Although I expect that you are already way ahead of me, may I request that you consider a future article/investigation into equipment supports. I am fascinated by the different thinking to be found in the products of different manufacturers, eg the heavyweight/lightweight approaches, glass or wood, three point or four support, clamped coupling of shelves or point (simple?) supports etc.

One particular issue intrigues me, namely the three point support favoured by Russ Andrews among others. I can see that this is an easy way of preventing rocking, but the fact is that all of my pieces of hifi equipment have four corner-located supporting feet. The result of this is that the rear two feet of each piece of equipment are located a long way distant from the rear post of the support. On the assumption that the three post positions of the support form nodal positions, this implies that the two rear feet of the pieces of equipment are located where the support shelves can flap, that is at or near to anti-nodes.

Yes of course the shelves are stiff but I guess that they are not wholly immune to vibration. I would have thought that it is probably better to place the feet of the equipment as close to the vertical posts of the equipment supports as possible, although I realise that this also implies matching the shelf size to the item of equipment. Altogether an interesting topic. A comparative test would be fascinating.

Love the magazine. Looking forward to issue 9.

Is there any chance of a binder in the future? It doesn't have to be too fancy. The classic minimilism of the magazines would be excellent.

They are too good to get left around getting scruffy.

Today I received the 3 issues I ordered in the mail, great reading!

Thanks and best regards.

I have really enjoyed the first set which I am dipping into with great pleasure.

I am only sorry you haven't tested Kimber Select 1030 interconnects. I have had two pair for some years when I was using Audio Synthesis D/A direct to amplifier. I use KEF Kube with my 107s thus requiring a second cable. Recently I changed my set up introducing a preamp thus requiring a third set of interconnects. Before investing in another Kimber 1030 which is pricy I tried a variety of interconnects including various Nordost ,Black Rhodium, Chord and van den Hul. None were entirely satisfactory so I tried Kimber KCAG. This was so good I decided to go for a third 1030 despite the cost. This has produced the best sound I have ever had , both smooth and detailed with a solid bass and fine sense of the recording acoustic. Voices are excellent with no unwanted edge. Perhaps you might listen to these fine cables in the future comparing with others of similar price.

I was also fascinated but bewildered by your different results for CD player or power amp using the same mains cable. There doesnt seem much point on spending a lot for CD player cables.

Thank you for an excellent journal.

Just a note to say thanks for your time and efforts at the recent Manchester UK Sound and Vision Show. It was a pleasure to meet you and realise the depth of knowledge, encyclopedic in some instances and enthusiasm you have for the subject. To make your personal touch even more real please could we have a recent picture of the team including the good ladies.

All the best Simon.

I've noticed a lot of coverage of class d amplifiers in fora, much of it not related to your very detailed reviews. Mostly it's been very favourable, especially in the USA. Like you I came to the conclusion that most posters weren't able to make proper comparisons and had probably been taken in by the hype. The problem seems to be that many audio systems aren't upgraded systematically, as a result when a new item is introduced neither the good nor bad aspects van be properly auditioned. And of course these days most dealers aren't much use. Incidentally, do remember than many Yanks love new technology - based on its "features" - and are very keen to jump on bandwagons. They also tend to jump off them equally fast.

(In your long list of problems with the technology I think you've forgotten another potential issue: some products vary the sampling frequency according to the power output required. I wouldn't mind betting a pint or two that that will introduce its own pretty gross distortions).

But this is not new.

Some years ago I was looking for a new pair of speakers. I tried a couple of floor-standing systems from highly reputable makers at home. Neither could produce significant bass in my room and one pair sounded deeply boring. Since then my main criterion for audio has become - does it sound like fun? Not very specific but highly relevant.

I've also become increasingly suspicious of hi-fi reviewers*. In my experience the reader needs to have an understanding of where the reviewer is coming from before he can be trusted. Again in my search for new speakers I listened to the Linn Keilidh, which had been extremely well reviewed. The sound was so poor that I took the trouble to visit another Linn dealer. Again the sound was abysmal - not qualifying as hi fi in any way. It was beyond my understanding how anybody could pretend they were anything but rubbish.

There's a well known reviewer who wrote (in Hi Fi News) that the audio quality of DVD players (the early ones) was better than that of dedicated CD players....

There's another extremely well known reviewer (again mostly in Hi Fi News) who really doesn't care about many aspects of Hi Fi - and simply skates over them when writing about kit. But then he once tried to flog me a floppy Black Widow arm...

