As a reviewer, I need to say several things. First, print and electronic magazines need advertising to survive. This was not the case in early subscription magazines like Stereophile and The Absolute Sound. There is an uncomfortable concern by both editors and reviewers in reviewing pieces from advertisers. I have known many instances of pressure from both sides in this relationship but have seldom, if ever, felt such pressure. But do personally know many manufactures and the personal efforts by small ones to make a go of their businesses. Nevertheless, I have felt that there is nothing positive that I can say about a product and simply returned it. Of course, unless the readership could note the list of "returned without review" pieces, they lack this context.
Second, you can learn the personal biases in what reviewers value when listening and key more closely on reviewers who reflect what you think to be important. You also gain familiarity with their equipment in a long review, rather than the often "blows away" etc. evaluations in posts here or elsewhere.
Finally, reviewers have listened to many components and have units for evaluation long enough to optimize them, at least within their rooms. Reviewers' rooms tend to be "above average" rooms.
Nevertheless, some individuals' postings carry more weight than others given their evident passions for what they hear. Reading between the lines, one often knows the poster has a good context for his (or rarely, her) posting and is quite sincere in what they say.
If you want negative and positive reviews in complete disregard to who advertises, you really need to learn to pay for your reviews and seek magazines not accepting advertising. The "internet generations" have learned to expect information at no cost. Lots of luck in getting unbiased information in such a circumstance.
