In Reply to: Regaining credibility. How about covering some "classic" used gear? posted by edta on June 21, 2003 at 22:28:00:
I don't accept your premise and I regret your bad manners.My readers email me all the time. They don't have any issues with my integrity or authoritativeness.
I do not cover used "classic" equipment as a rule because of my own experiences and experiences of others. Buying used "classic" equipment is very analogous to fixing up used "classic" cars. You can do it for love, but unless it is a Corvette or a Porsche, you can't do it for money--or get your money's worth.
Case in point. Buy some malfunctioning QUAD ESL 63s for, say $500. By the time they are fixed, you have $2,000 in them and are totally under water.
Large Advents by this time probably need re-coning.
I write for music lovers who want to hear the music in natural fidelity. I do not write for equipment hobbyists or fetishists, and there are already enough magazines that cater to those tastes.
Cordially,
John
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- No credibility gap here. - John Marks 06/22/0306:39:06 06/22/03 (8)
- Yes, you can't make $ on classic gear can you? - edta 19:10:06 06/22/03 (7)
- Precisely: I do care about audiophiles - John Marks 07:39:28 06/23/03 (2)
- I've tried to read your columns. Artful dodger? - edta 20:29:42 06/23/03 (1)
- That's OK! - John Marks 21:05:04 06/23/03 (0)
- A well stated, cogent argument... - longtimequadowner 20:47:46 06/22/03 (2)
- Re: A well stated, cogent argument... - mauimusicman 04:45:21 06/24/03 (0)
- Stereophile lost its soul when it accepted advertising - edta 20:23:13 06/23/03 (0)
- BTW, 12K profit fixing up a 69 Camaro - edta 19:23:23 06/22/03 (0)