Have your say & ask the experts

Huzzah!

Great news, Ms Newsome. Looking forward to better things to come.

I'm with Evilwolf, FrOg, Joelsim & thfcwestlower on this. There's too little hifi covered in the mag; especially comparative reviews are needed to appear more often.
Personally I'd like reviews to be a little more comprehensive too- the avi ADM9 review for example is so short it leaves questions unanswered, for instance:

-what is the performance of the speakers connected to a mac and/or a pc? Is there a difference between them and cd-players?
-how would you rate the ADM9 performance against an comparative passive system, like the avi pro 9 plus amp of choice? Which one gives better VFM?
-How well does the package perform with the avi sub? Does it cure the issues you had concerning the lack of bass?
-Does the ADM9 indeed sound very good with an ipod connected; do you feel different interconnects DO make a difference on the AVI, despite the makers claiming otherwise?

Obvious questions that -i suspect- were left unanswered because of valueing quantity of reviews over quality in info providing- maybe an idea to use the website to add more info to the reviews?

EDIT: haven't been clear enough on what I mean with comparative reviewing, I was more thinking about group tests....

All in the gameplan.

And I would remind you that - unlike many other titles - ALL our reviews are comparative: nothing gets reviewed in isolation.

But again, thanks for the feedback, as it's all useful insight. 

I've been a subscriber since 1997 or so, buying the magazine periodically for another decade before that. Obviously, in that time it's changed substantially; the content has widened to embrace a broader range of products.

It's less of a hi-fi magazine today than it's ever been however, but that doesn't make it a poor one. In fairness though, you could equally drop the "Hi-Fi" and just call it "What Sound and Vision" which is arguably more honest and better reflects the content.

Including the current one, the last three issues have had supertests for 37-40inch TVs, 32inch TVs and 50inch sets respectively. Last month's issue was interesting for my tastes; more hi-fi products for one thing and it was a good read. This month I had it back in the magazine rack in less than 10 minutes. 50-inch TVs, iPod docks, HDMI cables, AV receivers and £4000+ projectors. The Temptations gear was interesting - Plinius are impressive, but £18k is a shade off my buying radar and I am often wondering who this section is really aimed at? Your typical Cambridge buyer won't be topping up those coffers in a hurry...!

I took out a subscription to Hi Fi World at the turn of this year. Apart from being a well written rival, it reminds me of what WHF used to be once upon a time. I refer to it frequently over the month, something I rarely do with WHF any more. It also seems to acknowledge there are more options for buyers than Arcam, NAD, Cyrus, Roksan and the aforementioned Cambridge. The reader's requests section truly puts the WHF counterpart in the shade, yet this used to be one of the magazine's strengths by a long way.

I accept other readers will want AV / mp3, etc, but I think the majority of people are predominantly keen on traditional hi-fi (only going by this forum and not having access tot he market research data available to the team).

I'm not blind to the hi-fi coverage that does appear in the magazine, but if you'd never bought the mag before and September 2008 was your first issue, you'd struggle to connect the title with the contents I think.

Review space is minimal too - as previously outlined - the Cyrus CD6SE had more coverage but this is the exception rather than the rule typically and it'll be interesting to see how it compares to the 8SE review coming up in HFW in their forthcoming issue.

I suppose my overriding impression of WHF these days is a magazine that doesn't quite know exactly what it is! The review space is fairly minimal, there isn't really enough detail for all of the products covered and especially when more information than less is ideally required for the costs of some of these items in many cases. The Cyrus 6 review this month was a big step in the right direction and more space will be welcome, but feel free to prune some of the areas covered.

I should say I don't just want WHF to become another HFW - both magazines are different but I do think hi-fi is sometimes overlooked (the August issue excepted) to too great a degree.

I couldn't agree more. The heartland is being sidelined in favour of the TV crowd.

The problem with this is, once the hifi subscribers go elsewhere, those who buy the mag are either:

a) simply here for the free subscription gift
b) are interested in purchasing a telly

Hifi 'buffs' are serial upgraders and have many components to upgrade, someone who is buying a telly is buying one for a few years.

Think about it.

