Latest Issue Of Guitarist Magazine

mrleon83

must say @chrisv , that's a lovely website you've got there...



Also , I bought the latest Guitarist (as I was waiting for a flight at the weekend).. it was disappointing, most if not all of the gear was so out of your average guitarists price range it was insane, and of course the subjects being so old and therefore to me, irrelevant..I did enjoy the Gibson Feature, just because I've recently got one..

I'll pick up a copy of guitar next time...

markj

Blaendulais said:

Is it me or are the articles about old guitars for sale in the mags just adverts for the companies who sell them?

I Agree its a section i'm just not interested in. Plugging ATB Guitars.

Matt_McG

re: price ranges.

I'd be curious (I have the technical nous to do this, so will do it when I find 30 minutes)* to see how prices have changed over the past 3 to 4 years. Because, my anecdotal impression is that they have increased by a huge amount.

With US boutique guitars, even ones from fairly large builders with a team/factory, now routinely topping 3.5k for a standard bolt-on.

* i.e. scrape some current pricelists, scrape some archive.org versions of the same, and compare with adjustment for exchange rates and inflation.

xchrisv

Matt_McG said:

re: price ranges.

I'd be curious (I have the technical nous to do this, so will do it when I find 30 minutes)* to see how prices have changed over the past 3 to 4 years. Because, my anecdotal impression is that they have increased by a huge amount.

With US boutique guitars, even ones from fairly large builders with a team/factory, now routinely topping 3.5k for a standard bolt-on.

* i.e. scrape some current pricelists, scrape some archive.org versions of the same, and compare with adjustment for exchange rates and inflation.

Pre and post Brexit referendum there was a significant uplift in the cost of US boutique instruments as the pound fell. We noticed that guitars that were coming in at around £2-2.5k in early 2016 were over £3k by 2017. 

Matt_McG

Thanks @chrisv - that matches my anecdotal impression. 

mrkb

chrisv said:

Hello! Obviously this started out as a discussion about the other guys, but broadened out to encompass guitar magazines in general. While we all have a limited amount of pages to play with in print every month, it’s worth pointing out that there’s tonnes more going up on Guitar.com – recent interviews have included Tom Misch, Devin Townsend, Gibson’s CEO & CMO, Sun O))), Rob Chapman, Miette Hope, Slash, Kristian Nairn (aka Hodor from GOT), Larkin Poe, White Denim and a load more besides. Pretty diverse... 

I must admit I’d never heard of Larkin Poe before reading this months issue (via readly) but a quick Spotify stream and thought they were great! So I appreciate the effort you’re putting into getting new bands featured.

mrkb

markj said:

Blaendulais said:

Is it me or are the articles about old guitars for sale in the mags just adverts for the companies who sell them?

I Agree its a section i'm just not interested in. Plugging ATB Guitars.

I like the photography and brief history of the old guitars- theres been no ‘sticker damaged’ goods visible either.

I also like the “projector to amp” project type articles.

Modellista

mrkb said:

markj said:

Blaendulais said:

Is it me or are the articles about old guitars for sale in the mags just adverts for the companies who sell them?

I Agree its a section i'm just not interested in. Plugging ATB Guitars.

I like the photography and brief history of the old guitars- theres been no ‘sticker damaged’ goods visible either.

I also like the “projector to amp” project type articles.

Got to agree with this, I like the “one old guitar a month” article, and the chance of actually being able to buy it is a bonus! 

The artist interviews are great - a nice mixture of classics and up-and-coming artists. 

If there was space for a bit more about actually playing, that would be nice, although I have learned a few new chords over the years. 

Other than that, no complaints, keep it up!

gringopig

.

jeztone2

Matt_McG said:

I subscribe. I probably won’t renew. I have always found their relentless concentration on a certain demographic — middle aged men who like both kinds of music: blues, and blues rock — tedious, but there are periodic other things I like, and the magazine itself is well produced.

Recently, though, it has been worse. Literally all guitars reviewed are over 3K. Same cycle of cover features (there are basically 5): tele feature, strat feature, LP feature, over-rated white dead or elderly blues-rock guitarist feature, blingy PRS dentists’ guitar feature. 

And I am a professionally employed late 40s guy, so I should be smack in their advertisers target demographic, but I feel I am not. I like nusic made in the past 30 years, and while I could afford 3k+ for a guitar, I think prices are increasingly stupid.

This is how I feel. I’m supposedly in their demographic. But I find their content boring, lazy and they seem only to commission journalists they’ve met in the pub. 

