Stand Loudspeaker Reviews

I can’t add much to the good points already made in response to JohnnyThunder’s special blend of arrogance and ignorance, specifically this: “Some of you guys simply do not understand the role of magazines and the economics of magazines.” You, Mr. Thunder, are the only one exhibiting a clear misunderstanding of both magazines and economics. Like others, I have no idea why you think there should be a relaxation of transparency or editorial standards because we’re talking about luxury goods. First, Stereophile has probably influenced me more tangibly on big purchases than the Times has; there are products I wouldn’t have considered auditioning had Art Dudley not written about them. Since I can’t comfortably consider any of my income disposable, I need all the help I can get before blowing several mortgage payments on speakers. And if standards can lapse for something decidedly in the private — not public — interest like expensive speakers, tell me where I can find the scale to understand what measure of trust I should ascribe to a speaker review. 37%? 54%? As far as the economics of magazines, no publication — even propagandists — wants its readers wondering about its financial condition as they’re reading. There likely isn’t a single publication that you’ve read, Johnny, that hasn’t fallen on tough times, at least in its past if not its present. Should we tolerate more palm greasing and pay to play because a magazine is experiencing more financial trouble? And if they’re flush with cash, then should we expect them to be able to afford more truth and transparency?

It’s great — required, frankly — that the author disclosed his personal relationship and, as a fellow owner of several pairs of Devores, I’m interested in his knowledge and experience with all manner of apes. What I don’t get is why an editor, reading the ringing endorsement of an author noting that he has purchased one pair of Devores after another, wouldn’t ask that writer to clarify whether he paid full price — the price we’d all have to pay at a dealer — or something considerably less than that. If it was considerably less, then at least we can see a possible incentive the author has to write a positive review — whether or not he acted on that incentive. IMHO, that level of transparency tends to result in more reader trust that the author didn’t allow the discount he was gifted by the manufacturer to color his review. By not disclosing it, the publication easily achieves something less than the reader trust it’s probably hoping for.

Glad to see this debate break out here. Would very much appreciate if truth and transparency, whether in print or politics, were seen again as virtues and not, as JohnnyThunder’s note implies, for suckers and naïfs.

We understand the economy of a magazine that its real customer is the manufactures not the readers. But, once a magazine is considered as if a bible of the industry, I think we can expect a little more. JohnnyThunder's comment may be perfectly suitable for some publications which are nothing more than money grab (I won't mention their names). But, I believe we have a different expectation for Stereophile. Many of us spends a serious money based on the reviews and recommendations on Stereophile. My first speaker purchase was based on the review here. In fact, I was thinking of purchasing (giving it a serious audition) Baby O based on this review. Regardless it's a luxury good or not, I think we can demand some objectivity from the de facto leading publication.

Would another writer have asked Mr. Devore tougher questions ? Would he have found issues in the tonality of the speakers? Based on all other reviews of Devore speakers in the pages of Stereophile, they have a pretty great track record of garnering glowing endorsements. So Stereophile in general is a safe haven for them. Recently Ken Kessler also blew these speakers mega kisses in a sister publication. I am not going to argue with the seriousness of Stereophiles purpose in this hobby of ours. But I just don't think this particular example crosses a line. Would I want to read this every issue ? No. But in this case, and with the outcome pretty much predetermined, it didnt really bother me.

is just utter tripe. Totally NOT valid point. Everyone has a responsibility to themselves to auditioning equipment for themselves.

Even Stereophile warns all respective buyers of any gear in each and every Recommended Components 2x a year for decades - These reviews are merely signposts to purchase. They are "not telling you who to marry either!"

Everyone just desperately wants to take Stereophile to task because they are one of two authorities that have been along before any of us have been audiophiles.

Every dealer has return policies. Any self-respecting audiophile will audition ahead of time. Anthony Cordesman said it best years ago- If you don't audition a product before buying, you have no one to blame but yourself.

Any self-respecting dealer would also give you leeway to purchase then credit anyone back.

If you took this magazine 'SERIOUSLY', one would realize this review is just a report of an experience. His magazine recommends this- It's not forcing you at friggin' gunpoint.

And if a reviewer got it wrong, big deal. Your experience differed from his. You may be a fake audiophile and not know one thing about system matching to get ANY component to sound its best- and at the level that Ken did hear. Who's fault is that? Yours. Not Ken's.

