What happened to the July Stereophile print reveiw of SB3?

[dnighorn]

The title says it all. I am pretty sure that JA said that a full review would appear in the July issue. While I have not read the entire edition yet, a detailed scan of the contents does not indicate that the review is there.

Perhaps JA can respond if he is still hanging around here?

David

[sleepysurf]

I read somewhere that JA mentioned the Stereophile print review had to be pushed back to the upcoming Aug issue.

[sleepysurf]

Bummer, just got my Aug Stereophile and NO Squeezebox review... I smell a conspiracy!

[Pale Blue Ego]

I smell a Sonos kickback

[dlite]

Gee's yep, Slim Devices mustn't have wanted to pay for any advertising. Don't you just love Stereophile. You know they are so unbiased and filled with journalistic integrity.

[P Floding]

Gee's yep, Slim Devices mustn't have wanted to pay for any advertising. Don't you just love Stereophile. You know they are so unbiased and filled with journalistic integrity.

You may want to try out the British "Hi-Fi World" instead!
Better IMHO. Also, not so fixated with ultra-expensive stuff.

Their website is a bit amateurish, but here is the URL anyway:
http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk

[mauidan]

Bummer, just got my Aug Stereophile and NO Squeezebox review... I smell a conspiracy!

sleepysurf- No conspiracy. Your question was answered on the Stereophile forum on 7/13/06:

"You can read about John's experience with the Squeezebox here:
http://www.stereophile.com/images/ne.../306Bstph.html

And a thorough "Follow-Up" report will be published in our September issue. (I promise.)

Stephen Mejias
Stereophile"

Suggest people have some real proof before making claims of a conspiracy, kickbacks, or lack of journalistic integrity on a public forum.

I'm surprised SD allowed these comments to be posted.

[opaqueice]

Suggest people have some real proof before making claims of a conspiracy, kickbacks, or lack of journalistic integrity on a public forum.

There is something called humor... oh, nevermind.

Stereophile is a publication whose income is primarily based on advertisements for the products it reviews. Anyone that believes such a publication is objective has the burden of proof on them, not the other way around.

I'm surprised SD allowed these comments to be posted.

Why?

[mauidan]

"Stereophile is a publication whose income is primarily based on advertisements for the products it reviews. Anyone that believes such a publication is objective has the burden of proof on them, not the other way around."

I don't purchase products based on rave reviews, and I don't read the reviews in Stereophile thinking the reviewer got paid off or that a rave review was in exchange for advertising revenue.

If the SB gets a positive Stereophile review in the September issue, should I assume
SD paid them off?

I look forward to JA's follow-up on the SB, especially his measurements.

[seanadams]

if you mostly read your news on Teh Interweb, you may be surprised how long the print cycle takes between deciding to review something and actually getting it to the shelves. Sometime three months - and if they're doing extensive audio tests, even longer wouldn't surprise me. I think it's a bit premature to cry foul just yet.