I also think they are lazy. They seem to have this Southwest M4 corridor bias regarding contributors and interviewees. It’s like will Neville or Mick turn to stone if they went to Sheffield?? 

HarrySeven

After far too many years to mention buying/acquiring  guitar/recording/gear magazines (I have an archive of thousands of the things (going back to the ‘60’s) stashed in various attics and cupboards, etc), I’m finally about to give up. 

Truth is, Guitarist and Guitar no longer do anything for me (and in reality, haven’t done so for some considerable time - for pretty much all of the reasons quoted above).

I fully take on board the fact that my guitar/gear interests are either forensically specific or weirdly diverse - so in theory, there should be something in one of the mags for me - but I find myself increasingly indifferent to (or indeed, annoyed by) the contents.

*Articles on that band you’ve never heard of (who sound just like that other band you used to listen to 30 years ago).

*Interviews with some contemporary blooze dood whose entire repertoire consists of endlessly regurgitating dross that was originally played with far more verve and panache by someone else 50 years ago.

*Reviews of esoteric gear priced so high that the net profits from the sale of all your major internal
organs might *just* make a downpayment.

*Articles on that must-have new pedal (built in uber-limited runs just every two years by CV7003-obsessed Californian hipsters from long-defunct Cold War Mil Spec components and hand painted by Brazilian street children).

*Endless rehashes of guff relating to ‘Bursts, Custom Shop, R7, R8, R9 or whatever allegedly microscopically, historically-accurate bank-breaking recreation Gibson have churned out this year.

*That new PRS, compared to some other PRS.

*An interview with some obscure hyper-technical math-rock/metal-tastic/neo-shred tw*t, clutching something that looks like a cross between a harp and an ironing board.

*Avuncular reminiscences by some elderly blues-rock statesman, including a few off-colour ‘naughty’ stories and some droll advice for ‘the kids’.

*Info-tisements for/with dealers/collectors in/of high-end vintage gear.

*Fawningly sycophantic interview with one of a tiny selection of big name “bluesmen” or blues-rockers.

*Article/advertisement/review of that astronomically-priced ‘boutique’ guitar, built from ethically-sourced reclaimed church pews and bogwood by a swarthy, highly-strung Scotsman in a semi-derelict Norfolk barn.

*Interviews with some former bandmate, employee of, relative (or vague acquaintance) of some long-deceased guitarist, peppered with salty anecdotes, reverent references to ‘tone’ and wistful recollections of vintage gear.

Dull.

Dull.

Dull.

I’ll get me coat.

boogieman

HarrySeven said:

After far too many years to mention buying/acquiring  guitar/recording/gear magazines (I have an archive of thousands of the things (going back to the ‘60’s) stashed in various attics and cupboards, etc), I’m finally about to give up. 

Truth is, Guitarist and Guitar no longer do anything for me (and in reality, haven’t done so for some considerable time - for pretty much all of the reasons quoted above).

I fully take on board the fact that my guitar/gear interests are either forensically specific or weirdly diverse - so in theory, there should be something in one of the mags for me - but I find myself increasingly indifferent to (or indeed, annoyed by) the contents.

*Articles on that band you’ve never heard of (who sound just like that other band you used to listen to 30 years ago).

*Interviews with some contemporary blooze dood whose entire repertoire consists of endlessly regurgitating dross that was originally played with far more verve and panache by someone else 50 years ago.

*Reviews of esoteric gear priced so high that the net profits from the sale of all your major internal
organs might *just* make a downpayment.

*Articles on that must-have new pedal (built in uber-limited runs just every two years by CV7003-obsessed Californian hipsters from long-defunct Cold War Mil Spec components and hand painted by Brazilian street children).

*Endless rehashes of guff relating to ‘Bursts, Custom Shop, R7, R8, R9 or whatever allegedly microscopically, historically-accurate bank-breaking recreation Gibson have churned out this year.

*That new PRS, compared to some other PRS.

*An interview with some obscure hyper-technical math-rock/metal-tastic/neo-shred tw*t, clutching something that looks like a cross between a harp and an ironing board.

*Avuncular reminiscences by some elderly blues-rock statesman, including a few off-colour ‘naughty’ stories and some droll advice for ‘the kids’.

*Info-tisements for/with dealers/collectors in/of high-end vintage gear.

*Fawningly sycophantic interview with one of a tiny selection of big name “bluesmen” or blues-rockers.

