Stereophile's refusal to review more low

Someone sent me this thread and I find it "interesting." I hope that folks who think Stereophile only reviews expensive gear listen better than they read. If you go through the mag you'll find products at all price points in most issues. I get accused of reviewing only expensive stuff, but I've reviewed inexpensive turntables, cartridges, and phono sections--all under $1000 and the last issue had the Intermezzos--a powered woofer stand mount speaker from Infinity that costs two grand which, is inexpensive given that the bottom is powered. I also reviewed the Red Rose R3s which cost 3 grand. Not cheap but not ultra-expensive either. Review budget stuff and the folks who want the expensive stuff covered complain. Review the expensive gear and those on the other side complain. You can't please all of the people all of the time. The posts that gall me are the ones that see "vast conspiracies" in Stereophile wherein the advertisers and reviewers collude. It really doesn't happen.

The editor posted a message here about my review of the Hovland preamp was proof that we don't cater to advertisers and the larger companies. He was in error of course: Hovland does advertise in Stereophile. The editor wasn't aware of it, which I think speaks volumes.

I've been doing this for 15 years now and no one at TAS or Stereophile has ever told me what to review, believe it or not. I see something I like and ask to review it. Sometimes I get to, sometimes others beat me to it or the editor feels someone else should get a crack at it. but there's no coordinated effort going on that I know of.

Frankly, I think reviews should be read to learn not just about the product being reviewed, but for insight about how the reviewer listens or goes about evaluating a product. A good review will be valuable even if the product being reviewed is something the reader has no interest in because it should contain some useful information for everyone reading it.

Audiophiles should go listen for themselves before buying anything.

Okay, now ATTACK!

--Michael Fremer

A warm welcome, Michael. It's gratifying to know that our little forum gets attention from one of the best reviewers in the business. One of your colleagues, Anthony Cordesman, is another reviewer who has garnered my respect over the years. I hope you will continue to post, now that I know who "Grooves" really is.

There are big companies with large advertising budgets and inexpensive products. You see their products reviewed all the time. It's mid-range (in price) products made by small companies with no advertising budget that aren't reviewed. No criticism intended though, and I'm sure someone can point to an exception or two.

The magazine is published to make a profit. It depends on advertising revenue to do that. Advertisers need to feel their ads will be seen by people who are likely to buy their products. Circulation to readers interested in higher priced equipment and ad revenue from big ticket manufacturers would decline if there were many more reviews of inexpensive equipment. Too many reviews of cheap stuff and the mag will be filled with consumer electronics ads.

Of course, a couple of columnists and the editor do call occasional attention to noteworthy products in the economy range. But they're always careful to suggest the product as something you might recommend to a non-audiophile friend or buy for your college-bound son or aging parent with a significant hearing loss. Don't want to spook the high-end advertisers after all.

Paul, facts are usually different from impressions. If I had the time to analyze all of Stereophile's reviews for a year I bet there would be quite a good percentage of mid priced gear from small companies. Let's not forget that the reviewers are audiophiles themselves and are seeking out the good stuff wherever it may come from. What does it take for you to get it? Michael Fremer tells you that his reviews do not take the advertisers into account and you still recite the "advertisers control reviewers" mantra. Some people just like to think there's a conspiracy behind everything.

Let me be clear in saying that I have no personal knowledge that certain large manufacturers and importers who spend lots of money on ads at Stereophile and their other audio publications have greater access in getting their products reviewed in those publications. However, I have learned that when things look amiss, they usually are. I count that in 6 of the last 7 Sterophile issues (I cannot find the May issue right now), 4 Harman products have been reviewed. Meanwhile products from Merlin or Aesthetix, for example to my knowledge have never been reviewed. I don't own products from either manufacturer nor do I have any relationship with either or any other manufacturer, but I know the Merlin VSM in all its incarnations (it has been around a while) is at least a very credible product. Many consider the Aesthetix Io the top phono preamp currently made. Why hasn't either been reviewed? The Recommended Components would be even a better example. If the Merlin and Aesthetix are not even mentioned, should we consider it to be not even a Class D component in Stereophile's estimation? As far as reviewers demonstrating integrity and protecting their reputation, we have all heard the stories about the "intermingling" as BMP call it where the reviewers are given price breaks on equipment. As far as how what is to be reviewed is selected, I am sure it is not as haphazard a selection process as Mr. Fremer suggests. Sometimes he gets to it first, sometimes others beat him to it! I am sure that the editor, for the most part, hands out reviewing assignments and that the editor is deciding what will get reviewed and for what issue. After all, that is an editor's job. Whether much is made explicit between advertiser, reviewer and editor is irrelevant. It doesn't have to be explicit for there to be behavior which jeopardizes the integrity of the magazine. As far as negative comments about manufacturers, BMP, I rarely see them. Certainly, one never sees anything that is absolutely clear like: "In my opinion, product A is better than product B". Generally any statements of comparison are marvels of verbal obfuscation and equivocation. Now I am sure that there are reviewers who see the conflict of interest between accepting manufacturers gifts and reviewing the manufacturers products. We just need to know that none of the other type of reviewer works for Stereophile! Now it is interesting that BMPNYC attacks me as having a vivid imagination and suggests that I am one who lacks integrity. He doesn't know me and therefore would be on shaky ground to presume anything about me. I do know that he and Michael Fremer are good buddies. I must say that it was an interesting form of damage control engaged in here: to have Mr. Butler attack me personally while Mr. Fremer takes a much softer tack in defending his magazine. Would there be a strategy there, guys? Anyway, sorry Stokjoc for taking over your thread. In my opinion, it is not so much about expensive or cheap equipment. It's about which manufacturer's equipment gets reviewed. I leave it to others to look at all the info and to make up their own mind.