Home Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

A clarification

>Do you just need extra time to comprehend posts, or is this a
>strategy of yours...you know, deliberately misinterpret a post to
>make your own point?

Apologies for not responding earlier to this. I was travelling back
from Utah where I had been working on another recording proiject and
had not had time to respond in the depth it deserved.

I had understood your criticism to devolve to the point that
whomsoever I choose to write about in Stereophile, there are many
others who, it could be argued, are equally deserving of coverage.
I agree with this, as it is undoubtedly true. But because this applies
to _everything_ I choose to publish as a magazine editor and because
there is no way _not_ to suffer this problem, I dismissed this
possible meaning of your criticism out of hand. Instead, I
concentrated on the other possible interpretation, which is that
you felt Tony Faulkner was not deserving of attention, something that
I felt confirmed by your subsequent comment that Tony was a
"mediocre" engineer.

> I never said Tony Faulkner does not deserve coverage. You can cover
> whoever you like.

If you are now clarifying that no, it was the first meaning, all I can
say is that is what editors do: we choose. And for every positive
choice we make about what to publish, there is a large amount of
possibly equally deserving people, products, and recordings who
are inevitably denied their place in the spotlight (at least this
time around). That, unfortunately, given the finite size of
magazines, is the way of the world.

And given yours and others' dismissal of our K622 SACD, I am somewhat
surprised by the violence of your condemnation, given that none of
you have heard it.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile



This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  VH Audio  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups


You can not post to an archived thread.