*Article/advertisement/review of that astronomically-priced ‘boutique’ guitar, built from ethically-sourced reclaimed church pews and bogwood by a swarthy, highly-strung Scotsman in a semi-derelict Norfolk barn.

*Interviews with some former bandmate, employee of, relative (or vague acquaintance) of some long-deceased guitarist, peppered with salty anecdotes, reverent references to ‘tone’ and wistful recollections of vintage gear.

Dull.

Dull.

Dull.

I’ll get me coat.

Well I’m getting mine and joining you. Spot on ^.

I have a quick thumb through the mag if I see it but haven’t bought a copy in 10 years or so. 

Kittyfrisk

HarrySeven said:

After far too many years to mention buying/acquiring  guitar/recording/gear magazines (I have an archive of thousands of the things (going back to the ‘60’s) stashed in various attics and cupboards, etc), I’m finally about to give up. 

Truth is, Guitarist and Guitar no longer do anything for me (and in reality, haven’t done so for some considerable time - for pretty much all of the reasons quoted above).

I fully take on board the fact that my guitar/gear interests are either forensically specific or weirdly diverse - so in theory, there should be something in one of the mags for me - but I find myself increasingly indifferent to (or indeed, annoyed by) the contents.

*Articles on that band you’ve never heard of (who sound just like that other band you used to listen to 30 years ago).

*Interviews with some contemporary blooze dood whose entire repertoire consists of endlessly regurgitating dross that was originally played with far more verve and panache by someone else 50 years ago.

*Reviews of esoteric gear priced so high that the net profits from the sale of all your major internal
organs might *just* make a downpayment.

*Articles on that must-have new pedal (built in uber-limited runs just every two years by CV7003-obsessed Californian hipsters from long-defunct Cold War Mil Spec components and hand painted by Brazilian street children).

*Endless rehashes of guff relating to ‘Bursts, Custom Shop, R7, R8, R9 or whatever allegedly microscopically, historically-accurate bank-breaking recreation Gibson have churned out this year.

*That new PRS, compared to some other PRS.

*An interview with some obscure hyper-technical math-rock/metal-tastic/neo-shred tw*t, clutching something that looks like a cross between a harp and an ironing board.

*Avuncular reminiscences by some elderly blues-rock statesman, including a few off-colour ‘naughty’ stories and some droll advice for ‘the kids’.

*Info-tisements for/with dealers/collectors in/of high-end vintage gear.

*Fawningly sycophantic interview with one of a tiny selection of big name “bluesmen” or blues-rockers.

*Article/advertisement/review of that astronomically-priced ‘boutique’ guitar, built from ethically-sourced reclaimed church pews and bogwood by a swarthy, highly-strung Scotsman in a semi-derelict Norfolk barn.

*Interviews with some former bandmate, employee of, relative (or vague acquaintance) of some long-deceased guitarist, peppered with salty anecdotes, reverent references to ‘tone’ and wistful recollections of vintage gear.

Dull.

Dull.

Dull.

I’ll get me coat.

Are you registered as a bona fide political party that I can vote for & if not, why not?

StormshadowGuitars

HarrySeven said:

After far too many years to mention buying/acquiring  guitar/recording/gear magazines (I have an archive of thousands of the things (going back to the ‘60’s) stashed in various attics and cupboards, etc), I’m finally about to give up. 

Truth is, Guitarist and Guitar no longer do anything for me (and in reality, haven’t done so for some considerable time - for pretty much all of the reasons quoted above).

I fully take on board the fact that my guitar/gear interests are either forensically specific or weirdly diverse - so in theory, there should be something in one of the mags for me - but I find myself increasingly indifferent to (or indeed, annoyed by) the contents.

*Articles on that band you’ve never heard of (who sound just like that other band you used to listen to 30 years ago).

*Interviews with some contemporary blooze dood whose entire repertoire consists of endlessly regurgitating dross that was originally played with far more verve and panache by someone else 50 years ago.

*Reviews of esoteric gear priced so high that the net profits from the sale of all your major internal
organs might *just* make a downpayment.

*Articles on that must-have new pedal (built in uber-limited runs just every two years by CV7003-obsessed Californian hipsters from long-defunct Cold War Mil Spec components and hand painted by Brazilian street children).

*Endless rehashes of guff relating to ‘Bursts, Custom Shop, R7, R8, R9 or whatever allegedly microscopically, historically-accurate bank-breaking recreation Gibson have churned out this year.

*That new PRS, compared to some other PRS.

*An interview with some obscure hyper-technical math-rock/metal-tastic/neo-shred tw*t, clutching something that looks like a cross between a harp and an ironing board.

