There was a comment in Stereophile a few years back about the fact that almost everything they review ends up on the recommended list. They replied that it is true, but it is because reviewers/editors pick out equipment to review that they think is going to be recommendable to start with, based upon hearing it at shows or manufacturer rep, and thus it generally is. A reasonable explanation, but still, oughtn't we know about the equipment to avoid too?
My theory is, audio equipment has evolved to the point where very little of it is wholly meritless once you get above a certain increasingly lower price point. I mean, one will certainly prefer some $2000 amps over others as a matter of taste in sonics, system compatibility, and features, but how many $2000 amps (or $1000 CDPs, etc.) from the big high end players can you actually say are bad and "not recommended" today?
Fifteen years ago, there were wide differences among components. Today, you sometimes have to do direct A-B comparisons with familiar recordings to really grasp a component's sonic signature. That's good, of course, because it indicates greater neutrality (and hence wider system compatibility). But it also means that the audio critics become less important, kind of like computer critics (can you even name one?).
BTW, in January 99, Fi did a recommended component list that had only 140 components, just a couple in each class, that really did have some semblence of representing the best and most recommendable stuff out there. RIP Fi.
My theory is, audio equipment has evolved to the point where very little of it is wholly meritless once you get above a certain increasingly lower price point. I mean, one will certainly prefer some $2000 amps over others as a matter of taste in sonics, system compatibility, and features, but how many $2000 amps (or $1000 CDPs, etc.) from the big high end players can you actually say are bad and "not recommended" today?
Fifteen years ago, there were wide differences among components. Today, you sometimes have to do direct A-B comparisons with familiar recordings to really grasp a component's sonic signature. That's good, of course, because it indicates greater neutrality (and hence wider system compatibility). But it also means that the audio critics become less important, kind of like computer critics (can you even name one?).
BTW, in January 99, Fi did a recommended component list that had only 140 components, just a couple in each class, that really did have some semblence of representing the best and most recommendable stuff out there. RIP Fi.