I also agree that my other 2 subscriptions are for magazines that last much longer and have hifi on every page. My heart sinks when reading (WHF) Sound & Vision as more than half of it isn't relevant any more, the habitual TV supertest being a case in point. In addition much of this mag is now about low-fi and it's simply for a false/transient circulation that's going to get harder and harder to maintain.

And I have been reading What HiFi for nearly 20 years now and it's losing its appeal.

I don't mind the magazine reviewing more than just strictly HiFi products.... It's nice to be able to see what reviewers (who actually know what HiFi should sounds like) think of various mp3 players, minisystems and receivers... I find the change of pace refreshing from the usually snotty approach to a HiFi mag, where everything else is regarded as mass market and low fi...

What I think needs to be done is to find a good balance... so that WhatHiFi has enough actual HiFi reviews to please Hardcore Audionuts and everything else to appease the other consumers... The mag also needs to balance between what casual readers want (long buying guides - so they can pick up any issue and get a full recap) and what regulars (subscribers) want (more fresh reviews) ... My thought is to seriously cut the Buyer's Guide, just give highlights for price categories and give a link to this website for consumers wanting more detail... Then use that reclaimed space to review more HiFi products (not TVs!)....

My Dad still buys the mag on a fairly regular basis.  The last one I bought (August, I think) had a review of the Panasonic TH-42PZ81B (sorry guys, TV's again!)  I'd read the review on the W(HF)SV website but still went ahead and bought the mag expecting there to be more text to scan my eyes over.  I was sorely disappointed when I found I was getting the exact same review for not much change from a fiver! 

I was chatting with my Dad on the phone again this evening about the mag and the 50" TV SuperTest (we found a mistake in the review?) in the latest issue.  He read out the good and bad points about each set, the Pioneer unsurprisingly, came out on top. 

I popped onto the website tonight (I've not visited for a week or two) and found the exact same reviews on here! 

My question; is there any advantage or reason for buying the mag?  As far as I can make out the only thing amiss on the website is the verdicts from group tests. 

Fantastic website BTW, what's the chances of you ditching the mag and making the website a subscription service (not that I'd approve you must understand!)?

More TV reviews please, thanks

I don't think we'll be ditching a market-leading magazine anytime soon!

In fact, as mentioned several times in this thread, we're redesigning the magazine so it'll offer more - both to those who also peruse our reviews online (which will continue to be freely available) and to those who prefer to do all their reading offline.

There are still many things a mag can do/places it can go that a website can't...

Thanks for reading our gripes Clare - will there be any likelihood that the Buying Guide might include the much missed section on cartridges alongside the turntable section? Pretty integral to the whole vinyl replay scene and there's been a near glut of new cartridges this past 12 months or so. Okay, a good few anyway! It would be useful to cater for that too.

Sorry for picking your post out Joel, but you're summing up well what a few people are trying to say.

JoelSim:

The heartland is being sidelined in favour of the TV crowd.

But what is 'The heartland'? I guess that's different for everyone? The heartland for the more serious enthusiast is usually the more serious kit, but that isn't what sells in big numbers. So if the kit itself doesn't sell in big numbers, couldn't it be possible that a mag that reviewed mainly said kit wouldn't sell in big numbers either? The aspiration for the average punter is a 42" TV and a home cinema in a box, so if the mag review that stuff, then surely they get more readers?

The problem with this is, once the hifi subscribers go elsewhere, those who buy the mag are either: a) simply here for the free subscription gift b) are interested in purchasing a telly Hifi 'buffs' are serial upgraders and have many components to upgrade, someone who is buying a telly is buying one for a few years. Think about it.

Yup, but in a set period of time, even though a typical hi-fi buff spends more upgrading his hi-fi than your average bloke spends on a telly, I bet there are far, far more average blokes buying TV's. There must be more TV sales than hi-fi sales/upgrades taking place, or else the hi-fi shops wouldn't be shutting down with such alarming regularity. Yes, it may just be a transitional time in the market, but when things shift back to hi-fi, or to somewhere else, maybe the mag can shift too?

I also agree that my other 2 subscriptions are for magazines that last much longer and have hifi on every page. My heart sinks when reading (WHF) Sound & Vision as more than half of it isn't relevant any more, the habitual TV supertest being a case in point. In addition much of this mag is now about low-fi and it's simply for a false/transient circulation that's going to get harder and harder to maintain. And I have been reading What HiFi for nearly 20 years now and it's losing its appeal.