Stop BSing yourselves into thinking a deeper level of percieved transparency will change your buying habits. It's a non-sequitur- like the long-winded, nonsense posing as righteous indignation above.

I got what Johnny was trying to say- and I'm SURE you all did too. 'Audio gear' or any purchase requires all of us to pay attention on what we are spending. Economics 101. He was saying that the magazine article isn't an Article of the US Constitution. He's right.

for many years (between 1 and 2 decades). Big company. Starts w a T and ends w E. On the creative end of things. I don't work there any longer. I don't work for Stereophile or TAS or any other stereo magazine but I know how magazines work and how they have to operate to survive in today's market (it has evolved , it's different.) I am a music lover and a modest audiophile. I can hear differences in interconnects, speaker and power cables. I like tube amplifiers and also have a Linn LP12 w a Naim Aro tonearm and an EAR 834 phono stage. What else ? I just read Stereophile to learn about new equipment and music. Herb and Alex are currently my favorite "writers" at the magazine. I aspire to have my system duplicate some of the sounds they own, experience and respond to. Before he sadly passed, I adored Art Dudley's writing and the equipment he chose to review (I bought one of the amps he reviewed favorably.).

If I were Ken, my answer would be "it depends". They're probably both excellent speakers, but your choice will depend on the partnering electronics, the room, the type of music you mostly listen to, your sonic preferences, etc.

I appreciate your post.

If we're commenting here, it's because we're passionate. And when we're passionate, we can all get carried away. It's happened to me too in other threads.

Yeah, a few comments above (by other people) are almost ad hominem attacks on Johnny Thunder. And that's not right. Folks might not always appreciate his tone, but it's not a reason to attack him like that.

and this is either a flaw or positive, depending on your viewpoint. John doesn’t sell enough speakers for cost efficiencies. This means you pay 2-3 times the price for what a more mass-produced speaker company would charge you for essentially equal performance. Part of the secret sauce of Devore speakers is their aesthetics (both in their beauty and the fact that there really isn’t anything on the market that looks like they do). So owning a pair of Devore speakers means you own something esoteric that sets you apart from others, and let’s be honest, audiophiles love that. If I could afford the O96, I’d get me a pair in a second. That being said, there are many mass market companies hitting it out of the ballpark at stupid affordable prices. I’m not sure if your reference to KEF was a putdown, but having owned the LS-50 Metas and the non-meta R3’s, I can attest to the fact they are some of the best speakers I’ve heard. I could care less if everybody owns them. They are outstanding and relatively cheap.

... automatically mean that it is artisinal?

The drivers are made in the VIFA and SEAS factories.
The cabinets are bought in from Box Furniture and are mostly made from recycled-content MDF.
Whatever resistors, capacitors and inductors may be in the crossover are likely factory-made, as well.

Aside from the initial design, how much artisanal work is required to assemble the various parts that are mostly (if not all) sourced from outside suppliers/subcontractors?

Or are audio reviews not meant to guide people what to seek out to audition (not necessarily what to buy)?

Reviews help to guide the audio gear buyer what to CONSIDER given his / her listening preferences, associated equipment, room size and acoustics, visual ascetic, and so on. Yes? No?

Back in the day, I took a shine to Art's listening and equipment philosophy, so I auditioned gear he loved and found I resonated with his approach. After awhile, I came to trust the man's judgment and have yet to be disappointed, God rest his soul.

Ken loving these O Babies gives a nice bump in interest to DeVore no doubt, but the beauty of the free market is this: if the speakers don't hold up under consumer scrutiny, they don't succeed. If these sound like something that interests you, go listen, or purchase with a 30 day audition clause. If Ken has failed in his analysis and description, it will become widely known very quickly in our small community.

In the end, I find that the "upper echelon" reviewers (as I call them) are very dependable. Of the few pieces I've purchased w/o audition, I've not returned one nor found that the reviewer in any way led me astray.

Most importantly, enjoy the art of music and pray for the world.

100%

Reminds me of Henry Rollins barking "Yeah, what do YOU do?!"

And yes, bless this earth! Thank you everyone for dissenting comments and for your input, everyone included.

I wish you all new stereo purchases in 2024!

Well, because it sounds better, comes the obvious answer. And looks better, is made with better stuff, and so on. Preference, we call that. Judgement.

Are you sure you know why you asked that question or did you really expect it to turn up some Factor by which all things are made right according to your views?