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
I basically agree with your comments but you should remove Dunlavy from your list of "preferred companies". Believe me, there is a LOT of "funny" circumstances around what took place with the SC-IV. Besides that, how many Dunlavy products have been reviewed compared to Musical Fidelity, Harmon International, etc ??? I only know of the SC IV off the top of my head and they demoted that one as it is. Sean
>
I too would love to see a wider range of equipment reviewed, especially stuff that's hot in the market. Why, for example, no review of some of the better one-box cd players by Audiomeca, Audio Aero, or EMC (and I don't mean a crummy Tellig review)? On the other hand, the magazine is extremely resource limited -- it's getting thinner and thinner due to lack of advertising, as most consumers are now into home theater. Also, Stereophile may avoid reviewing equipment made by small companies with limited distribution, because a bad review could put the company under, and a good review could do the same if the company can't keep up with the demand created, thereby angering prospective buyers.
I also agree with all points made.That is the main reason I bought a computer to get real info from real people.Once I went online I stopped buying rags like the Magazine mentioned any many others like it. Thorman
Hi all,
I would like to point your attention to the situation where a component is dropped from the recommended list with the explanation "Has not been reviewed in a long time OR no follow-up performed".
Whose fault is this? Can't Stereophile go out and purchase the component to do a follow-up? I feel the real reason is that manufacturer probably asked for component to be returned after a lengthy "borrowing" period OR manufacturer refused to provide a FREE "long term loan" (basically gifting it to the reviewer). I recall the case of Sam Tellig selling one of the McIntosh amps (which may have been gifted or sold for pennies on dollar to him) and then while he is reviewing another later amp from McIntosh he manages to wangle another unit (of amp he sold) from McIntosh. No wonder that the subsequent review of amp was so complimenatry. BTW, the above incident was quite recent, in last year or so. Anyway, I only read rge S'phile to get specs of units, industry news and the blubbering attempts by Atkinson to defend his stable of reviewers. Note especially JA standard responses like - I too have heard component A in similar conditions as (fill reviewer name here) and feel that so and so was right on in his assessment! BTW, last issue had 3 speakers with average price of almost 30,000 - the economy must be doing better than I thought if the market for these is healthy!