Forgive me if I'm wrong here, but wasn't the "review" only picked up because it was posted by someone else i.e. not the person himself here?
Furthermore, the "review" was done not only on his own website, but also a website that sells a multiplicity of earphones i.e. not only the Shure SE846. So with that in mind, not only does he have the latitude to post a review on his own website, but he should also have the latitude to post whatever he likes on his own website. His own website has a section dedicated to "best earphones", and I don't believe his website to be the only one to do this. If so, then I don't see why umbrage was not taken against that in addition to the fact that he does his own reviews?
Sure, the review may have been done to drum up interest, but his review is every bit as valid as anyone of yours. Perhaps, one might be well advised to take it with a pinch of salt given he will be selling it as one of his products etc. But we all take a pinch of salt with most reviews we read here anyway. But let me state this, we have reviewers here who receive free products on the side or who are sponsored by one or more audio companies. And when they review products, they are just as much an interested party whether we like it or not. The question is how some are able to remain objective. Some are, some aren't, who knows?
What some of you are forgetting is that these earphones may be every bit as good as is claimed (I'm not claiming they are). Picking any "review" apart now for want of impartiality shows yourself up for the very same issue, partiality (by giving a person stick, and the review stick, without even having heard the product itself first).
Lighten up, take a chill pill. Have a listen to the product when it comes out and then challenge his or whoever else's findings on the Shure SE846. Till then, at least we have an impression of the product, no matter how skewed the opinion may be.