Signs that a Guitar magazine has nothing to talk about

Telejester

I used to be an avid reader of guitarist magazine, I stress the phrase used to be. Now the very sight of it just ellicits a tremendous yawn. Lifting it eagerly, looking inside to be greeted with subject matter like top ten ways to hold your pick or 20 best facial expressions when playing a guitar solo and you know you are buying reading material best suited to lining a budgies cage. In my opinion guitar mags have run out of things to say, endless yawn inducing articles on Clapton. Page, Hendrix  etc etc just killed  my interest stone dead. In the 80s guitar for the practicing musician was my Bible that I imported, now that was a magazine ! Dec 1985 and it's full tab transcription to wanted man by Ratt  and 16 year  old telejester  nearly shit himself.

Anyone else finding the guitar mags and endless polls and tired articles to be a bit of a snooze feast these days ?

redrighthand

I think you are being unfair. There's always a Bonamassa interview to break up the tedium. Or a Bonamassa signature guitar to review. 

xchrisv

Just leaving this here. Three issues for three quid... if you don't like it then tell me why as the feedback is useful. https://anthem.subscribeonline.co.uk/subscriptions/guitar-magazine?offerCode=SSFBTAKE17

duotone

The only magazine that I have got time for is Guitar Techniques, I used to have a paper magazine subscription for 5 years, after a while its started getting repetitive i.e. An overdose of blues & the same old faces/play in the style of, cropping up time & time again so I cancelled it.

Still like the magazine so to save a few quid I now get the online version.  It's also nice to be able to delve into some of the archives (it goes back to November 2009) to pick and choose lessons I want to work on and to have the press play feature (which starts from around 2011 iirc) TBH I would prefer the paper copy in front of me for learning, but the large saving makes it worth it for me.

richardhomer

redrighthand said:

I think you are being unfair. There's always a Bonamassa interview to break up the tedium. Or a Bonamassa signature guitar to review. 

And the frequent PRS and 'latest' R9 reviews....

Neil

Lets be honest, there is only so much about guitars you can talk about and most of that has been covered in the last thirty years of UK guitar mags. 

It's not as if startling new guitars are arriving all of the time, most are just rehashes of the sixty odd year old favourites. 

That said, on the occasions I have read it,  I do like what @chrisv has done with the Guitar mag, it feels fresh somehow. 

HarrySeven

IMHO, I don't think there's one single problem...there are a number of factors, three imporant ones I'd say were:

a. The shift from printed magazines to online content - I'll always appreciate the tactile experience of page-turning, but as @duotone says, online is cheaper/easier in many ways.

b. Target demographics - you can't please everyone - for instance...personally (and in some cases, this is obviously very generalised) I'm uninterested in:

i. Articles/features on techniques
ii. Acoustic guitars
iii. Blues
iv. Anything related to Joe goddamn Bonamassa, Clapton, SRV, blahblahblah
v. Jazz
vI. Metal
vii. '60's/'70's "Classic" Rock (or any contemporary band/players rehashing the sh*te)
viii. New gear
ix. Blinged-up PRS, Eggle or any other planks which look like G-Plan furniture
x. Boutique pedals/amps
xi. '50's R'n'R
That leaves a fairly narrow bandwidth(!) of topics which would make any given issue (of whichever publication) attractive to me.

Of course, I realise this is a fairly extreme example, but while there will be hordes of people avidly consuming the above, there will equally be those for whom certain aspects are nothing more than yawn-inducing tosh.

Also, the price-point of review gear is important - while many people appreciate drool-worthy exotica, how many readers (in this fiscal climate) can actually afford £3K boutique combos and £4K guitars? NB. Generally, most magazines seem to strike a reasonable equilibrium on this matter.

Faced with the above, how do/can editors achieve an egalitarian blance?

c. The reality that there is only so much history - Can any more really be said about '59 Bursts, Hendrix, '57 Strats, Clapton, etc, etc, etc? Surely, the coals can only be raked over so much and in ever-increasingly fine detail?

RocknRollDave

Guitar magazine (Guitar and Bass , as was) is excellent. Always liked it but it has really ramped up the quality of late.

EricTheWeary

RocknRollDave said:

Guitar magazine (Guitar and Bass , as was) is excellent. Always liked it but it has really ramped up the quality of late.

I haven't read a word of the current one yet, it's in my luggage for on the beach.

