Sterophile's not so nice review of Bryston

The press is very powerful. Reviewers can makes us feel good about a product we own or want to buy, but they can also make us feel bad as well for buying a certain product. Suddenly, it is no longer about how it sounds or if we like it.

I had some speakers once that the respected reviewers disdained. I loved them and to me they compared well against the magazines' Class B rated products.

Eventually, I changed out my system to get a more "respected" brand name speaker. It ended up costing me a lot of money and time to get my system back to the level I felt I was at before making the change.

At least stereophile told it the way it was and did it knowing it would cost them . And I will have to agree with them on there findings , this was not Brystons best product , and if you read Brystons Chris Russell's rebutal in stereophile's January 2010 edition page 139 you will no why .

Tmsorosk, "At least stereophile told it the way it was"

you are so funny making such a statement but then again I read a few of your other threads and you seem to rely on reviews and not your own ears which tells me allot, because you seem to rely on reviews so much have you read all the other glowing reviews out there in relation to these specific amps?

Did you hear that set-up personally?

I have the latest Bryston 28 Squared in my own set-up and I know of many others who are enjoying so what are you sugesting?

In the end as many have written above reviews are entertainment and that's it right or wrong but they do have a large influience on specific individuals and I believe you fall into the specific category.

P.S. I prefer the new Salon's by far over the originals, would I own either now? NO

a review is dependent upon the rest of the chain. thus, a reviewer can affect the outcome by selecting the rest of the components to create a favorable or unfavorable result.

there is nothing wrong with saying that given a reviewer's reference compoents, he/she heard such and such./ with other components a different outcome would ensue.

Mr T, your comments are right on, however, I find it unfortunate when I read where a reviewer pans or praises something based on hearing it through a system that is in some way suboptimal for the piece being reviewed. In Stereophile, at least you get measurements that JA tries to correlate with the reviewer's impressions.