Stereophile's J. Gordon Holt Interview

OK, if you haven’t read this As We See It editorial at the front of this month’s Stereophile [November 2007], don’t.

It is a startlingly transparent view into how a bitter old man can embarrass himself in public. I would suggest to JA to avoid doing any more of these to try and preserve whatever generous status history will assign Mr. Holt at this point.

This “high end audio is what I say it is and anybody who disagrees with me is a __________” is so, so, … so speaking to the adolescent males of the species with too much testosterone and an undying sense of self-importance [yes, it plays right into the hands of the forums where similar modes of thinking rule. On purpose? I don’t know. The topic of how Stereophile is more and more often targeting this same audience is for another post].

Reminds me of the similar people on car forums [I go there every 4 years or so when I need to find out about the current state of the auto market].

These people shout that cars are only supposed to:

1) Handle well [engines in the center, please], or
2) Go fast [in a straight line, of course, you Corvette owners know best], or
3) Be reliable [aka not American made], or
4) Be American made, or
5) Have good mileage [Hybrids], or
6) Have 10 ton towing and hauling capability [here in the west, *sigh*], or
7) … many others

and any other reason to evaluate how good a car is is angrily shouted down and flamed.

For those of us not fanatic about cars [I figure 80% or so of our readers], we can see that this is ridiculous. All of these reasons may be valid for different people, and that a weighted mix of these features is most often what is important to most individuals.

Yes, double blind testing has its uses [but mostly its abuses]. And certainly there is a place for science in high-end audio [though remarkably few of the people advocating this have any clue what science is. And besides, funding is, uh, lacking? AWOL? Laughable? But needed if any real research is to be done in the public domain.]

But the ideas thrown around in the article about ‘disciples’, ‘gospel’ and ‘talented reviewers’ smacks of traditional patriarchal dominance of our hobby and that day is thankfully, long gone, dead, buried, and composted. [the net gave the ignorant a voice for the first time in history, and it is obnoxious; but this is better, in my opinion, than a few moldy olds pontificating from on high].

So, in case it wasn’t clear, it is OK to evaluate your system subjectively, objectively [as if this really exists], a mix of the two, by color scheme, weight, size, technologies used, maximum SPL, origin of manufacturer, personality of manufacturer, towing capacity, or what have you. Sure it may not sound good [If you want it to sound good, use subjective evaluations. Duh.]. Welcome to the free world. Welcome to high-end home audio.