Previous conversations on here with Chris V are, to some extent at least, about Guitar being a specialist magazine so whilst you might get JoBo in the front ( although is there anybody anywhere who hasn't read enough about him FFS? )but articles on guitar restoration or valve types in the back. It's that depth that elevates it. Whereas Guitarist has been stuck in a perpetual loop of being a generalist magazine that anybody could pick up off the shelf and have 'humbuckers' explained every month, which is fine but it gets a bit tiring. Total Guitar aimed quite successfully for a certain demographic although that's also the internet savvy demographic so I wonder how that's doing now. I'm fairly surprised Guitar Techniques still exists  but perhaps it's protected by it's own nerdism in a parallel way to Guitar. 

axisus

There are 3 reasons why I stopped buying guitar mags. 1 they got too expensive, 2 the rise of the Internet means that I have loads of stuff to read for free, 3 I felt I was paying for a lot of content I didn't want eg all the CD stuff, obscure transcriptions. To be honest I'm not into any transcriptions. 

axisus

It seems to me a common thing that guitarists and forums like to whinge about guitar mags, but at the end of the day they seem to have enough readers to continue. There was a time I bought guitarist every month, then I went to interesting covers only. Now there are only 2 bands that would make me buy an issue if they were on the cover.

prowla

I haven't bought (or read) a gagazine in years; I think the last one was the one which had Clockwork Angels as cover disk, but it wasn't for the rag.

peteri

Read Guitarist since 84-5.

Wouldn't give you 2p for it now, just adds nothing - bland.

I have an electronic subscription to Guitar, read it on my iPad - and it's a great read, and really good value.

Reviews are much less 'everything is awesome' and the vintage/restoration pieces are really interesting.

Give it a go

Ravenous

Telejester said:

top ten ways to hold your pick

What's boring about that? (I have been tinkering with picking technique a bit, I have the feeling a lot of people take it for granted)

Skipped

To tempt me into regular, rather than occasional purchases, they would have to make Guitarist less glossy and more technical.
When the "History of the Fender Strat" articles could easily be lifted and published in Readers Digest you know that blandness has taken over and that something is wrong. I could think of many ideas for content but it would look like a "specialist" mag (think Angling magazines) and the sales would half. (Yes - that bit is awkward. LOL).

Here are some random ideas of  what I would want to see:
1. Interviews that go into detail. What picks does he use. Not just the brand! What size and shape? What gauge? What material? What does he think of (similar pick)??
2. Find a reader who wants a "Historic Makeover" of his R8 but does not want to ship the guitar to the USA. Put him in touch with a superb craftsman in the UK (for example......Feline), and then document the whole thing. This could create a new small scale "industry" in the UK.
3. Lots of articles about guitar cases. Yes I said cases. (Remember - it's a specialist mag. The focus group was you. The focus group was not the waiting room in your Dentist). Cases are awesome. We will never run out of cases to talk about. Harry7 will make sure of that. I want to see the Selmer cases that were sold with Gibson Es-335s in the 1960s.

But the truth is.....it is really tough. As axisus has just said, the internet can provide most of what the real enthusiast wants.....

Andyjr1515

Having subscribed to 'Guitarist' for many years, I switched a couple of years ago to the (then named) 'The Guitar and Bass'

Not regretted that for one moment.  

Let's face it, most magazines on most subjects only hold maybe 10-20% of really interesting stuff for regular readers (and it can't be anything other than that) but that is fine providing there is a decent amount of content that is:

• Interesting

• Relevant

But, in my view, 'Guitarist' had ceased to be relevant to me.  And yet I would have thought I was pretty much in the target demographic - a regular guitar buyer and player who, at the time, was earning an OK salary.  
And yet pretty much ALL of their content was completely out of reach or justification cost-wise - and this in an era where the range and quality and affordability of guitars was and is unsurpassed.

'The Guitar' (although I'm a bit concerned about the subtext of the dropping of the 'and Bass' @chrisv ? ) has more content that is interesting to me and is much, much more relevant.  Chris has brought it up to a better publishing standard whilst, so far, retaining the good aspects of the earlier incarnations.  Hopefully, @chrisv will retain the relevance with a balanced mix of the unattainable (because we all like to drool now and again) with the things I might be tempted to throw a few bucks at.  If he does ,it will continue to get my vote and subscription.

Winny_Pooh

I like the print version of Guitar from time to time. Otherwise, Premier Guitar online is great and on the occasion I look at a lesson you can hear the audio with examples too. 

Ravenous

Skipped said:

1. Interviews that go into detail. What picks does he use. Not just the brand! What size and shape? What gauge? What material? What does he think of (similar pick)??

That sounds really boring (and good luck asking Andy Summers that question, he bores easily as covered in a recent thread)...

When I used to read Guitarist in the late 80s-mid 90s, they had a regular interviewer (some old guy called Tony Hicks) who got genuinely interesting stuff out of some of his interviewees. Admittedly often old-fashioned interviewees even for the time, but they had interesting views even to an early twenties guy.

Skipped

Ravenous said:

That sounds really boring (and good luck asking Andy Summers that question, he bores easily as covered in a recent thread)...

The exact choice of pick that you settled on (at a key point in your playing development) is not boring. It is an essential element of your technique.
It could only be boring to a non Guitarist.

Asking a Musician what picks he uses and then accepting the reply "Dunlop" is a pointless question. 

Sassafras

I think we need more articles about '59 Bursts.

impmann

I really enjoyed this month's indepth feature about the guitars used by Man. That was brilliant, as I've actually held Mickey's SG and his Strat. I also had no idea that Deke's (in)famous Tele had been stolen.