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
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???
Joe: I agree that Kal's writing style is different than some of the other writers that we are used to reading in Stereophile. Having said that, i think that Kal tries to convey specific ideas more than he worries about making his words "float off the page", etc... It is always nice when you can find someone that can do both "convey" AND "entertain". Unfortunately, most that are good at "entertaining" aren't quite as good at "conveying" hard-core data and vice-versa. You have to remember, Kal is a Professor and he probably writes in the same manner that he teaches i.e. "just the facts".

As to your comments about having multiple people reviewing similar types of equipment, try taking a look at this Stereophile based thread over on AA. Pay close attention to my responses to "Grooves" as i say much the same thing that you do here.

I find it interesting that Mr Fremer, Kal and John Marks have all responded to this Agon / AA thread, but we've not heard a peep from the "head honcho". I would really love to hear his thoughts on the suggestions that i've made as to how to stream-line and "clean up" the reviewing process. I'm not holding my breath though... Sean
>
I find it interesting that several responses to this thread and to others have commended Audiogon for offering consumers the opportunity to give their non-biased reviews of their equipment. One post above reads, "Listen to the folks here on AudioGon who paid good money out of their pocket for their gear and have no vested interest."

I can't help but wonder, however, if those reviews are truly non-biased or without a vested interest. I find that there is a natural and understandable tendency for a buyer to support the gear that he or she has purchased. We do not like to believe that we may have made a mistake. Or, if we recognize that we made a mistake, we may not want to undercut the market value of our own equipment with a negative post, just when we are contemplating putting that equipment up for resale on Audiogon. In any event, like manufacturers, like distributors, like retailers, like the magazines, we all have a vested interest of some sort. I do not believe, however, that this in and of itself makes a review invalid. Every review by its nature is biased, whether of financial bias or simply based on the life experiences of the reviewer. The trick is to recognize the limitations as well as the value of every review.