LPs and console stereos- 1974 perspective

[tube fanatic]

J. Gordon Holt doesn't mince words:

 

http://www.stereophile.com/content/flexible-firms#8zEmUIeDmvIaOEPW.97

 

Maynard

[totalcomfort]

I was lucky enough to inherit my grandmothers rca console. A fine piece of furniture and sounds pretty dang good. Still has original tubes and going strong.

[MyOwn]

Maynard, this is a great read....Brings back many memories playing vinyl on a console. For me I wasn't introduced to better sounding equipment until my late teens.

[Chris A]

J. Gordon Holt doesn't mince words:

 

When you really think about the punch line (near the bottom of Mr. Holt's article), what he is really inserting into the conversation is his magazine's role as "audiophile police" and how manufacturers should conduct their business relative to their customers and the magazine. 

 

I suppose Mr. Holt thought that he was clearing up an issue for the manufacturers...although it really appears to me to be a critic trying to increase his importance relative to the people that design and manufacture the hardware--something that I've always had a lot of trouble digesting,  I look deeply into the motivations and income streams of the critics themselves as my grains of salt.

 

Fortunately, a much lower percentage of people actually read those kind of magazines nowadays since many other online resources are much less pretentious, offer more information (like the testing labs and perhaps even the consumers themselves), and generally those alternative sources aren't making their living by selectively taking "donations" from their advertisers and readers.  I really like the Web and the better informed forums like the pro-forums and the pro-sumers in that respect.  It knocks down the "critics" egos (thus keeping them more honest), keeps the critic population turnover at healthier levels, and, most importantly, it self-regulates much better for the consumer's benefit.

 

In the case of Stereophile, artto a few years ago posted the listening rooms of three so-called "audiophile critics".  I was not impressed.  In fact, I found their listening rooms and setups to be incredibly wanting--and just by looking at the pictures of their rooms and setups.  Full disclosure is something that I actually value...not tip-toeing around to avoid hurting feelings.

 

As for the message that Mr. Holt was pushing in 1974: while that message might have been relevant in the era of slow product development and much smaller market sizes relative to today's marketplaces, no one that I know buys a computer or a smartphone thinking that the manufacturers will not come out with something better in a few months.  I believe that extends into most everything electronic or connected to electronics.  The message is severely dated to an age and way of thinking that I believe just doesn't make sense nowadays.  Mr. Holt's views on that subject in 1974 is, IMO, dead wrong nowadays.

 

YMMV.

 

Chris

[Jim Naseum]

Holt was a true pioneer for good sound. He has no equal in that regard. He broke the link between advertising, which was ridiculus, and the actual sound wich was often crap!!! Lol!! Time changes but in his time he was the best!!! No internet back then!!

[tube fanatic]

 

J. Gordon Holt doesn't mince words:

 

The message is severely dated to an age and way of thinking that I believe just doesn't make sense nowadays.  Mr. Holt's views on that subject in 1974 is, IMO, dead wrong nowadays.

 

YMMV.

 

Chris

 

Chris, that's exactly why I posted the link- it is a good historical perspective.  We need to remember that, in spite of his agenda (whatever that really was), JGH truly cared about having high quality sound in one's home, a view certainly shared by our revered PWK.  Today, it seems that everyone involved in commercial audio has some kind of agenda which makes it no different from any other endeavor from which someone, somewhere, is trying to make money.  In that respect, times really have not changed at all.

Maynard

[Chris A]

My comments on the applicability of Holt's article weren't really directed at the man--except for his addressing manufacturers instead of his real audience - the consumers, which was a serious faux pas on his part and evidence of an overactive ego.  Other than that, I believe that he also wanted true hi-fi, like some folks here, and I don't consider that to be terribly noteworthy, but nevertheless a cause with some merit.  Achieving world peace would be a cause of some merit.  Wiping out hunger and killer pathogens would be a cause of some merit.  Achieving hi-fi, well, it's probably down the merit list a bit...

