... but as you explain, an incomplete one.

I agree, Recommended Components for example contain other such non-review reviews and other less formal observations.

On the other hand, Magnepan's stance is curious at best. Why would they care if a competitor knows how their stuff measures? Any competitor who really cared could merely buy a pair and measure them whenever they wanted to ... doesn't seem plausible a competitor would sit around waiting for a magazine to measure them before making a move with their own product cycle.

JA is already on record as saying planars are harder to measure in some aspects. I'm willing to bet Magnepan is gunshy of how any measurement results would be interpreted by the public. Why, I don't know. I only care how speakers sound and whether or not my amp has a reasonable chance of driving them. The rest doesn't concern me much.

I may be wrong here, but I think the reviewers pick their products they review in the columns. They are not assigned products to review. I believe the components reviewed in the in the formal review portion of the magazine are assigned, likely based upon that component being consistent with the reviewer's system and listening preferences.

Every time I listen to music on my maggies, I thank TAS for reviewing them.

More importantly....

Since they hold the Maggies in such high regard, they routinely mention how other reviewed equipment sounds/interacts with them as many of the reviewers have them in their systems.  I, for instance, purchased the Rogue Audio Cronos Magnum based on comments about how well it sounded with Maggies.  I could not be happier.

I could care less whether or not Maggies are covered by Stereophile.  This magazine is just one source of input.  As a further illustration, I picked up a MF V-Link based on the Stereophile review and also couldn't be happier with my purchase.

No real reason not to review the Maggies, or at least allow mention in the non-measurement columns.  After all, they are wonderful American products, and well-loved by thousands.  

Although I don't quite understand Magnepan's reservations.  Anyone have an historical perspective on this - it can't be a new thing? 

There are measurements of the Magneplaner MG1.6 in Home Theater and High Fidelity dated Sept 1, 2011 so what's the deal.

Couldn't care less if Stereophile reviews  panels or not , I've heard lots of them over the years and could not bring myself to like them no matter how hard I tryed or how hard friends have tryed to make me like them . There lack of warmth and steely metalic like sound is something only a mother could love . To me they sound more like electronics and less like music . 

Actually, I have had the opposite experience.  I find that no other speaker can recreate the "I'm there" feeling like the Magnepans.  They are ruthlessly revealing to the source.  I have them mated to tubed electronics and it is majical.

However, they are extremley sensitive to the room.  I'm lucky to have a dedicated room that allows me to position them wherever I want.  I have no doubt that they could sound that way if positioned in a less than optimal way.  I was also able to control the reflectivity of the wall surfaces.  It took a bit of trial and error, but I now have them dialed in and there is nothing like it.

Too bad you had the negative experiences with them.  

mav52 wrote:

There are measurements of the Magneplaner MG1.6 in Home Theater and High Fidelity dated Sept 1, 2011 so what's the deal.

That was in 2001 not 2011, which predates the policy.