Anybody ever read an old digest called "The Sensible Sound"?

[JCOConnell]

Was is subjective like "stereophile" and "the absolute sound", or objective like "stereo review" and "audio" mainsteam magazines?

[Cyclotronguy]

It was very objective and tended to focus on mainstream products, very well done, IF they didn't like something they said so.

Cyclotronguy

[Rust]

I remember the magazine, published out of Canada IIRC. They were more of a subjective bent and they tended to frown upon the excessive hyperbole surrounding ultra expensive gear where it was felt a significant increase in price was not matched by the same in performance. Thus "sensible".

When the magazine stopped publishing, an attempt was made at a blog which apparently failed.

[Steve Lefkowicz]

It was out of Buffalo, NY. Seemed to think anything that cost more that what they had was a waste of money. I bought a few issues back in the 1980s and didn't care much for it. it should have been a much better magazine.

[MylesBAstor]

Steve pretty much hit the nail on the head. I had a subscription until 1980 when they proclaimed digital perfect. Published by John Horan, SS tended to focus more on entry level gear. Hard to call it objective since to my recollection, SS never published any measurements.But definitely anti-high end audio.

The music section never did much for me though. Didn't the infamous Howard Ferstler review for them? (denizens of (w)rec(k).audio.high-end.opinion will remember him.)

[JCOConnell]

were they like stereo review in that if a product has the same specs they just assume it sounds the same, or do they listen to it?

[Garth]

Never heard of the mag. Is the word SENSIBLE not a banned word on audio sites.

[JCOConnell]

Lol

[MylesBAstor]

At the very least oxymoron.

[tom_hankins]

My wife is still laughing over this

[GaryB]

were they like stereo review in that if a product has the same specs they just assume it sounds the same, or do they listen to it?

I subscribed for a while in the 80s and probably still have back issues sitting around the house somewhere.
They definitely listened to equipment, but as others pointed out, their mantra was cost effective audio. If TAS or Stereophile raved about something, odds were that they considered it overpriced and overhyped. I remember that they hated Audio Research gear. They liked things like high end japanese gear, equipment from Van Alstine, etc.. They weren't wrong about the japanese gear - I remember visiting Japan in 1985 - the dollar was worth 250 yen then compared to ~ 100 yen now. So Japanese gear was really a good deal.
They sometimes had recommendations for gear that I never heard about elsewhere that was actually pretty good. I seem to recall getting a japanese linear tracking direct drive turntable (Phase Linear?) based on their mention that was quite good.
---Gary

[Steve Lefkowicz]

As I've always been into "cost effective" audio, I should have liked them. I just didn't like their attitude or writing style. For example, though I focus on lower priced and high value gear in the articles I write, I don't dismiss the quality of the best gear even if it is really expensive. I might have issues with the pricing structure in high end audio, but I admire the quality of great gear regardless of its price. I understand that the speakers in the price range I cover simply won't equal what is available for 10 or 100 times the price. When I read Sensible Sound, I always got the feeling they felt the really expensive gear was just a ripoff.

[allenh]

Good post!

[mkuller]

$ensible $ound and John Horan. In the early 1980s I had a battle with him when he published something I wrote in the Northern California Audio Society newsletter a member had sent to him. He was an ass about it. Anyway the publication claimed to be observational in their reviewing (no measurements) but many of the writers were objectivists, like Howard Ferstler, who heard differences only up to a point. I thought the publication was a waste although I subscribed to every other underground audio publication I could find in those days.

[Steve Lefkowicz]

As Myles pointed out, Ferstler was another thorn in the side of rec.audio.highend...back in the day.

[MylesBAstor]

$ensible $ound and John Horan. In the early 1980s I had a battle with him when he published something I wrote in the Northern California Audio Society newsletter a member had sent to him. He was an ass about it. Anyway the publication claimed to be observational in their reviewing (no measurements) but many of the writers were objectivists, like Howard Ferstler, who heard differences only up to a point. I thought the publication was a waste although I subscribed to every other underground audio publication I could find in those days.

Hi Mike! Glad to have you aboard. For those who don't know Mike, we were colleagues at (what now seems almost distant memory) back at TAS many, many moons ago! Well when I joined TAS, Mike was one of the magazine's leading contributors! The NCAS newsletter IIRC was quite a little publication in its day and way ahead of its time, dealing modding equipment, listening experiences, etc. Memory might be failing me but you guys (wasn't it written by Garth Leerer?) published an article about how to modify DQ10s? Anyway, hope to see a lot more from you here!



Ha! I didn't know about you and Horan. (now it's just people printing private emails.) And Ferstler was know for his epic online battles with Steve Zipser, Fear3000 and some other audiophiles.

[mkuller]

Thanks, Myles. Actually I wrote all the NCAS newsletters including the DQ-10 mod article that TAS later published. I think Garth was still at DB Audio in Berkeley then.

[MylesBAstor]

I think I still have that issue in storage.

[1morerecord2clean]

I only read SS when I was shopping in Tower Records late 80s early 90s and they had a magazine area. Never bought a copy. I don't recall any bench tests at all. I think the litmus test was that as long as it wasn't wires or tubes and as long as it retailed for less than $2K it was good otherwise it was just high end mumbo jumbo. I ranked it with other publications like Hifi Heretic.

[Steve Lefkowicz]

Hi Fi Heretic was a much better publication that Sensible Sound. There were some great writers on the staff at HFH!

[1morerecord2clean]

Hi Fi Heretic was a much better publication that Sensible Sound. There were some great writers on the staff at HFH! Quote from Steve L

Guess I'm recalling HH incorrectly. Don't remember HH writers.

[Steve Lefkowicz]

Guess I'm recalling HH incorrectly. Don't remember HH writers.

Art Dudley, Judy Davidson, I believe Neil Levenson. Funny though I can't remember the guys' name who owned and published the magazine. I got my first published credits there too, though mostly as a photographer. I was Judy Davidson's technical/setup assistant (when she wrote for TAS, too). It was how I got to know Artie, leading to my writing for Listener.
I still have most of the issues in a box in storage somewhere.

[1morerecord2clean]

Art Dudley, Judy Davidson, I believe Neil Levenson. Funny though I can't remember the guys' name who owned and published the magazine. I got my first published credits there too, though mostly as a photographer. I was Judy Davidson's technical/setup assistant (when she wrote for TAS, too). It was how I got to know Artie, leading to my writing for Listener.
I still have most of the issues in a box in storage somewhere.

Well obviously I don't remember accurately here. Luv Art D's humor. He can make me LOL.