I received my back copies of the Audio Critic a couple of days ago. I've had time to only skim through most of the issues. Before I get into what I think about Peter Aczel and the magazine let me start off by saying that so far it's been entertaining and worth the $30. If you're interested in reading a different opinion than the norm then this fits the bill. Was it the best $30 I've spent in audio? Probably not. That honor would go to certain albums I have purchased at one time or another.

So what do I think? There is much in the magazine that can be debated and I'm sure would make for some very interesting threads. Way too much to put into one post. I'll try to summarize some of my thoughts below.

1) If $30 is too much for you to spend ("risk") on the magazine go to the link below and read Peter Aczel's "Ten Biggest Lies in Audio". Basically the magazine is these same points drilled in over and over again. This will give you a good idea what to expect.

2) As colinhester says below, the guy is harsh. He even goes so far as to list the people in the industry that he thinks are good people (white hats) and the people he thinks are bad (black hats). This I think goes a little too far. Basically Peter Aczel's attitude is "in your face". Normally this doesn't bother me but I do think Audio should be fun. The constant bashing of other magazines and industry personal gets tiring. Of course several of the people he lists as good people advertise in the magazine.

3) If all preamps and amplifiers sound the same then why bother to review them?

4) I was disappointed to see that there were advertisements in the magazine. I don't know why but I thought it was ad free. IMO as soon as a magazine takes advertising money any reviews contained in the magazine are all suspect.

5) The magazine does get you to re-think many things audio. This is the magazine's biggest positive. I don't agree with all he says but he is thought provoking.

So that's about all I have time for today. Overall I liked the magazine and thank Akhilesh for pointing it out to me. I am sure there are many hours of interesting reading yet to come.

• http://www.theaudiocritic.com/downloads/article_1.pdf#search=%2210%20biggest%20lies%20in%20audio%22

Glad you got $30 worth out of it. THe more you read it, the more sense it should make (or the more you'll hate it!)
-akhilesh

1.Different cable geometries do sound different from each other but not enough to survive more than a few minutes of "break-in", i.e., your brain processing the sound to conform to what sounds/feels good to you. Eventually, bad sounds good.

2. Tube amplifiers present, in general, different frequency response as to type, than transsitor amps. The differences in FR here are large enough to survive a great deal of "break-in".
2A. Topologies are much more audible than differences in driver tubes which have more audible differences than power tubes.
2B. Solid State Class "A" sounds quite different from Class *.* others

3. Digital sounds different from Analog. Waaay different frequency response and signal-to-noise and no amount of familiarity can cause one to sound like another. I don't have a preference for either. They both sound good in different ways when done right.

4.Blind testing is bad? It isn't possible to pick out differences in components with proper blind testing?
Where did Aczel do his military service? In the Artillery?

Back when I spent a lot of time at Hollywood Sound we would frequently A/B amps, pre-amps and sources w/o knowing which was "live" at the time. Not all that scientific but migosh, if you couldn't hear the difference between an Adcom and a Counterpoint or Melos or Conrad-Johnson ......

5. I agree with Aczel here, but like a lot of generalities it needs to be tempered by "if properly implemented" or some such qualifier.

6. Once again, Aczel is right. "Break-in" is your brain processing sounds to conform to what it already is pre-disposed to hear as good or bad. The very first moments of sound you hear from any component are what it really sounds like.If you don't believe me. Try this experiment.

Acquire a brand new compression driver, connect it to source/amplification and listen to it just sitting on it's box. First few minutes, very strange/bad. Continue to listen for a few hours.....

7. Bi-wiring is the single most phony "mainstream" tweak. 'Nuff said.

8.Power conditioners do sound different.
See 1. above.

9.I can't hear CD treatments either. But I can SEE them on DVD's.
Go figure.

10. Since I'm home today writing this 'cause I'm drinking 8 oz's of Sodium and potassium this and that every 15 minutes preparatory to another 'scope tomorrow I'm reminded that opinions are like assholes, everyones got one.

Excuse me while I go play Ass Trumpet.

"4.Blind testing is bad? It isn't possible to pick out differences in components with proper blind testing?
Where did Aczel do his military service? In the Artillery?

Back when I spent a lot of time at Hollywood Sound we would frequently A/B amps, pre-amps and sources w/o knowing which was "live" at the time. Not all that scientific but migosh, if you couldn't hear the difference between an Adcom and a Counterpoint or Melos or Conrad-Johnson ......"

-Are these all solid state amps?
-are they level matched?
-is it a double blind test or r u given subconscious cues by the test giver, who knows which amps ar being switched (that would be a single blind test).

In a few of the articles in his back issues, Aczel describes the conditions for blind testing, and one of them is level matchng to 0.01 db. Apparently this is very difficult to do. He claims that once amps with similar levels of distortion, freq response and damping factor are used, in a level matched scenario (0.01 db +/-) you really cannot distinguish them in a double blind test, provided they are not overdriven.
I haven't personally tried that, but I find it intuitive to believe. In other words, I buy it.
Of course, I still use SET amps, becuase, as I have said many a time< I LIKE the distortion & weird freq curves they produce.
Makes music sound more "natural" to me.
-akhilesh

As I mentioned above, I'm sure there will be many interesting debates as to whether Mr. Aczel is correct or not. I seriously doubt the people on either side could take the debate to conclusion where one side is correct and one side admits to being wrong. All I can do is give you my opinion. You will either agree or disagree. But because this is what I think these kind of message boards are for, I will give you my opinion on his ten biggest lies when I get a chance to write it down. As long as it doesn't turn into a name calling thing I will be more than happy to participate. Should be fun.

Thanks again for the recommendation.