Many years ago, when transistor amps had recently been introduced as hi fi, and universally welcomed. one of my Quad valve amps had to go for service, and the dealer kindly loaned me one of the flashy new Japanese products.. It looked great and initially sounded very impressive. But after a short time it became headache inducing (quite literally) and was unused again until it could be returned. Crossover distortion?

Getting back to the switching amps - give it another year or so and quite likely a lot of people will be quietly off-loading them on e-bay ...

Mind you, I'm expecting the idiots at Which to pronounce them as the new audio sliced bread any issue soon.

- Regarding recording equipment: May I add to Tony Faulkners list the new Sony PCM-D50, the smaller brother (500$) of the PCM-D1? It is outstanding in operability, excellent sound, 4GB inbuilt flash memory, 24b/96kHz, USB, and above 12 hours battery live (worst case) while recording. A higher quality alternative to the M-Audio Microtrack (another interesting device BTW).

- Microphones: If one can do away with a slight hiss, the miniature DPA 4060/4061 electret microphones are very, very good (with their EQ grills off) and excel in *true* omnidirectionality. They sound very natural in the uppermost octave (specially for being electrostatic mics). To my ears they have less diaphragn coloration than larger membrane ESL mics. Similar things have been said about the Earthworks minis, some Sennheiser (MKE-2) and some Panasonic capsule dervatives, though their problem is some inherent, "even" higher noise levels.

Best wishes and thanks for the highest quality audio magazine by far.

And: If ever Keth Howard flys off the board of Hifi News because of his (too?) courageous, outspoken technically & auditory very profound reviews ­ please take him aboard! (I hope it doesn't happen...) Even better: "share him". He *really* has something to say (IMO).

Congratulations on an excellent magazine which provides the most individual and independent perspective on the hi fi scene.

I wonder whether you have considered a comparison between CD and SACD? There has apparently been a report which states that SACD is no better than CD (at its best). I remember Martin making a similar point at a hi fi show some years ago (although I think he was not commenting on the potential quality of SACD but merely saying that as implemented up to that time it did not rival CD (at its very best).

Given that most magazines only seem to compare CD with SACD when looking at a player which delivers both, it would be interesting to see whether SACD does now surpass CD at its best. It is unlikely that any other magazine would do this.

Thanks for excellent and well informed read.

Your reviews of the Roksan Xerxes.20 triggered some activity - I was considering a turntable upgrade at the time.

My system was LP12/Valhalla/Ittok/Adikt/Karik/Pekin/Wakonda/LK140/Kan. The LP12 and Kans were bought 25 years ago, the amplifiers more recently. I had heard the Keel and Ekos SE at my dealer, and already knew that the Lingo was better than my Valhalla. It was obvious that the Keel was a major upgrade, but required a commitment to Ekos or Ekos SE (whilst the Ittok will fit, its armrest won't). So - c.£4k for Keel, Lingo and second-hand Ekos - for that price I could also start again with another turntable.

So it was with great interest that I read the Xerxes.20 review and follow-up - a respected reviewer with extensive LP12 experience has declared it "clearly superior overall" to his own "curious (but undeniable effective)" LP12 setup. From another reviewer in another magazine, I would have taken this with a large dose of salt... but since I am an extremely discerning individual whose only subscription is to an authoritative journal with respected reviewers, independent of advertising pressure, I had to hear the Xerxes!

I first heard it at a show, where I assumed that the room or partnering equipment were masking its capabilities. At the same show I also heard a demo of the Funk firm LP12 mods, compared to a Keeled Lp12. The Funk mods sounded marginally better, but neither sounded really good, and were light years away from what I had heard at the Linn dealer.

A subsequent dealer demo of the Xerxes was hampered by unfamiliar amplifier and speakers, but appeared to show that whilst detail retrieval was better than my current LP12, the result was "sound" rather than "music" - and distinctly less involving. Was the Roksan properly set-up? It bore no resemblance to the expectations I had after reading your review. So, another demo at another dealer, this time with speakers I had heard before. This Roksan with top power supply/Tabriz (no Artemiz available)/Lyra Dorian was marginally bettered by a Michell Orbe/SME V/Lyra Dorian. However, neither of them made me want to tap my foot and keep listening.

