Collective letter s to Stereophile

Why don't you start your own magazine and review these items. The reality is that Stereophile gets to choose who they want to review. Who says that it should be democratic?
This is a naive assumption. You can learn far more here on the Gon.

With all due respect, who cares about the rags anyway? They have their agendas and your best interest somehow doesn't fit in. Listen to the folks here on AudioGon who paid good money out of their pocket for their gear and have no vested interest. Save your money spent on the "golden eared mags", read up on truly passionate and impartial views, and buy more music. Enjoy, Jeff

I'll play devil's advocate. Perhaps Stereophile prefers to review products from established manufacturers with wide distribution and the resources to follow up with customer service. The magazine has more appeal if it can lead consumers to products that are readibly availabe and have parts and service readibly available rather than the contrary. It would make sense to reward those companies with a good track record. These manufacturers have an established following waiting for reviews of thier latest products. Besides, well established companies who have had previous good reviews probably have the biggest advertising budget. The manufacturers and the magazines have a symbiotic relationship that co-depends on each others success. If the magazines truly wanted to help the consumer, they would keep gear on hand that it's readership typicaly owns (Stereophile has taken readers surveys), note manufacturers reliabilty and service record as well as expected resale value. The magazines would make special note of appropriate technical and sonic compatibilities. The magazines would compare the items of comparable value vis a vis possible new and used alternatives. While the last suggestion is fraught with diffuculty it is not impossible as most of us who use Audiogon do this all the time.

I think they are creating some kind of monopoly or at less prevent free competition in the market. Clearly, if a product from a new company didn't get exposure/review or intentionally unfavourable review in an audio magazine. Nobody will buy it and the new company will fall very fast. At the end, only a handful of manufacturers will share a large portion of the market share. Which is exactly what happening now. Both the manufacturer and the magazine are the in the same side. Favourable reviews(even though the product under review is no good at all) means more sale, more money and then more and bigger ad in the magazine. I think the government should look into this kind of unethical practices.

Check out Audioperfectionist.com and you will find out why this happen.