🚀 go-pugleaf

Be prepared for a footnote questioning your intellegence (or other qualities)
TAS rarely admits error.  (I found it extremly amusing last year when there
january issue didn't appear until march, then they apologized for it in the
next issue and promised that the january issue would be the last late one.
the issue containing the apology was itself one or two months late, going
by the cover date vs. its appearance at the newsstand.  I think magazines
should appear the same month they are dated, I don't like it when the
februrary issue is in my mailbox by the first half of december.  TAS and
stereophile are usually pretty good about matching up dates.)

TAS seems to think they are always right and usually letter writers with
other points of view get nasty footnotes.  They were asked in letters to
please quit the juvenile bashing of stereophile.  We only bash stereophile
because they bash us was the reply.  I have been reading both, and whenever
TAS is mentioned in stereophile, its polite.  Not so the other way around.
(in fact, i've never actually seen Sp bash TAS).  TAS is a little to far
on the subjective side for me.  I think that just because what I hear does
not show up in a measurement does not mean that it is not measurable.  I also
think that a lot of things which are not being measured affect sound.  I
prefer Sp to TAS in this regard.

Sorry this wondered off the subject.  I think its a good letter, just be
prepared to be stomped on by their footnote generator.

dave@csulx.weber.edu (ignore the header address, its probably wrong)