"...and I don't take any advertiser money..."

I grew up in the UK with the Gramophone magazine. Its primary purpose is reviewing classical music, first on records, then on digital media.  It has been going for over 100 years.

It devoted a couple of pages per issue to reviewing playback equipment.  There was rarely a bad review, but this was dictated by space, not by money.  The audio editors simply did not waste their valuable space on second rate equipment.

Good performances were usually compared with other good performances.  When the same recording kept coming up as a comparison piece, you could expect it to be among the best.  Same with audio.  And when they disclosed what they provided their top reviewers with, in order to judge top recordings, you knew it was good.

This was helped by detailed technical discussion of the reasons why a piece of gear achieved its results.

Of course, the results do not translate well across the North Atlantic, primarily because relative prices are influenced by import duties and tariffs but also because room sizes tend to be very different.

I trust this guys opinion and how he conducts his very thorough reviews. 
http://erinsaudiocorner.com

@artistx 

Nice review site.  Thanks!

OK, I have to step in here as there are a lot of cynical misconceptions stated. I once sold audio gear, non-commissioned, but always looked to build repeat business. I was the #2 salesperson in the shop (behind the manager) because I knew what I was talking about and could help the customer find a system that fit his/her needs and budget.

For the past 30 years, I've been a reviewer, for whom, I won't say. I can't speak for all reviewers but I work to specific standards. Have I received freebies? Yes - a few, but mostly minor things such as low-to-mid--range phono cartridges. Do I get to keep the review gear forever? No - I work on a roughly two-month schedule and the gear always goes back. Do the manufacturers/distributors pay me for the reviews? No - I'm paid by the publication only. Must they advertise? No - Selection of the gear to review is strictly up to me. Do I take advantage of "accommodation pricing"? Yes - but not all my system gear was acquired that way. There's a fair amount I bought retail or used. Do I play favorites? No - If I get a piece in for review that just doesn't cut it, you never see the review. I won't waste my time or yours with a bad review. I stick to gear worth reviewing. 

Any questions/comment?

@realgoodsound 

Thank you for clarifying the money aspect of the manufacturer / reviewer relationship.

What about the information aspect? Reviewers sometimes appear to be repeating manufacturers' marketing materials or technical claims without too much scrutiny.

Here is a great example:

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/bs-meter-is-pegged

If this can happen in Stereophile magazine... what is your take on what happened there? A reviewer unschooled in computer science, passing a manufacturer's claims along no matter how misleading / spurious?

Certainly no one expects hifi reviewers to be experts in each of the numerous fields of craft and science involved in the making of hifi gear.

But isn't it fair to expect reviewers to seek the advice of experts when their own expertise is lacking?

Also, isn't copy fact-checked before publication, especially at a respected publication like Stereophile?

Just curious about these things. The appearance of coziness between manufacturers, publications, and reviewers discredits everyone involved and casts doubt on the reviewed products.

Well, you invited comments

What are your thoughts?