Sterophile's not so nice review of Bryston

Reviews are about entertainment and money folks.

I've been saying this for years and it's never been more evident. As a matter of fact one of their staff called me out on this during a phone call. I stood my ground.

With all of the dirt, politics, and money in play I wouldn't trust any of these clowns reviewing a hearing aid for grannie.

Gotta agree with Cmalak. One way magazines get around it is to pre-screen products and then only review those products that are going to get either a positive, or very positive, review. Since the advertisers primarily fund the magazines, and certain readers are going to complain either way, I see no upside to publishing negative reviews. In reading reviews, I look just as hard at the compatabiity of the partnering review equipment, and the reviewer's listening preferences, listening room and experience with similar equipment, as I do at what they say. My approach is to read the magazines for entertainment, take the reveiws with a grain of salt, and base final buying decisions on my own ears and listening preferences.

So who's going to start up the audiophile version of Consumer Reports, where no advertising is allowed?

Audiophile Consumer Reports? Take the subscription cost for CR and multiply that by the ratio of their subscriber base to that of Stereophile or TAS. Think it will fly?

Kal

Mitch2 hit it on the head. Want a bad reveiw? Just look at what pieces of gear from well-known manufacturer's don't ever get reveiwed by any of the big magazines. Probably a reason that they don't, since most reviewers attend the big electronics shows and smaller events around the country where they listen to gear and, by their own admission, screen what they're going to look at in more detail.

So, the Bryston amp must have peaked somebody's interest, and then it didn't pan out under closer scrutiny. Interesting, because other Bryston gear has been receiving rave reviews lately, especially their small integrated, CD player and DAC. In any case, I read the original review and Manufacturer's rebuttle with some interest, thinking this must be have been a real dilema for the editors.

I usually think that if you want to know what reveiwers really think, look at what they end up buying for themselves. I don't always agree with their choices, but at least you know where they stand on that particular piece.