Conference cookie::notes$archive:cd_v1

    re: .0
    
    As my personal name suggests, this is bogus information without
    some basis for the statistics.  What criteria did CR use to determine
    these scores?  Were they reviewing _all_ CD players or just a certain
    price range?  How did features stack up?  etc., etc., etc.
    
    David.

    CR felt all the players sounded the same, so they ranked on
    features, convenience and resistance to skipping from vibration
    and damaged discs.
    
    No, they did not review all CD players - just what they felt
    was a representative set, excluding the high-priced models.  As
    usual, I find that they have interesting and useful opinions in
    how pleasant the products are to use in real life, and are
    less discriminating when it comes to actual performance.

    				Steve

    For those of you who think CR is crazy, they have been  issuing 
    such controversial results for years on all types of products. 
    Remember they are *Consumer* Reports and they are always looking
    for "best buys".  In the case of CD players where all players *do*
    already sound good (yes, some are better than others,but a $150
    CD player will blow away most $150 turnatables or cassette decks)
    then the features vs. price would be their only criteria.
    
    Face it, Sharp will sell alot of machines based on that article.

    Realistic?  You've got to be kidding!
    
    I disagree with Consumer Reports on this one.  How could an overpriced
    Radio Shack model, which is probably made by Sharp, be ranked higher
    than units made by Technics, which has 30% of the market?
    
    Two year ago, Consumer Reports rated the Technics SLP-3 (now SLP-500)
    as number 2, and a Sony model number 1.  I can't believe that Technics
    has fallen off the charts.
    
    I must confess my Technics bias.  But, I believe that Technics has
    EARNED their market share through a quality product.
    
    
    						-Paul
    

    re: .2
    
    Thanks Steve.
    
    re: .*
    
    I was just trying to get an angle on CR's report and NOT insinuating
    that the report was garbage.  Sorry if anyone took my .1 as a flame.
    
    Also, as I understand it, CR bases some if not all of their data
    on information supplied by *consumers*, thus the title.  What this
    means is if product X is junk, but (say) 75% of those buying X found
    it to be worth the money and simply marvelous, then CR will rank
    it highly.  Yes?
    
    David.

    Consumers Union, who publish Consumer Reports, do have annual surveys
    to get product and service information from members, but most of the
    data for their reports are gathered from controlled testing. However,
    that testing is frequently more in the nature of getting a sample of
    subjective responses to a product, rather than testing measurable
    qualities.  For example, when evaluating CD players, they are not
    doing bench tests to measure frequency response, wow and flutter,
    signal/noise ratio, etc.  Rather, they rely on a panel of users
    to rate the equipment on sound quality, features, ease-of-use, etc.
    
    They do occasionally devise unique test equipment for testing
    particular qualities, such as durability, of some products.
    
    In general, I find their ratings to be a good indication of how
    satisfied I'll be with many products, but I am not always swayed
    by their evaluations of "high tech" and electronics products. I
    was particularly disappointed that their recent ratings of VCRs
    only rated picture quality based on the slowest (SLP, for VHS) speed.
    Pre-recorded VHS tapes are always recorded at SP speed, and some
    players have different heads, and hence different picture quality
    characteristics for these speeds.

    Re: .5
    
    No - most of their product evaluations are done by CR staffers
    in their laboratories.  For certain products, they do enlist the
    help of readers in trying the products over a long period of time
    - a report on pantyhose was a recent one.
    
    As for Technics - I don't have the issue in front of me, but it
    would appear that they simply didn't test a tabletop Technics
    model (that surprises me, as they indicated that Technics is
    one of the popular brands).  I'll have to check it again.  They
    DID compare the Technics SL-XP7 (I think) against the Sony D-7
    and found the Technics lacking in several regards.
    
    But a reminder - by and large, and especially for this report,
    CR did not take audio performance into account at all.  For the
    majority of readers who would take a CR review seriously,
    all CD players DO sound alike.  (Actually, they sound pretty much
    alike to me too.)  Those who are picky about technology and
    purity would be reading one of the specialty magazines anyway.
    CR can't afford the space to do the detailed reporting for all those
    products that a magazine such as Digital Audio devotes to just one
    player.
    
    If people who don't have any better sources of information buy the
    Sharp player instead of the more expensive Sony, who are we to say
    they are wrong?  If the player does what they want it to, sounds
    good enough to them, and the price is right - so what?
    
    					Steve

    Ok, now I have the issue in front of me.  They did test two
    Technics models, the SL-P310 and SL-P110.  (They also tested
    A Panasonic SL-P3620 - why does Matsushita compete with itself?)
    
