Rank Stereophile, & why no Von Schweikert reviews

Rgs92,

They don't write for us because we are the lunatic fringe. We actually know as much, or more, about this stuff than they do.

Additionally, I have always felt that the glossy rags are seeking the well-heeled, uninitiated buyer for their advertisers.

I can remember while reading Stereophile and Audio back in the 70s, wondering how it could be that everything on every page was grounbreaking or incomparable. Just how many bests were there? I'm still wondering, aren't you?

Thanks, Macrojack.
I do fondly remember when S'phile in the 90's had reviews that were right on the money. Like when Wes Phillips noted that a pair of Watt Puppy 5's would have you wandering from dealer to dealer to find matching equipment to make them sound good. Or in 1990 when they noted that Apogee Stages reproduced vocals more naturally than any speaker, regardless of cost. Or that Aerial 10t's had and upfront sound but little depth in the soundstage.
Those were the days.

Yup, Remember how we used to reminisce?

One mag that is actually useful is HiFi. They seem to be very objective no matter what they review.

Sereophile is awful. The idea of 20 class "A" or "best" amps or whatever is ludicrous. Its all about money.
TAS used to be wonderful 15 yrs. ago but HP,s cashing out also. Oh how I wish for the return of the old "Audio Critic".
As for von Schweikert reviews - It may be that the manufacurer won't loan them the gear because they don't want a review.
There used to be several high end guys that didn't want to risk a hatchet job by some tin eared moron because they wouldn't pay their ad rates. Can't blame them.