rate(1) It'd be fascinating to see an article by one of the engineers explaining mechanisms that can cause this. With analog signals, it's easy to see various possible causes for subtle differences between different bits of equipment. For the purely digital bits, it's hard to see how you can do anything other than increase the bit error rate, which ought to give a range between 'perfect' and 'totally trashed' - but shouldn't be able to do *different* subtle things to video or audio since the digital transport stages don't know what the bits mean or how they relate to later bits. 

If an engineer could come up with a mechanism that explained _how_ you could get different subtle effects, it would make a very interesting article.

 (1) I have no problem believing that some HDMI cables work better than others, especially for longer ones. What I don't understand is how you could achieve some of the more subtle differences reported; doesn't mean the differences aren't there, but if they are, it should be possible for an expert to come up with an explanation that explains how it could happen :-) which would make me a lot happier.

I too would like to see less reviews of TVs. I appreciate that it is probably the most likely item most people will be buying Freeview HD will be rolled out etc but I think that there is too much at the expense of other areas.

I appreciate that What Hii-Fi Sound & Vision? has a product driven format. But I'd like to see columns discussing new technologies eg  OLED etc. Interviews with key industry figures, behind the scenes at the major manufacturers etc. Also more dedicated to accessories etc - I mean how often do we actually buy new components?

Cheers!

I agree the danger is the mag becomes quantity over quality. I'd like to see more "objective" data provided in reviews to assist with the product selection process. I don't mind subjective opinion but it does concern me that this is somtimes misguided and at the expense of the full facts.  

There was a two page spread in the Sep08 issue about HDMI cables that provided very little real information or objective assesment on the difference between a range of cables spanning £50-£200.

What type of reader is WhatHiFi? targeting ?

jerryC:

Since it seems that reviewers and some tech people think there are subtle differences with things like HDMI cables and HDMI amplifier inputs, which seem to go beyond just a lower of higher error rate(1) It'd be fascinating to see an article by one of the engineers explaining mechanisms that can cause this. With analog signals, it's easy to see various possible causes for subtle differences between different bits of equipment. For the purely digital bits, it's hard to see how you can do anything other than increase the bit error rate, which ought to give a range between 'perfect' and 'totally trashed' - but shouldn't be able to do *different* subtle things to video or audio since the digital transport stages don't know what the bits mean or how they relate to later bits. 

If an engineer could come up with a mechanism that explained _how_ you could get different subtle effects, it would make a very interesting article.

 (1) I have no problem believing that some HDMI cables work better than others, especially for longer ones. What I don't understand is how you could achieve some of the more subtle differences reported; doesn't mean the differences aren't there, but if they are, it should be possible for an expert to come up with an explanation that explains how it could happen :-) which would make me a lot happier.

I also struggle with this as I posted elsewhere.  Here's what one high quality cable manufacturer has to say on the subject of HDMI -

"Unlike analog cables, DVI and HDMI video cables will usually either be 100% perfect, or have obvious problems that make them unusable, that is to say that their acceptability is also “digital”. Analog signals can suffer from a wide variety of subtle problems that can additively result in a visible but unacceptable picture."

http://www.dvigear.com/documents/DVIGear_HDMI_1.3_Cables_-_A_Look_Under_the_Hood_v2.pdf

It really does make be ponder the credibility of reports that describe noticeable differences in colour, motion, sharpness etc due to different (even short length) HDMI cables.  Like you I do not believe all cables are manufactired to the same standard but I would also welcome an article on how the subtle differences described in the reviews are possible.  Maybe some simple example tests from WhatHiFi? that we can try at home that show these differences.

AVI

Hi Guys,

After flicking through some WHF? back issues recently,i'm not sure what you think,but to me there's a lack of interviews with  manufacturer's designers,technicians/technical-directors.Perhaps the WHF? technical team could include a short Q&A or interview with these designers in a review of a new product - Preferrably without too much promotional spiel from their business & marketing departments.

I,for one,would be interested to know how manufacturers approach design,what technical hurdles had to be overcome & what solutions had to be devised before the release of a new model or range.

What d'you reckon?

BABUR.

Richard Melville:

More thoughts, people? All feedback welcome! Oh and DistortedVision, you'll like next issue - on sale 21st August.

Ah turntables... but what I would like to see is a cartridge and tonearm group test. These never seem to get reviewed.

Our aim is always to cover as much of any product as possible.

With both print and web space at our disposal, you'll see more of everything covered in the future...just watch this space