Very well said Wireless200.
It is quite obvious that whatever piece of gear Stereophile happens to be reviewing at the time is "the best sounding" ground breaking must have piece of gear available. Meanwhile some of the reviewers have 10 year-old pieces of gear in their systems. I recently listened to a friends rig consisting of nearly 10-year old Krell Class A Series Components and Wilson Audio W/P 6 Speakers, and it sounded awesome, and contrary to what Stereophile would have you believe, the new Systems, that I have recently heard (at this level), do not make it sound broken.
Stereophile Magazine is plainly and simply paid (through advertising dollars) to try to convince their readership that last years (or last issues) model is crap and that whatever you are listening to at Home is garbage, and that you are doing yourself a grave disservice unless you run-out and buy this newly-reviewed piece of gear. Nearly every review that I have read in this Magazine gives an absolutely glowing review, proclaiming the best of the best status on nearly everything they plug-in. This is not objective journalism, or consumer reporting, it is advertising.
Im sure that Consumer Reports Magazine would find that at least half of Stereophiles reviewed gear is over-priced garbage (most notably the equipment that frequently fails during the review, or shows up broken).
The Magazine does however have some interesting and well written show reviews, industry news and opinions, and strangely enough, their music reviews are actual reviews and not endorsements, but when they get their hands on a piece of electronic gear look-out, hear comes the not-so-subtle sales pitch