*Avuncular reminiscences by some elderly blues-rock statesman, including a few off-colour ‘naughty’ stories and some droll advice for ‘the kids’.

*Info-tisements for/with dealers/collectors in/of high-end vintage gear.

*Fawningly sycophantic interview with one of a tiny selection of big name “bluesmen” or blues-rockers.

*Article/advertisement/review of that astronomically-priced ‘boutique’ guitar, built from ethically-sourced reclaimed church pews and bogwood by a swarthy, highly-strung Scotsman in a semi-derelict Norfolk barn.

*Interviews with some former bandmate, employee of, relative (or vague acquaintance) of some long-deceased guitarist, peppered with salty anecdotes, reverent references to ‘tone’ and wistful recollections of vintage gear.

Dull.

Dull.

Dull.

I’ll get me coat.

My last copy was bought must be close to twenty years ago for pretty much most of those reasons

HarrySeven

Kittyfrisk said:

HarrySeven said:

After far too many years to mention buying/acquiring  guitar/recording/gear magazines (I have an archive of thousands of the things (going back to the ‘60’s) stashed in various attics and cupboards, etc), I’m finally about to give up. 

Truth is, Guitarist and Guitar no longer do anything for me (and in reality, haven’t done so for some considerable time - for pretty much all of the reasons quoted above).

I fully take on board the fact that my guitar/gear interests are either forensically specific or weirdly diverse - so in theory, there should be something in one of the mags for me - but I find myself increasingly indifferent to (or indeed, annoyed by) the contents.

*Articles on that band you’ve never heard of (who sound just like that other band you used to listen to 30 years ago).

*Interviews with some contemporary blooze dood whose entire repertoire consists of endlessly regurgitating dross that was originally played with far more verve and panache by someone else 50 years ago.

*Reviews of esoteric gear priced so high that the net profits from the sale of all your major internal
organs might *just* make a downpayment.

*Articles on that must-have new pedal (built in uber-limited runs just every two years by CV7003-obsessed Californian hipsters from long-defunct Cold War Mil Spec components and hand painted by Brazilian street children).

*Endless rehashes of guff relating to ‘Bursts, Custom Shop, R7, R8, R9 or whatever allegedly microscopically, historically-accurate bank-breaking recreation Gibson have churned out this year.

*That new PRS, compared to some other PRS.

*An interview with some obscure hyper-technical math-rock/metal-tastic/neo-shred tw*t, clutching something that looks like a cross between a harp and an ironing board.

*Avuncular reminiscences by some elderly blues-rock statesman, including a few off-colour ‘naughty’ stories and some droll advice for ‘the kids’.

*Info-tisements for/with dealers/collectors in/of high-end vintage gear.

*Fawningly sycophantic interview with one of a tiny selection of big name “bluesmen” or blues-rockers.

*Article/advertisement/review of that astronomically-priced ‘boutique’ guitar, built from ethically-sourced reclaimed church pews and bogwood by a swarthy, highly-strung Scotsman in a semi-derelict Norfolk barn.

*Interviews with some former bandmate, employee of, relative (or vague acquaintance) of some long-deceased guitarist, peppered with salty anecdotes, reverent references to ‘tone’ and wistful recollections of vintage gear.

Dull.

Dull.

Dull.

I’ll get me coat.

Are you registered as a bona fide political party that I can vote for & if not, why not?

Sadly, no...but now you mention it...

Kittyfrisk

To coin a phrase from a UK DIY ad... 'Do It' 'Do It' 'Do It' 
https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/party-or-campaigner/guidance-for-political-parties/registering-and-maintaining-a-party
Free the Harry 7!!!

meltedbuzzbox

@HarrySeven bravo sir, bravo!

equalsql

I've used readily on and off and there's no doubt it's great value but I hate their content filtering as it's just not fine grained enough. I really, really hate all the macho US gun mags they have, glorifying the damn things which I find sickening, so not being able to explicitly filter out those mags without also losing a shed load of other outdoors type content is a ball ache.

SimonC

HarrySeven said:

After far too many years to mention buying/acquiring  guitar/recording/gear magazines (I have an archive of thousands of the things (going back to the ‘60’s) stashed in various attics and cupboards, etc), I’m finally about to give up. 

Truth is, Guitarist and Guitar no longer do anything for me (and in reality, haven’t done so for some considerable time - for pretty much all of the reasons quoted above).