Back to my Linn dealer - at last, music! I have now clearly understood that detail, ambience, sound stage and similar criteria are less important to me than a sense of engagement with a musical performance, and that I want to continue hearing it. And so I have ordered a Keel, bought a second-hand Ekos which has been traded against an SE, and will now save up for a Lingo. Delivery is imminent - there has been a slight delay on the Keel.

Does this mean I think you are wrong about the Xerxes? Not necessarily, even though I didn't hear the speed, timing and coherence you reported. You had the Roksan proprietor check the set-up, I had two dealers of questionable competence and/or motive. You were able to keep the rest of the system (including room) constant while evaluating, I had to try to allow for different rooms, speakers, cabling, amplifiers, arms and cartridges. You also (I hope!) spent much more time. Maybe all that I should learn from these experiences is that most demonstrations mislead because so many factors are variable. Maybe I should have had a home demo. Maybe I should have read less into your comments - I guessed that the benchmark of your "curious but effective" LP12 meant a standard roughly equivalent to a pre-Keel LP12 with Lingo/Ekos or Armageddon/Aro.

I did not make my choice on "sound" or "hifi". The Keeled LP12 made music, and I wanted to continue listening. It made the same emotional connection that my LP12 has always done, but with greater detail and coherence on complex music. The Xerxes (and Orbe) replayed greater detail than my LP12, but failed to engage musically/emotionally. The Xerxes' shortcomings may be intrinsic or the result of poor set-up and inapproprate ancillary equipment - but I did give it three chances, because of your review. In retrospect, the first hearing at the show was the best it sounded, and I strongly suspect that both dealers succeeded in sub-optimising (!) the Xerxes. I'm reasonably sure it's got more to give than I've yet heard, so I can't say absolutely that the Keel/Lingo/Ekos will sound better than a perfectly set-up Xerxes.20/top psu/Artemiz - but one is a known factor, the other a chimaera. I do know that when I get my LP12 back, it will have been set-up by a very competent dealer, and I will continue to enjoy vinyl for many years to come.

Now, when my wallet has recovered, what should I get to replace the Kans?...

whoopee!

Un unbiased, uncensored, tell it like its publication? Really?

Is this possible? I would like to hope so.

I discovered you guys at issue 4.....and echo the words of JERMY BALWIN and STUART GREENFIELD.

An extremely refreshing publication indeed.

Congratulations on your first year. I too have subscribed for a further three years. With regard to recent comments about older equipment, I am still using one of the original Kuzma Stogi tonearms (bought January 1988) and an Audiolab 8000PPA phono stage (bought March 1996). These products still produce excellent results and I am reluctant to "upgrade" without a significant improvement in sound quality/performance. Indeed, I now wish I had kept some of the gear I have traded in over the years (I put my first system together 37 years ago !!). Please keep up the good work.

Hi , Happy New Year and congratulations on a great magazine!

Dear HIFICRITIC, I have renewed my subscription of your great magazine. I love the concept of an advertisement free magazine and the in-depth articles.

I would love to have an article about how to "home rate" your own audio system. I read about image width, depth and height and would love to have some sample recordings that illustrate this, or the lack of it. Publishing a WAV or uncompressed FLAC torrent with recordings that subscribers can download and burn to CD would be very nice.

I have set up my system to be very good at jazz and it shows great PRAT. But I am aware of some [for my musical choice minor points] that can be improved. Most of all I'd like to improve the imaging.

An excellent first year for HiFi Critic, now established, it is the one and only Journal I can trust. I have just renewed for three years with confidence assured. One of the few good things the postie delivers!!

Thanks for making such a delightful magazine! And I especially enjoy that you dare to criticize. I love that. Not every Hi-Fi Component in the world is good or great. Thanks for letting us know about the real drawbacks about a product too.

Thanks a lot and keep up the good work!

Great article by Chris Bryant on the valve amplifiers, I have renewed.

Congrats on a good first year. HiFiCritic is my only subscription.

I have renewed. In your music reviews how about some high quality Jazz being reviewed. Someone once said ?It is music being constructed and composed in front of your ears? I don?t mean audiophile plink plonk, or the demented thrashing the s**t out of drum kit that is labelled jazz. Don?t get me wrong I enjoy ALL good music but your reviews tend to reflect Chris B?s listening preferences and is not balanced??. have a squint at HI FI + for example.

PS My wife is amazed that I pay £8.00 for a 50 page magazine and I am too!