 

If you notice, that Holt article was posted three days ago on Stereophile's web site.  That's to whom my comments were directed--the administrators that run that site that chose that article.  In the whole world of things that Holt said, they chose that one.  I don't think that should be rewarded.  PWK also said things that today we don't care to remember because over time they didn't pan out, but we have the good judgment to forget those very few topics for the posterity of the man. 

 

If you want to know the man more, I'd recommend this article:  https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=82882

[tube fanatic]

Other than that, I believe that he also wanted true hi-fi, like some folks here, and I don't consider that to be terribly noteworthy, but nevertheless a cause with some merit.  Achieving world peace would be a cause of some merit.  Wiping out hunger and killer pathogens would be a cause of some merit.  Achieving hi-fi, well, it's probably down the merit list a bit...

 

 

 

 

Very well stated Chris!  I'm convinced that many of the activities we humans engage in are bandaids to ease the pain we experience when considering issues such as those you mentioned. 

 

Maynard

[garyrc]

 

J. Gordon Holt doesn't mince words:

 

When you really think about the punch line (near the bottom of Mr. Holt's article), what he is really inserting into the conversation is his magazine's role as "audiophile police" and how manufacturers should conduct their business relative to their customers and the magazine. 

 

I suppose Mr. Holt thought that he was clearing up an issue for the manufacturers...although it really appears to me to be a critic trying to increase his importance relative to the people that design and manufacture the hardware--something that I've always had a lot of trouble digesting,  I look deeply into the motivations and income streams of the critics themselves as my grains of salt.

 

Fortunately, a much lower percentage of people actually read those kind of magazines nowadays since many other online resources are much less pretentious, offer more information (like the testing labs and perhaps even the consumers themselves), and generally those alternative sources aren't making their living by selectively taking "donations" from their advertisers and readers.  I really like the Web and the better informed forums like the pro-forums and the pro-sumers in that respect.  It knocks down the "critics" egos (thus keeping them more honest), keeps the critic population turnover at healthier levels, and, most importantly, it self-regulates much better for the consumer's benefit.

 

In the case of Stereophile, artto a few years ago posted the listening rooms of three so-called "audiophile critics".  I was not impressed.  In fact, I found their listening rooms and setups to be incredibly wanting--and just by looking at the pictures of their rooms and setups.  Full disclosure is something that I actually value...not tip-toeing around to avoid hurting feelings.

 

As for the message that Mr. Holt was pushing in 1974: while that message might have been relevant in the era of slow product development and much smaller market sizes relative to today's marketplaces, no one that I know buys a computer or a smartphone thinking that the manufacturers will not come out with something better in a few months.  I believe that extends into most everything electronic or connected to electronics.  The message is severely dated to an age and way of thinking that I believe just doesn't make sense nowadays.  Mr. Holt's views on that subject in 1974 is, IMO, dead wrong nowadays.

 

YMMV.

 

Chris

 

 

I agree with most of this.  But the Klipschorn, for instance, has undergone only about 7 relatively major changes (and a bunch of minor ones) since I started counting (1963).  I'm counting all crossover changes as just one, since other changes often required a new crossover.  At one point a customer wrote to PWK saying that he had recently bought Khorns, then there was an improvement.  He wanted to know if the change justified trading in the Khorns for new ones.  PWK wrote him suggesting that if he had extra money, he should donate it to his favorite charity, and wait a longer period of time (was it about 10 years?  I think so) before replacing the Khorns.  Sometimes an improvement takes the form of a branching off.  Thus, the Jubilee.  Almost everyone on this forum thinks it is an improvement, but a few think the Khorn is better.  I may find myself with a pair of Jubs someday, but I'm content to wait and enjoy my Khorns.  I'm glad that Klipsch -- at least in the Heritage line -- goes slowly, unlike other companies I also like, Oppo, for instance. 

Edited July 11, 2015 by garyrc