Stereophile's refusal to review more low

While I do think there is a bias towards reviewing the "cost no object" products of some manufacturers, I must admit that I do find reviews of lower priced gear as well. Perhaps they run these letters in an attempt to passify those of us who are not in a position to purchase the more costly gear. I doubt that the average subscriber of that publication has the financial muscle to buy much of it. I hold a subscription, and have reconsidered time and again whether I'll renew it or not for the very question you have asked. There is something fishy going on insofar as that I can't really put a finger on exactly why they continue in this way. One cool thing about the current state of affairs-
it allows those of us who are smart enough to wait until it appears on Audiogon in the form of "used gear at used prices" to get familiar with the expensive stuff until we can make educated buying decisions at a fraction of the original retail price!

It is fairly evident that Stereophile has little interest in supporting the audio industry as a whole and favors the large audio "conglomerates" who advertise heavily with them like Krell, Madrigal etc. These "conglomerates" tend to rely on the magazine for corroboration that their overpriced equipment is worth the price. High prices results in lots of advertising which results in favorable reviews which results in high sales. It now seems that Madrigal has a review in each issue! Yet, other stuff which has been generally recognized to be at the top of the list never gets reviewed by Stereophile. Ever notice how the cover page looks more and more like an ad for whatever is in the issue? They have just about lost all credibility. The only reason that I continue with my subscription is that they are one of the few (if only) which measures the equipment.

For budget end gear (under $1500 per piece) I find Hi-Fi Choice very good. Very detailed and well thought out reviews.

Stokjok, I think a reality check is in order here. Stereophile consistently gets flak for reviewing mid-fi or "consumer" level gear. Case in point: their recent covers of the Denon AVR-4800, and the $600 computer speakers(I forget the brand at the moment). The audiophiles scream bloody murder if they are contaminated by the sight of "low end junk", the "regular guy" type reader wants more reviews of equipment they can afford. They can't be all things to all people, but they come about as close as possible in my opinion. They have a consistant and logical paradigm, if it sounds good, they'll write about, whatever the cost or format. Yes, I think that a few improvements are in order such as not including 3 1/2 year old, outdated components in the "recommended" components list simply because they haven't reviewed some of the newer pieces . Just don't include it. Why have a discontinued 1998 Class AAA DVD player that has no progressive scan, and is outperformed by at least 3 different DVD players that I can think of. Even though they can't review everything, and it is nearly impossible to get groups of similar gear in one place at the same time, I think that greater efforts could be made to compare current choices. As for their advertisers, I think that their critics should grow up. I don't care if I see a BMW ad or an ad for high end oatmeal, if it supports the magazine by increasing their budget, I get to subscribe at about a dollar an issue. How can anyone complain at that price? Read what you like and use the pages you don't like to line the puppy's poop box.