Stereophiles 2021 Recommended Components is now on line.


No A+ for preamps, amps or integrates, but there are A+ for digital processors

Cheers George
@testpilot Insofar as the internet is filled with lists of rankings of products for people buying them, why wouldn't it be? In other words, not sure what you mean by "relevant" because which audience *counts* in your view.
Are the reviews completed independent and unbiased, or have they become a byproduct of paid advertising and industry pressure?  Personally, I find them interesting from an entertainment standpoint, but no longer consider them as a trusted source.  I do however, find their measurements part of the review quite valid and informative.  
Is it still?
As much (or little) as ever. Only "your" attitudes may have changed. We have no way of determining that.
Unless I missed one somewhere, not a single thing in my system is on that list. This pleases me no end. 

Same, I find their measurements interesting as well simply because so many companies can not be trusted to publish the truth.  In fairness they also pick up info on new companies that I find interesting. One example being Okto  Research out of Prague.  I would have never even heard of these folks had I not read the list.  Like any review or opinion, its all grain of salt to me.  I'm still more interested in negative opinions and why. 
Post removed 
They claim to be unbiased but travel and meals are provided by the manufacturer at times, I believe. I trust that listed components don't suck but they list KEF LS50s as Class A and I just don't hear it. Also Magnepan .7s are listed as class C and I think they are better than that, although set-up can be tricky. So, Stereophile is a source but not the absolute bible on things audio. 
Like all things today one must, take with a grain of salt
and read between the lines.
Lots of "alternate facts" out there.

Because of the the measurements, as they aren't subjective, it's better than nothing, or having to read TAS.

Audio Science Review (ASR) measurement man Amirm, could be a good contender but it's limited in what they get to measure.

Cheers George
 Funny how often the most dishonest are also the most distrusting of others.
Roger Modjeski never once advertised in Stereophile, yet his RM-200 amplifier has been in the Class A Tube category for twenty years (it's Fremer's reference "affordable" tube amp). AND, since Roger's passing a few years ago has not been available new. 
@bdp24 right on…i wonder what he up to now… Burning Amp - Angel Edition
I have always wondered which was first, the high rating or the full page ad.  I feel there are many components on that list that are not advertising in the magazine.  But there are many that are.  I guess its still down to Trust but verify.  Just have to verify through all the weeds out there online.
Hi, I love their annual report. I use it to buy all my stereo stuff. If they like it and I can afford it I buy it. I got my KEF LS50's and Outlaw HD FM receiver because they said they were good bang for the buck. Regards.
Roger Modjeski never once advertised in Stereophile, yet his RM-200 amplifier has been in the Class A Tube category for twenty years (it’s Fremer’s reference "affordable" tube amp).
As too were the Quicksilver Monoblock's of Sam Tellig’s

Cheers George
Listening  to my QS Mid Monos right now.....have to be one of the best bang for the buck amps out there....

Just to add to the Audio measurement institutions above that I mentioned, is this an extremely thorough one call "Miller Audio Research" (AVTech tab) That do them for HiFi News and HiFi Choice and a few others This has been logged in by me for the 2014, don’t know for how long it’s good for.
Here's a sample of the Burmester integrated

Cheers George
I'm  a believer in the 10,000 hour rule. Nobody just stepped into this list- unless it was a family business. Sure, some are better at networking and building international business relationships. Some have more marketing prowess and interpersonal savvy. Likely some have more money. 
In the end the list "is what it is" within the given categories. I've owned several products on this list but none currently. We are all individual in our pursuit of audio and if you end up using only items in this list you will do very well.  
It's a nice accomplishment to be recognized at being near the top in any given field. It's also a well known phenomenon that is takes courage take all the competition and scrutiny that come with standing on top. It's common to be critical of success when we don't quite have it ourselves. Congrats to all these people who are making it in this competitive worldwide market.     
Speaking of the RC list: The October 2021 issue of Stereophile---which contains it---has yet to be left in my mailbox. Am I alone in this?
AND, since Roger's passing a few years ago has not been available new.
@bdp24 - There are actually two new RM-200s left from the last production run which was 2017. As I organize the shop they just keep turning up.
Cool @clio09. Are the RM-200's the "standard" Mk.2 version, or with the transformer(s) personally hand-wound by Roger?
@bdp24 - there are no more "T" versions to be had. The last production run used in-house wound transformers. They were wound on a George Stevens transformer winder under Roger's supervision and tested by Roger.
Somebody should snap one up for themselves @clio09. If I didn't already have one (and an RM-9 Mk.2 and RM-10 Mk.2) I would. Not trendy enough for some audiophiles.

The late Brooks Berdan recommended Music Reference to his clients (and hosted Roger's in-store appearances to introduce the RM-200 and RM-10 amplifiers), but didn't refuse the $ they insisted on spending on Jadis and VTL. His used shelves were littered with ARC amps, all their circuit boards scorched. ;-)
Your last sentence is why I would never even think of buying Audio Research.....    I have heard too many horror stories about tubes failing and destroying the circuit trace and other things in the path

at least with point to point there is usually less collateral damage.