Congratulations to all of you for reaching your first birthday. I doubt is many other magazines would publish an article such as Philip Newell?s ?A hard look at Audio cables.? I have often wondered how much of such matters are due to poor engineering, imagination or even dishonesty.

I future reviews would you care to comment on why the humble NE 5532 op amp still figures in Hi Fi gear, what benefit if any to be gained from surface mount components, and what ?short signal paths are about, or is the ?benefit? just another myth. I enclose my renewal.

Happy Christmas to all!

I have renewed for a further three years. Love the magazine, especially the latest issue and Philp Newell?s article. As someone who has had memorable visits to ATC and Naim and who is about to take the plunge and go active, it backs up what my ears have been telling me for a while.

Congratulations on your first year and keep up the good work.

Congratulations on the 1st birthday of HifiCritic and hope there will be many more.

highendcable.co.uk

Hopefully your team can keep up the good output even when faced with what seems like a sea of modern popular but inferior products. Sad though such reviewing can be it always helps the likes of myself to avoid expensive ?mistake purchases? based on a misplaced modernity drive and the notion that one has some spare cash.

It?s encouraging to see in writing that which I?d suspected a long time ? that often 10 years old amps etc are better sounding than the latest mid priced and occasionally high priced offerings.

If the public and industry can properly ?waken up? to this something might be done about it. I do however fear that the time for that awakening may be past as it seems only the major companies have the R&D clout to put forward and market ?progress? beyond the cosmetic face lift these days.

Just a short note to say how impressed I have been with all aspects of the magazine since its inception. I'll certainly be renewing my subscription when the time comes. In particular I was pleased to see the Metallica feature and Porcupine Tree review in your magazine. Whilst being of interest to rock fans like me it clearly demonstrates the balance and fair-mindedness that runs throughout the entire publication. I wish you every success in this endeavour.

If my car's engine has eight cylinders, but only five of them have pistons, I will be disappointed in its performance.

If a digital converter is in 24-bit format but its distortion and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) correspond to 15-bit performance, I will likewise be disappointed.

Some 24-bit converters indeed do not reach 15-bit performance. Some reach 15 but not 16. Full 17-bit SNR and distortion are uncommon, and 18-bit performance is rare. Better performance is rarer still.

This matters because people are discussing "24-bit sound" when they haven't even heard 18 bits. This would be like my discussing V-8 engine performance based on the engine described above.

It also matters because more bits are indeed required for noise-free reproduction at realistic levels.

(See Louis D. Fielder, ?Dynamic-Range Issues in the Modern Digital Environment? JAES Vol. 43, No. 5, May 1995. "A dynamic range of over 120 dB is found to be necessary in the most demanding of circumstances....")

In a personal communication, Mr. Fielder stated that up to 124 dB may be needed.

Using the formula dB dynamic range = 6.02n + 1.76, where n is the number of bits, and bearing in mind that you can't have a fractional bit, a range of 120 dB requires 20 bits; 124 dB, 21 bits. More bits yet are required for the analog-digital converter used for master recording, to allow for uncertainty in setting level. Twelve dB, or 2 more bits, is reasonable.

When I choose a converter for recording my own next piano concert, I will listen to the candidates, of course. But before I go to that trouble, I want to know I'm getting enough bits of performance, not just format. The pickings are thin.

Yours very truly, James Boyk, Los Angeles

PerformanceRecordings.com

Just finished reading the Class D article and it is a well reasoned and explained article with (what is unfortunately missing from other press) teeth. I actually have a chance to hear this first hand as an advocate of Class D is bringing his amps over today and I will be interested in how it fares against my McIntosh 275.

I notice that you have not reviewed McIntosh amps, do you have a view on their quality, is it all pipes and slippers?. Although Alvin was impressed and I respect his views. Anyway, an excellent magazine.

I suspect that you will receive a lot of criticism over the Class D 'bubble burst' but please carry on clearly stating your views.

Congratulations on your first year; something for everyone, almost? I suppose it?s right that you leave me wanting more. I think that Hi-Fi Critic got off to a good start and has gradually improved issue by issue despite annoying print delays for issues 4 and 5.

International High End products help demonstrate progress in audio so keep up with the market - please don?t be afraid to nail the duffers.

For me, renewal of my subscription is mandatory!

Your first two issues proved to be both informative and entertaining. I agree with Malcolm Steward that there is a trend toward music downloads, and that this can be a mixed bag. The availability of lossless compressed formats like MLP, ALC and FLAC should be welcomed by all audiophiles. To investigate FLACs sound quality, or lack thereof, I asked a DSL-equipped friend to download the files from throwingmusic.com.