I fully take on board the fact that my guitar/gear interests are either forensically specific or weirdly diverse - so in theory, there should be something in one of the mags for me - but I find myself increasingly indifferent to (or indeed, annoyed by) the contents.

*Articles on that band you’ve never heard of (who sound just like that other band you used to listen to 30 years ago).

*Interviews with some contemporary blooze dood whose entire repertoire consists of endlessly regurgitating dross that was originally played with far more verve and panache by someone else 50 years ago.

*Reviews of esoteric gear priced so high that the net profits from the sale of all your major internal
organs might *just* make a downpayment.

*Articles on that must-have new pedal (built in uber-limited runs just every two years by CV7003-obsessed Californian hipsters from long-defunct Cold War Mil Spec components and hand painted by Brazilian street children).

*Endless rehashes of guff relating to ‘Bursts, Custom Shop, R7, R8, R9 or whatever allegedly microscopically, historically-accurate bank-breaking recreation Gibson have churned out this year.

*That new PRS, compared to some other PRS.

*An interview with some obscure hyper-technical math-rock/metal-tastic/neo-shred tw*t, clutching something that looks like a cross between a harp and an ironing board.

*Avuncular reminiscences by some elderly blues-rock statesman, including a few off-colour ‘naughty’ stories and some droll advice for ‘the kids’.

*Info-tisements for/with dealers/collectors in/of high-end vintage gear.

*Fawningly sycophantic interview with one of a tiny selection of big name “bluesmen” or blues-rockers.

*Article/advertisement/review of that astronomically-priced ‘boutique’ guitar, built from ethically-sourced reclaimed church pews and bogwood by a swarthy, highly-strung Scotsman in a semi-derelict Norfolk barn.

*Interviews with some former bandmate, employee of, relative (or vague acquaintance) of some long-deceased guitarist, peppered with salty anecdotes, reverent references to ‘tone’ and wistful recollections of vintage gear.

Dull.

Dull.

Dull.

I’ll get me coat.

You forgot to mention those ultra tedious “Private Collection” features......

HarrySeven

SimonC said:

HarrySeven said:

After far too many years to mention buying/acquiring  guitar/recording/gear magazines (I have an archive of thousands of the things (going back to the ‘60’s) stashed in various attics and cupboards, etc), I’m finally about to give up. 

Truth is, Guitarist and Guitar no longer do anything for me (and in reality, haven’t done so for some considerable time - for pretty much all of the reasons quoted above).

I fully take on board the fact that my guitar/gear interests are either forensically specific or weirdly diverse - so in theory, there should be something in one of the mags for me - but I find myself increasingly indifferent to (or indeed, annoyed by) the contents.

*Articles on that band you’ve never heard of (who sound just like that other band you used to listen to 30 years ago).

*Interviews with some contemporary blooze dood whose entire repertoire consists of endlessly regurgitating dross that was originally played with far more verve and panache by someone else 50 years ago.

*Reviews of esoteric gear priced so high that the net profits from the sale of all your major internal
organs might *just* make a downpayment.

*Articles on that must-have new pedal (built in uber-limited runs just every two years by CV7003-obsessed Californian hipsters from long-defunct Cold War Mil Spec components and hand painted by Brazilian street children).

*Endless rehashes of guff relating to ‘Bursts, Custom Shop, R7, R8, R9 or whatever allegedly microscopically, historically-accurate bank-breaking recreation Gibson have churned out this year.

*That new PRS, compared to some other PRS.

*An interview with some obscure hyper-technical math-rock/metal-tastic/neo-shred tw*t, clutching something that looks like a cross between a harp and an ironing board.

*Avuncular reminiscences by some elderly blues-rock statesman, including a few off-colour ‘naughty’ stories and some droll advice for ‘the kids’.

*Info-tisements for/with dealers/collectors in/of high-end vintage gear.

*Fawningly sycophantic interview with one of a tiny selection of big name “bluesmen” or blues-rockers.

*Article/advertisement/review of that astronomically-priced ‘boutique’ guitar, built from ethically-sourced reclaimed church pews and bogwood by a swarthy, highly-strung Scotsman in a semi-derelict Norfolk barn.

*Interviews with some former bandmate, employee of, relative (or vague acquaintance) of some long-deceased guitarist, peppered with salty anecdotes, reverent references to ‘tone’ and wistful recollections of vintage gear.

Dull.

Dull.

Dull.

I’ll get me coat.

You forgot to mention those ultra tedious “Private Collection” features......

Yup. And for the large part, I’d agree with you. 

The latest one is...interesting.