Collective letter s to Stereophile


Why Stereophile magazine reviews (favors) only certain manufacturers? Mostly are already big corporations and established themselves in audio arena. Cary (almost every amp reviewed)Krell even get spotlight for the first speakers they ever made, that's FAIR! Mark Levinson and CJ same Musical Fidelity, B&W every single speaker, so as Revel and Dunlavy and Thiel to a certain degree but still in the spotlight. Ocasionaly one or two obscure companies make debut on the pages (usually scapegoats for the bad reviews). Where are the loudspeaker companies, here in the North America, that already established themselves as competative and superb performers? Meadowlark Audio, Coincident, Talon, AVALON, Tyler, Nova etc..! How about Spendor, Herbeth, Living Voice from UK, JM from France and many many more that do not even get mentioned?

Your take on this? Thanks!
data
Some insightful comments, some that are pathetic and stupid. Speaking personally, not counting cables, I own (meaning I BOUGHT) everything in my system except what I am currently reviewing--and I have the DCS stuff here for a few extra months while I complete another review.

. I don't keep a roomful of "loaner" equipment and how wonderful it is to be lumped in with those who may do this by the more thoughtless and foolish posters on Audiogon! I love the poster who called Stereophile a "joke" but couldn't be bothered to elaborate.

And consider this: since I can buy anything out there at wholesale (one of the perks of this job, which no-doubt some of you will hold against me), the only reason I own something and use it in my system is because I LIKE IT.

Frankly, I don't pay attention to the advertising in Stereophile and it has no effect on what I write. I laugh every time I see one of the handful of cynical idiots here, who post their conspiratorial conjectures. I think back to those posts and to seeing the VPI TNT on the cover of Stereophile and awarded product of the year a few years back, when in fact VPI has NEVER advertised in Stereophile, and is hardly alone in being honored and reviewed without advertising. Most of the people posting these "advertising drives reviews" posts have never taken the time to correlate the two because if they had, they'd find out how wrong they are. But, hey, why let facts get in the way of prejudice?

Frequently a company begins to advertise after getting some good coverage. And that's no guarantee of continued good coverage. I am accused of writing frequently about Musical Fidelity. I plead guilty. They make great products that are reasonably priced. Last time I checked that's precisely what audiophiles are looking for. I've also given NEGATIVE reviews to Musical Fidelity products, but why let facts get in the way conspiracy theories!
So little time, and so many products. I agree with you Grooves, but I would also like to see more variety products reviewed in your mag.
For the record, "Grooves" is Michael Fremer of Stereophile. He is responding to this thread through a link that i provided in a discussion that was taking place over at AA.

Mike, as far as your comment about "negative reviews of MF gear" goes, what product was this and what issue was this printed in ? I think that we may have different ideas about what a "negative review" consists of.

As to "getting lumped in with" reviewers that "hang onto" gear for extended periods of time, that was a generic comment that i made applying to those in the industry in general. I know that some reviewers are more ethical / timely than others. As a side note though, the suggestions that i made over in AA regarding Stereophile and other audio rags following a set procedure in terms of the reviewing process might go a LONG way towards smoothing ruffled feathers AND making the subscribers happy. Sean
>
OP wrote: Meadowlark Audio, Coincident, Talon, AVALON, Tyler, Nova etc..! How about Spendor, Herbeth, Living Voice from UK, JM from France and many many more that do not even get mentioned?"

Of the 10 brands specifically mentioned, I can recall, from casual memory, at least 4 that have been reviewed. Also, of the 10, at least 3 have not responded to my inquiries about a review. There are many reasons why a product is not reviewed and some of these have to do with manufacturer's decisions (or lack, thereof).
I am not sure why Fremer didn't use the handle has previously used on this forum, but if he is going to officially be "Grooves" around here, that's fine.

I actually have to give Stereophile a hand on some recent reviews they have published. First, is the current Audes Jazz loudspeaker review by Kalman Rubinson. Excellent work by Kal, a reviewer I have not always found interesting in the past. The others are most of what Art Dudley has put out in the past few months. What a breath of fresh air! It's nice to have multiple opinions on analog equipment. Stereophile should never have one writer be the only person who reviews a particular class of equipment. I mean, think about it, if any of us were "the whatever guy" there would be just as many people who disagree with our opinions as not. Having a balance is definitely a good thing.

If Sam Tellig ever thinks of doing something else, they have a super writer in Art ready and able to step right into his shoes.

One thing I wonder about is why Sam Tellig has written about the Sony SACD player for months on end now without an "official review" which he hinted at previously.

And a question, is Paul Bolin actually Jonathan Scull???