But what 'isn't relevant' to you or I is probably pretty relevant to other people. I bet a shed-load of people buy the mag purely for the TV supertests. So maybe WHF are just aiming at the majority? Whilst it's good retaining customers, surely retaining a small, loyal readership isn't as good as having a high casual readership? I'm guessing that the more traditional hi-fi mags sell far fewer copies than WHF?

In a similar vein, when I used to help out with a golf forum, we'd repeatedly receive requests for info about the gear the pros used, or ultra high-end stuff. No-one seemed to care about the bread and butter stuff. But when we put up info about a mass market release, that appealed to your average player, we'd get a ton more clicks (and more importantly sales) from lurkers. I'm a member of a few specialist forums, and what I see across almost all of them is that enthusiasts know what they like, have a fair idea of what other enthusiasts will like, have less of an idea what non-enthusiasts will like, and have practically no idea what sells!

What I'm long windedly trying to say is that the content of the mag isn't always what I enjoy either (I made a thread with regard to this a while back) but I can see why WHF set out their stall this way. They just seem to be responding to market trends. Once everyone has their plasma/LCD and people start buying something else, I guess the mag will feature that 'something else' at the time.

bigblue235:

Sorry for picking your post out Joel, but you're summing up well what a few people are trying to say.

JoelSim:

The heartland is being sidelined in favour of the TV crowd.

But what is 'The heartland'? I guess that's different for everyone? The heartland for the more serious enthusiast is usually the more serious kit, but that isn't what sells in big numbers. So if the kit itself doesn't sell in big numbers, couldn't it be possible that a mag that reviewed mainly said kit wouldn't sell in big numbers either? The aspiration for the average punter is a 42" TV and a home cinema in a box, so if the mag review that stuff, then surely they get more readers?

The problem with this is, once the hifi subscribers go elsewhere, those who buy the mag are either: a) simply here for the free subscription gift b) are interested in purchasing a telly Hifi 'buffs' are serial upgraders and have many components to upgrade, someone who is buying a telly is buying one for a few years. Think about it.

Yup, but in a set period of time, even though a typical hi-fi buff spends more upgrading his hi-fi than your average bloke spends on a telly, I bet there are far, far more average blokes buying TV's. There must be more TV sales than hi-fi sales/upgrades taking place, or else the hi-fi shops wouldn't be shutting down with such alarming regularity. Yes, it may just be a transitional time in the market, but when things shift back to hi-fi, or to somewhere else, maybe the mag can shift too?

I also agree that my other 2 subscriptions are for magazines that last much longer and have hifi on every page. My heart sinks when reading (WHF) Sound & Vision as more than half of it isn't relevant any more, the habitual TV supertest being a case in point. In addition much of this mag is now about low-fi and it's simply for a false/transient circulation that's going to get harder and harder to maintain. And I have been reading What HiFi for nearly 20 years now and it's losing its appeal.

But what 'isn't relevant' to you or I is probably pretty relevant to other people. I bet a shed-load of people buy the mag purely for the TV supertests. So maybe WHF are just aiming at the majority? Whilst it's good retaining customers, surely retaining a small, loyal readership isn't as good as having a high casual readership? I'm guessing that the more traditional hi-fi mags sell far fewer copies than WHF?

In a similar vein, when I used to help out with a golf forum, we'd repeatedly receive requests for info about the gear the pros used, or ultra high-end stuff. No-one seemed to care about the bread and butter stuff. But when we put up info about a mass market release, that appealed to your average player, we'd get a ton more clicks (and more importantly sales) from lurkers. I'm a member of a few specialist forums, and what I see across almost all of them is that enthusiasts know what they like, have a fair idea of what other enthusiasts will like, have less of an idea what non-enthusiasts will like, and have practically no idea what sells!

What I'm long windedly trying to say is that the content of the mag isn't always what I enjoy either (I made a thread with regard to this a while back) but I can see why WHF set out their stall this way. They just seem to be responding to market trends. Once everyone has their plasma/LCD and people start buying something else, I guess the mag will feature that 'something else' at the time.