    The SL-P310 got a rating of 79, the SL-P110 got 76.  Both the
    Technics models were rated "much worse than average" on
    disc-warp immunity (a dubious test, as CDs are hard to warp, but
    some players did better than others on this).  Also, for both
    models, they noted the following disadvantages:
    
    	"On Search, sometimes clipped first note of a track"
    	"Drawer sometimes jammed disc in player (but did not
    	 damage disc)"
    
    The SL-P310 also got hit with "Single button gets you Scan
    (within a track) and Search (track to track), an inconvenience
    that may get you one when you want the other"
    
    Frankly, I'm baffled as to how they assigned their ratings
    value, because if we look at the top two models, both ranked
    95, the Sony rates better judgements on three of the
    categories (disc warp immunity, track locate speed and features)
    than the Sharp.  The text says that the ratings reflect differences
    in operation under less-than-ideal conditions.
    
    All in all, I feel that the article serves as an unbiased,
    no-nonsense guide to CD players for the uninitiated, and clues
    all of us into little nits that could be annoying if we had to
    live with them day-to-day.
    
    				Steve

    
    My opinion on CR is that they provide a useful service to people
    who are not <mumble>philes. They provide a useful measure of
    return-for-the-money that someone who is not looking for a state
    of the art whatever will find satisfactory in performance.
    
    When they do their auto issues, they don't rate Ferrarris, but
    most of their readers aren't shopping for Ferraris, either...
    
    

    I find CR to be invaluable for all kinds of shopping (audio, video,
    cars, appliances) mostly because, during their testing, they think
    of things that I never would have thought of that probably would
    have turned out to be annoying!!  For example, how easy a VCR is
    to program doesn't really affect it's performance, but it can sure
    make a difference in how much fun it is to use; that is the kind
    of stuff that they do the best.
    
    I agree that <mumble>philes should get their technical info elsewhere,
    but for ergonomic testing and general info no one does it better
    than CR.  <Mumble>philes are people, too...
    
    				Vernon
    

    Has CR ever come out and identified their testers and their biases?
    
    One thing that bothers me whenever I read CR is that I get the
    impression that the guy who tests the Nikon camera in the morning
    is the same guy who tests the Waring blender in the afternoon.
    
    They also seem to assign strange priorities (20% of our evaluation
    was based upon the color purity of the faceplate.  In this regard
    the Realistic easily outranked the Technics because of its deeper
    black appearance.  :-)  ).
    
    > R.Michael
    

    Re: .11
    
    CR does not identify their testers, nor should they.  Nor have
    I ever seen them claim to rank based on frivolous stuff as you
    suggest.  They clearly don't look as closely at performance as some
    of us might, their audience is those who don't really know much
    about (whatever).  For most people, all CD players DO sound alike,
    and thus it is reasonable for CR to judge players on other aspects,
    such as how well they cope with adverse situations.
    
    I do wish that CR would provide some detail as to how they calculate
    their numerical ratings scale.
    
    				Steve

    re. 12  CR does tell you how they come to these conclusions, But
    you have buy their book to do it. They tout it in the section
    along with special booklets on drugs, vcr ratings, the best tombstone
    for the buck etc...
    
      I found the information in the test excellant compared to the
    vcr and tv issues in the past couple of months. In those, the 
    information overload was severe(3-5 pages). They should make the results 
    available in a 1-2-3 format floppy and let consumers come
    up with their own ratings to find their best buy (What an idea,
    i'll have to send it in along with this years survey, the one 
    they ask for 8 bucks extra to process)!
    
      To me the best part is not the features tables, it is the repair
    ratio ussally at the end of the test. I refuse to buy anything
    that is not engineered to last. If everyone did this, maybe the
    manufacturers would wake up.
    
       To most people, the review is just fine. Yesterday my wife hands
    me a copy of some CD magazine that just blew me away. I didn't
    understand a lot of what they were talking about (nothing new for
    me!). I mean what is the sound characteristic "boxiness" mean? For
    the average joe trying to buy a cd machine they will like , CR fills
    its niche perfectly.
    
    john
                                      

    "Boxiness" is the sound the CD drawer makes when it's openned.

    Why is everyone so down on Sharp?  I have two of them.  They work
    great.  They sound great. Better yet, one cost $116 and the other
    one was free.  Sounds 1579% better than my old record player.

    
    If you want to know what to buy, I think a trip to the AUDIO notes
    will be more worthwhile than CR.  As a general guide to household
    items they are fine.  If I want a toaster, CR gets the look.  But
    I wouldn't buy any consumer electronic item based on their review.
    You should either go to the specialty magazines such as Video Review,
    Stereophile and Photography for the expert opinions or find a friend
    who really knows that particular hobby.  And your fellow
    noters in AUDIO know a hell of a lot, and they're free.  
    
    As far as the Sharp owner, if your old turntable was of the Garrard,
    BIC, 99$ Technics, etc.  then your Sharp CD will knock their socks
    off.  But it will sound like crap compared to a quality table such
    as the Linn or Rega Plannar.  I think what the folks are saying
    is that there are better cheap CD players than the Sharp and many
    others.  Try Magnavox's new 47X line.  Cheap and very good.
    
    Regards, Jim