++++StereoPhile Class A components+++++

About all that can truly be said for this "grading" system is that it is unlikely (not impossible) that a seriously flawed component would be given a "Class A" or "B" ranking. BUT: This is really saying extremely little, because the distinctions being made by audiophiles at this level are not about gross questions of competence, they are about relatively slight matters of personal preference and system synergy. With luck, a reader can basically hope to, over time, gain enough familiarity with any reviewer's preferences and language to estimate a degree of trust in respect to that reviewer's opinions having even a somewhat predictable correlation with their own perceptions and preferences, something made wildly difficult from square one just by virture of the fact that there exist limitless system variations within our crucially system-dependent world. But the letter grading system, inherently flawed from the start, has only become more and more meaningless as the years have gone by and the top-rated components have seemingly exponentially multiplied.

Are the reviews and reviewers completely independent? Technically, probably yes - the reviews and reviewers are not operating on a strictly predetermined basis like professional wrestling, or forcibly coerced into their conclusions. But that is not the same as being able to say the deck is not loaded, or that the reviews should be seen as always authoritative. It's called "subjective reviewing" for a reason, and that's the way (highly subjective) most audiophiles seem to prefer it. The opinions rendered in conventional high end reviewing, while their authors may feel they are honestly reflective of what they heard, typically leave so many uncontrolled and dependent variables, fail to to achieve any semblence of comprehensive comparision, are so vulnerable to unconscious bias, are so potentially compromised in integrity by manufacturer influence and benevolence, and are so formulaic in their means of operation and communication, that even with the purest of reviewer intentions - and accounting for the aforementioned overriding factors of listener personal preference and infinite system variability - most cannot be looked at as carrying much more than benign curiousity and entertainment value at best (with the more worthwhile ones maybe throwing in a bit of technical or historical educational value).

This is mostly all OK for the sophisticated reader - especially since in truth any notions of 'real objectivity' are actually unattainable even as theoretical ideals (and furthermore would be fundamentally irrelevent) anyway. But for the novice review reader, you will very likely be swayed by what the 'pros' write, so you can only hope that it will prove to be in the generally correct (for you) direction.

Once upon a time, Stereophile reviewed the Wilson Witt speaker, gave it a "high" Class B rating. Wilson reacted like a little girl, personally set up the speakers at the editor's room, and lo and behold, they were reconsidered as Class A. That did it for me. Of course, a new $8,000 speaker that received a Class B rating was the kiss of death, considering the Audio Physic Virgo was Class A - can't tell those apart from Sound-Lab A-1's, can you? (sarcasm, not a knock on AP) - at half the price.

So, to me, if two editors disagree on a Class A, which is supposed to be a rating that is clear and unambiguous as far as sound goes, then it's not Class A - even by THEIR standard. How can anyone expect to take the reviewer seriously if the editor over rules him? No, I do not take those ratings seriously anymore. But I did when the magazine was the size of a paperback - even though it rated my Thiel 3.6's as Class B, which was an honest rating with respect to the kilobuck speakers available. Nowadays it seems anything held down by gravity qualifies for Class A.

Class "A" for electronic components - is not a rating - it means that equpment operates only in linear mode with the least distortion, Class "AB" and Class "C" are much more efficient and don't cause as much heat but generate crossover or switching noise added to the signal.
Just my 5 cents.

..."Reviewers have good and bad days just like us."(Johnj)..

I would have to disagree with this statment! Reviewers, if you read their reviews, have products for review for WEEKS, EVEN MONTHS!!!...not a day! And they all have reference systems whith which to make competent comparisons, and know EXACLTY WHAT A PRODUCT IS LIKELY CAPABLE OF! I would never buy that a review just simply got it wrong with all their experience! But I can understand "selling soap" and or "incentives"!...as a business man myself.
Perspective is always good while reading reviews in magazines, respected or not. So that in mind, it's always good to keep the perspective that "the mighty dollar" is where the people running the magazine's perspective is!...and probably most anyone else who's in business..duh!
Since it's just a dumb catagory-thing in the end, who's to say what's what!?! YOu read it for entertainment, and don't take it like it's "God's spoken word!"
I can indeed whole heartedly concure that there's been a ton of misplaced items in the ratings list that Stereophile puts up and, for that matter, the ratings that HT magazine posts! (Hint, notice that Def Tech's get rated as state of the art in every way all the time!...then see all the ad's for Def Tech in the same magazine!!!) ...Hey, I wonder if Sadam Hussein was a manufacture of audio gear, would his gear ever have gotten a Class B rating from his own country man's magazines...?! Hummmmm...maybe different incentives there, ey?
Never the less, It's safe to say that we audiophiles have a right to make a fuss about anything we want in our great hobby. We can do what we want in our forums, with our gear, and all associated mediums. But then again, another perspective is that audiophiles in general tend to be the most critical and picky people alive! So if we want to gripe about our fav gear not getting recognition, then fine. And if we want to complain, because we trusted the mag we give our money to to "tell it like it is", and they let us down when the product get's home, because we are IN A HURRY to have the end-all or best audio gear possible for our money, then fine! It's a free country where I live anyway!...and we can excercise our oppinions(thank God) accordingly.
Still, if anyone thinks that there are absolutes with people, other than that PEOPLE HAVE AGENDAS, and it's money that makes the world go around in the business world, then it's time to reconsider! Patience, time, trial and error, diligence, and a little knowledge and application can go a long way in achieving anything mostly! It's not so different if someone's trying to put together a truely fine audio system either...you're just not going to get it by simply reading a review or some ratings, or doing this stuff for a few day's out of your life! It's all good though...

All I can say is that I do not agree with the S-Phile in many ways.I think they show favoritism to some and then are not fair with others,Kind of like mood swings.I have seen them almost or did distroy the company that made my speakers with out due process after the designer asked to come out to see what was wrong .They went ahead and bashed the Co. after that.
My cousin went by their review of Phillips CD player in the late 80's then tested Sony against it and found their opinion did not hold up with fact,He sold all his mags and never looked back.
People should judge for themselves vased on their own experience and how things work in their system.
In the end your the one who should judge not a mag.You'll get better results from this BB and AA's then any mag I believe.

BTW my speaker Co, was hailed by everyone else besides S-Phile,but they are the leading Audio Mag on the planet so Cos. get squashed if they get a bad review if they are not firmly established and can take the weight of a bad review.