 

I don't disagree with anything you've said, and I understand the economics, but the current climate is still fairly new in that big tvs are still really in their infancy. Once digital is over and done with, WHF will be left with few loyals.

The other side to this is the hifi manufacturers, who will see the hifi buffs migrating, and then they won't advertise as much and WHF will slowly become WSAV, the specialist and enthusiast readers will be gone (as will some of the hifi companies), and the vicious circle will continue until everyone is listening to average pap.

Surely as the most-read hifi magazine in the UK by quite some distance, and of course where their history lies, WHF has a certain responsibility to that wot made it!!!!.
 

WHF needs to get back to it's roots - 2 channel hi-fi. This is what made the magazine world famous. The 'Sound and Vision' bit that is a recent phenomena appears to have hijacked the magazine and we're now left with what it is today.

Maybe a solution to this would be to offer an option - one magazine to hifi buffs and the other to home cinema buffs. This way there's a clear differentiation and distinction between the two - a win-win situation to the subscribers and to WHF. Just make sure that both magazines are jam packed with the good stuff and leaves no room for complaints.

I must at this juncture draw a comparison with your sister (or is it brother?) publication, AUTOCAR, which I subscribe to as well. I get a magazine EVERY WEEK, and it's nothing short of fantastic! How do they do it then? Being under the same group, Haymarket, doesn't the same ethos apply to all the publications across the board?

Again, not a complaint but a constructive criticism. And, just my 2 pence worth!

JoelSim:

I don't disagree with anything you've said, and I understand the economics, but the current climate is still fairly new in that big tvs are still really in their infancy. Once digital is over and done with, WHF will be left with few loyals.

I get you, but I still feel that they'll retain people who maybe take the magazine for what it is currently, rather than what it used to be. I bought the mag for a few years then gave up on it 'til surround sound came out. I remember buying every mag available for reviews of the MS decoder1! The whole pro-logic thing got me hooked on the mag again. Then I kinda drifted away 'til I had a bit of spare cash so came back to see what was available. Stopped buying again 'til the mag became a great place for TV reviews. If WHF had stayed strictly 2-channel I'd have bought nowhere near as many copies. 

The other side to this is the hifi manufacturers, who will see the hifi buffs migrating, and then they won't advertise as much and WHF will slowly become WSAV, the specialist and enthusiast readers will be gone (as will some of the hifi companies), and the vicious circle will continue until everyone is listening to average pap.

Yep, again, I see what you mean. Isn't it possible though, that ad revenues could come from the manufacturers of the products that now feature in the mag in place of the hi-fi stuff? I totally agree that the mag could lose some of the 'enthusiast' readers though, which I guess could in turn lead to a watering down of the technical content. That definitely wouldn't be a good thing for me.

Surely as the most-read hifi magazine in the UK by quite some distance, and of course where their history lies, WHF has a certain responsibility to that wot made it!!!!.

Yup, definitely. But even with all the AV stuff that's in the mag, it's still my mag of choice for hi-fi reviews. I can't really think of any hi-fi products that WHF have missed because of dedicating more room to AV/MP3. That said though, I don't feel the reviews have as much info as articles from maybe 5-10 years back. I guess there isn't room to go into so much detail now, due to the amount of products in the marketplace.

EvilWolf:

WHF needs to get back to it's roots - 2 channel hi-fi. This is what made the magazine world famous. The 'Sound and Vision' bit that is a recent phenomena appears to have hijacked the magazine and we're now left with what it is today.

Maybe a solution to this would be to offer an option - one magazine to hifi buffs and the other to home cinema buffs. This way there's a clear differentiation and distinction between the two - a win-win situation to the subscribers and to WHF. Just make sure that both magazines are jam packed with the good stuff and leaves no room for complaints.

I must at this juncture draw a comparison with your sister (or is it brother?) publication, AUTOCAR, which I subscribe to as well. I get a magazine EVERY WEEK, and it's nothing short of fantastic! How do they do it then? Being under the same group, Haymarket, doesn't the same ethos apply to all the publications across the board?

Again, not a complaint but a constructive criticism. And, just my 2 pence worth!

The day the hi-fi/AV market is as big as the car market, and I can have a team the size of Autocar's, then we'll do a weekly! In the meantime, we're up here every day