[Audio_Empire[_2_]]

On Tuesday, December 11, 2012 2:22:08 PM UTC-8, Arny Krueger wrote:
"Audio_Empire" wrote in message

...



The SR reviews are suspect due to SR's editorial policy which was

that everything printed in SR must serve the advertisers/potential

advertisers. That meant no critical evaluations of anything. Ever

wonder why SR never published a negative review from Julian

Hirsch? Because it was SR policy to not publish negative reviews.]



Looks like Stereo Review is being stigmatized for doing what other magazines

do without being noticed.

What magazines would they be, Mr. Kruger?



For example, virtually every product ever reveiwed by Stereophile this

millenium shows up on their Recommended Components List (RCL)

That's simply a very misleading statement. (1) Not everything published
in Stereophile makes it to the Recommended Components list. and (2)
those that do are categorized according their perceived flaws and listed
under an alphabetical hierarchy. To wit: "A" is state of the art, and "D" is
very flawed but still acceptable. I've seen lots of critical reviews in
Stereophile.



I personally agree with editors who seem to take the viewpoint that they

don't have any space for reviews of equipment that is substandard.

And that serves the readership, how? Seems to me that serves the
advertisers. "Yeah, your new amplifier is lousy, but we won't tell
anybody about it. OK? And while were on the phone, you want to
buy a new ad?"

Gimme a break!