what's your opinion on the magazine 'stereo review'??

I think most if not all stereo magazines are paid by the manufacturers to review their equipment based on how much money they give to the magazine or to the person writing the reviews.  They often will sell their gear at cost to the writer in order to receive a good review.  Be curious to find out how much money they hand out for good reviews.  My nephew wrote for Stereophile Magazine and Revel Harmon basically gave him the speakers he was reviewing.  He paid a fraction of the cost for all of the equipment he owns as a result of writing an excellent review.  Based on this, how many reviews are written to reveal the honest truth?

"They often will sell their gear at cost to the writer in order to receive a good review."

Why do reviewers buy equipment when they get different new ones to review all the time? When do they have time to listen to their own?

I read Stereo Review and High Fidelity.  I don't remember any bad reviews of equipment.  If there were, manufacturers would pull their ads.

I read SR back in the day and can't disagree too strongly with any of the posts. The record reviews were always a favorite.
Getting out of the Navy in Fall 1974, I had saved enough money to buy a pair of AR 3a speakers and, along with the speakers, I ordered a pair of 50'AR speaker cables: they were gray-colored lamp cord!
It took until the late 80's before my ears were "peeled back" via a pair of my brother's used Monster cables hooked to a pair of K-horns.  ...ironically, those '78 model horns were internally wired with the same spec lamp cord! 

Reviewers have to eat too.