He then burned a CD using Nero, which needed a plug-in as mentioned in the article. I took the disc home and compared it to an old CD by the Throwing Muses themselves (Hunkpapa, 4AD cad901). To my surprise, the LED signaling HDCD-encoded discs came on, raising hopes for great sonics. Sadly the sound of all tracks was disappointing, if not downright bad. The cymbals had the annoying 'frying pan' sizzle of early digital recordings. Kristin Hersh's vocals were quite scratchy and the low frequencies a single mushy blob. The old 1989 CD had none of these faults. Maybe this is a result of the increased digital editing, rightly criticised by Tony Faulkner, but at least these tracks won´t persuade anyone to embrace downloads with higher bit-rates.

A second thought on the above: my Bow Technologies ZZ-Eight player has two separate digital filter stages, one for HDCD and another for normal discs. While the HDCD indicator went on, the relay switching between the filters did nothing. Might this be the culprit?

I also liked your feature on cables, which gave me some new technical insights on this theme.

But my favourite part were the rock music reviews in issue one. Nigel Finn's style of writing is as good fit to the music he likes and his way of describing them gives me an equally good idea what to expect. I liked five of the reviews so much, that I ordered the discs (Willard Grant would have been the sixth, but I already own enough of their previous releases).

I haven't read all the issue yet, but how good it is to have relatively long and thoughtful pieces. Interesting too to have a points system applied to cables. Prices still appear not to be closely related to the cost of design and manufacture, but I have to admit they can make a subtle yet remarkable difference even in my limited experience. Good luck!

I found the overall tone of the launch issue refreshing, and encouraging, in light of the advertorials that pose as serious audio magazines these days. I do hope you are able to take that honesty forward, and that you find ways to deal with hostile distributors and manufacturers.

As an aside, a big thank you to Paul, whose review of the K2 caused me to plunge headfirst, first into JBL Japanese market speakers, and now in full-on Asian audiomania. There is a resurgence of interest in vintage loudspeakers, horns and valves in general, with more and more enthusiasts realising the benefits of looking backwards to move forwards. With the Chinese valve suppliers making serious inroads, I would love to see some coverage of the Asian scene.

The fact remains that a large amount of US kit is built and voiced around very different acoustics to those encountered in the typical suburban British household. With ever decreasing living spaces and ever increasingcosts, the UK and Japanese markets seem more and more alike in their requirements for serious audio. The K2 is an excellent example. The US market would demand an extra half octave of extension in any loudspeaker of that size. I use 4338s soon to be replaced by TAD's big 15's with f3's around 45hz. Remarkable results.

Enough ramblings from the keyboard of a very happy music lover. Thanks for the guidance and good luck with the new publication.

Just spent several hours with your first issue. Outstanding. A welcome sea-change that will appeal to the true enthusiast. I wish your venture continued good fortune.

The first edition of your new journal is awaited with keen expectation. Your intention not to accept advertising is indeed noble, but begs the other pertinent question concerning links with the trade - manufacturers and importers.

How will you choose which equipment to review and how will you get hold of it? The point being will YOU pay them or will THEY pay you. You see the point. This link needs to be transparent as well.

Further, if you give a duff review of (say) an AR amp, will AR ever lend you another? How will you keep the equipment review side of the business going, since it is unlikely that fully independent objective reviews of equipment will always be positive for any one supplier or importer? So, over time, you may well upset them all!

And, what about the associations of writers with other journals? They, hardly, can be expected to jeopardise their full careers in the name of the odd independent critical (in the negative sense) review for HIFICRITIC. I am not a nay-sayer, it's just that there are so many twists and turns in these relationships that simply refusing advertising won't break all links with the trade, much as we would like it to.

On the other hand, we your new readership will probably demand that you are fully independent. There's a further conundrum for you to address. However, we are with you all the way and good luck! [Should keep me in Editorials for a few issues - Ed.]

I really enjoyed the first issue. And I am inspired by your efforts to provide some feedback. I subscribed because I liked the idea of an audio publication devoid of advertisements. I agree that ads do not, of themselves, lead to corruption, however the impression is clearly there. I am a longtime subscriber to Stereophile, and will continue to be, but the incessant advertising of equipment reviewed in the issue I am reading makes me pause and wonder.

