TAS. The Absolute Sound?

I got seriously into Audio about 25 years ago and for many years regarded TAS and Sterephile as unimpeachable sources.  Gradually I realized that as knowledgeable as the writers may be, there is a tremendous amount of subjectivity in Audio, and there is also a need to sell magazines and keep their advertisers happy.  I particularly lost respect for TAS when they became the cheerleaders for MQA.

  Regardless, the value of these magazines is to alert one to technology development.  The internet now can perform the same function.  It would be interesting to see if these magazines survive another 25 years 

TAS has zero credibility at this point, they are just a marketing tool for advertisers. In my opinion Tom Martin is a complete blowhard.  Their reviews have very little content that is reliable or trustworthy.  

Tom Martin comes across to me as do the salesmen in some high end shops.

Prior to the appearance of TAS in 1973, J. Gordon Holt (who started Stereophile in 1962) was the only hi-fi reviewer assessing the quality of components based on their sound, rather than test bench measurements. How he rated components included the consideration of price-to-performance ratio. He never used the term "high end", that was introduced into the hi-fi lexicon by Harry Pearson.

Pearson and his TAS staff focused on components which advanced the state-of-the-art, regardless of the cost required to accomplish that goal. We soon saw the emergence of companies whose products cost far more than had hi-fi up to that point. Companies such as Levinson and Wilson Audio.

When in 1973 I bought my first "high end" system, the Audio Research SP-3 pre-amp sold for $595, the Dual 50 power amp $695, the Dual 75 $995, and the Magneplanar Tympani T-I loudspeakers $995/pr. Those prices were not all that much more than mass market products.

When Levinson introduced their first pre-amp, it was---iirc---priced about double that of the ARC SP-3. And the price race (to the top) was on! It seemed as if high end companies were very interested in finding out just how much audiophiles were willing to pay for gear.

It’s gotten rather out-of-hand, wouldn’t you say?

And I think that Stereophile has even less cred. than TAS. Point is that TAS doesnt even claim, really, to be an untainted source. Stereophile does. The only issues I read from either of these sources and the ones I get for free at the various shows, but last time I looked TAS seemed much more apt to review products outside of the the small circle. The business model is flawed and so are the magazines. 

@jomace. Thanks for info. I agree about the Guide and always used to buy it. Will again now. I was shocked- and put off-  at the cost of the dac; therefore questioned relevance. Having gone through the full presentation of the room development I appreciate what I learned; and respect the accumulated expertise and effort that went into it. I respect attention to detail. The speakers just happened to be those under review. Knowledge is power and I expect to gain some by reading about stereo/ hi-fi again.