So here's to a publication devoted to, and supported by, audiophiles. A publication destined (hopefully) to become a strong voice advocating for audiophiles everywhere as we pursue the enjoyment of our hobby.

Some comments and my personal wish list for the future: I am always looking for ways to improve the equipment/system that I currently own. New equipment is wonderful, but optimization of what you have is where the fun really begins in this hobby. Towards that end I hope you take a hard look at tweeks and simple diy ideas that can be inexpensively implemented and are backed up by real audio science.

I liked the article on cables (cryo comments were especially intriguing), and look for more in this area. Comments on vibration control, contact enhancement, power conditioners, room treatments to name but a few would be very informative and helpful.

New equipment is wonderful but there's a lot of older gear which is still very good and available at excellent prices on the used market. For example, Martin's article on the new Quads was excellent, but I would have liked to have seen even more comparisons with the older 63s as well as the 989/9, both of which are available cheap on the used market.

How can users of this older gear improve what they have to bring performance closer to the state of the art? In my opinion coverage of good old gear serves the audiophile community well, as it allows newcomers and folks on restrictive budgets to get good sound for relatively little money, and for those who like to live on the bleeding edge, it helps support a vibrant used equipment market.

Pictures and print were good. I always like to see pictures of both front and back of gear under review. HiFi+ might be better in the production/gloss department, but your publication does the job adequately. For some equipment an internal picture (with the 'top off') can be most informative, and I would hope you would consider adding this when appropriate.

I listen to CDs, but vinyl is still the medium of choice for the serious audiophile. Reviews of new releases as well as older LPs would be very useful. I like the rating system used by Hifi+ and Stereophile, where recording quality is viewed independently of musical quality. I love music, but I am first an audiophile!

Digital equipment particularly high resolution digital recording - is also of considerable interest. I very much liked the article on download formats. I hope this is continued with information about high resolution music servers (no MP3 please!). In my main system I use an Alexis Hard Disk recorder, and find the reproduction from the hard disc superior to burnt CDs.

I don't think I am alone in making this observation. A hard disk-based music server which can store CD quality audio as well as even higher resolution recordings of LPs is in my future, and I suspect in the future of many serious audiophiles.

I also hope you start an online community for subscribers. I don't wish to be unreasonably elitist but I find it much more profitable to listen and respond to other seriously committed audiophiles without intrusion by naysayers and BOSE owners. Those who support this publication should be a rather select group who could benefit greatly from online contact with like-minded enthusiasts. For the true audiophile, it's much, much more, than just the music!

I hope your efforts prosper. It's about time that critics were free from the self censorship imposed by having paying advertisers to think about.

Perhaps I'll even start to take critics seriously again, although that would require you guys to restore my respect for critics. Almost impossible after reading hi-fi mags' for over 40 years, and watching various fads develop, most of which forgot about reproducing a musical sound.

Recommended products (especially CD Players) often just produced sounds that gave me a headache after an hour or so. There's so much wrong with the hi-fi press that you have your work cut out to attract real enthusiasts, who for the most part have rejected it.

Congratulations on the first issue, received yesterday. Thought provoking, honest and informative - all we really need. Much appreciated music review section. Well done

I was initially pleased at seeing the introduction of a new HiFi magazine - especially one that does not rely on advertising for its base funding. I qualify the above when I saw with great dismay that Paul Messenger was involved.

Can you tell to what extent Paul will be involved in writing reviews for HiFi Critic? His inept and boring writing style coupled with a lack of musical reference points and courage in his convictions shines through his Stereophile and HiFi Plus contributions. If Paul wrote more reviews for the previously mentioned magazines, I would cancel my subscriptions. Sorry to go on but I feel strongly about this.

I guess if we're going to call ourselves HIFICRITIC.. - Ed

Congratulations. A brave move to start up another magazine, though I heartily commend it if the reliability of reviews and the listening conditions behind them set professional standards for the industry. I think professionalism in reviewing and retailing with a few notable exceptions has almost disappeared in the UK market, leaving buyers confused, cynical and disappointed.

The names behind this venture give one confidence.

I am delighted to see that there will be a consistent, comparative scoring system, devised by Martin Colloms, that will give readers a valuable indication of where a product stands in relation to its competitors. At last a "good" rating will have a meaningful relationship with other products at different price levels. No more knicker-wetting enthusiasm for £600 CD players that appear to outshine others at 10 times the price.