Latest Issue Of Guitarist Magazine

guitars4you

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.

worthy of both a wiz and LOL Mr H - I find I  read the actual content far less - Maybe I get blase about it all, having spent 40 years in the trade - I've either seen it all or not interested in it all

But i do like your descriptive thoughts on this, very much

Grumpyrocker

Missing from the list:

Surprisingly exuberant and gushing review for an amplifier "engineered" in the UK opposite a full page advert for the very same amplifier company. What a coincidence. 

crunchman

chrisv said:

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. 

That's partly profiteering.  At the lowest, the pound fell 17% against the dollar.

The pound is now only about 11% down on what it was before the referendum, so why are these guitars still 20% (or more) more expensive?

There is a strong argument that the pound was overvalued before the referendum anyway.  So not only is the fall in the pound not enough to explain the price rises, it would have fallen anyway:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/currency/12065157/Pound-is-most-overvalued-currency-in-the-world-analysts-claim.html

That article is about 6 months before the referendum.

Greatape

I gave up on Guitar Player and moved to Guitar & Bass / The Guitar Magazine. Now I'm about to ditch that. 

I'm sick to death of the emphasis of gear over playing (although I get the realpolitik), the egomania of the contributors (bit better in TGM; bloody horrible in Guitarist) and the whole 'Instagram lifestyle' side of it. And when did £2k become a ' not noteworthy' price for a guitar?

Maybe this is the endgame made inevitable by tech advance. Stick a fork in the industry: it's nearly done. 

idiotwindow

Grumpyrocker said:

Missing from the list:

Surprisingly exuberant and gushing review for an amplifier "engineered" in the UK opposite a full page advert for the very same amplifier company. What a coincidence. 

It probably is a good amp though.

crunchman

I gave up on Guitarist years ago.  I still get The Guitar Magazine, but I don't know if I'll keep getting it.

They are trying to do different things (like the offset issue) but that doesn't always work.  I don't like offsets.

I might unsubscribe and then get a free gift again to subscribe at the Guitar Show!

sev112

2 years ago, one of “our own” went off to try and make the guita magazine that everyone is complaining they want.  Without too many details it would seem that trying to pleas us all wasn’t good for his health.

It’s not as easy as it seems

Winny_Pooh

sev112 said:

2 years ago, one of “our own” went off to try and make the guita magazine that everyone is complaining they want.  Without too many details it would seem that trying to pleas us all wasn’t good for his health.

It’s not as easy as it seems

It wasn't a particularly good magazine, so I'm unsure what you're saying.
Quality and reach are possible, Guitar Player used to be brilliant in the 70's 80's 90's and at present Premiere Guitar do lots of cool stuff, I do "thumb" through their online version now and then. 

I think it's also affected (as mentioned) by being part of a larger media conglomerate. Has you read a Time magazine lately, not worth wiping one's arse with. However, something like the Atlantic does the same thing Time used to but is dramatically better. 

57Deluxe

gringopig said:

Funkfingers said:

The publishers put out what they think we want to buy. Some of us buy the mags. The publishers use our purchase decisions to instruct their editorial content decisions. 

Stalemate.

Stale, mate.

Well, in ten years time there will be one issue a year and it will feature Joe Bonamassa exclusively and cost £300

hangon - I am just mailing Joe now with a great idea - Joe Bonamasa Monthly Magazine...

Blaendulais

57Deluxe said:

gringopig said:

Funkfingers said:

The publishers put out what they think we want to buy. Some of us buy the mags. The publishers use our purchase decisions to instruct their editorial content decisions. 

Stalemate.

Stale, mate.

Well, in ten years time there will be one issue a year and it will feature Joe Bonamassa exclusively and cost £300

hangon - I am just mailing Joe now with a great idea - Joe Bonamasa Monthly Magazine...

It comes with a free Joe signature guitar as in 10 years time there will be so many they will be worthless

meltedbuzzbox

sev112 said:

2 years ago, one of “our own” went off to try and make the guita magazine that everyone is complaining they want.  Without too many details it would seem that trying to pleas us all wasn’t good for his health.

It’s not as easy as it seems

You mean jooky?

He had serious health issues before the magazine.

RiftAmps

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.

Didn’t you have a multi-page feature done on your guitar/amp collection a few years back in Guitar Mag? They did something for you then...

monquixote

It's not complicated.

Print revenues are through the floor because of the internet and journalists haven't worked out how to make money out of websites.

As a result there is no money to pay writers and so the writing isn't very good. What money there is, is rightly targeted towards the magazine buying demographic which is essentially people who don't know how to use the internet otherwise known as old people so all the articles are about things they care about like JoBo and R8s.

If Guitarist was raking in money then Rabea  and Danish Pete would no doubt be working for them, but as it is they work for Lee Anderton because the big audience with money to spend have moved to YouTube.

Philly_Q

Winny_Pooh said:

Quality and reach are possible, Guitar Player used to be brilliant in the 70's 80's 90's and at present Premiere Guitar do lots of cool stuff, I do "thumb" through their online version now and then. 

I think Guitar Player is still good.  The interviews and reviews are much more brief than they used to be but they still feature loads of people I've never heard of, who are therefore interesting to read about, even if they play musical styles I'm not a fan of. 

HarrySeven

RiftAmps said:

HarrySeven said:

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

Didn’t you have a multi-page feature done on your guitar/amp collection a few years back in Guitar Mag? They did something for you then...

Hmmm...so you think I’m biting the hand that feeds? Does that matter?

Do you feel that because I appeared in two editions of the magazine, it means that I’m exempt from an opinion and therefore personally can’t critique it’s current overall axis/target demographic?

Remember, this isn’t solely aimed at Guitar.

However, it is interesting where lines get blurred...for instance, as you mentioned the Private Collection features - these aren’t necessarily ‘private’ and have/do cover dealers (the latest edition, for instance). This is perhaps a different discussion - it could be said that being allowed a window into someone’s personal passion for collecting - which would normally *never* be on view - is somewhat removed from what practically amounts to an extended free advertisement for a shop/business.

Of course, no one publication can please everyone all of the time - and I think this thread is perhaps more about the state of the music industry, the impact of online publication vs. hard-copy, etc.

NelsonP

monquixote said:

It's not complicated.

Print revenues are through the floor because of the internet and journalists haven't worked out how to make money out of websites.

As a result there is no money to pay writers and so the writing isn't very good. What money there is, is rightly targeted towards the magazine buying demographic which is essentially people who don't know how to use the internet otherwise known as old people so all the articles are about things they care about like JoBo and R8s.

If Guitarist was raking in money then Rabea  and Danish Pete would no doubt be working for them, but as it is they work for Lee Anderton because the big audience with money to spend have moved to YouTube.

But on the plus side reading isn't as important as it used to be. You can now find out everything you need to know by watching YouTube ;-)

MtB

I joined my local library (costing £0) and found that by downloading a couple of apps the library gives me free access to electronic copies of thousands of magazines including guitarist, total guitar, guitar techniques, etc,. 

monquixote

NelsonP said:

monquixote said:

It's not complicated.

Print revenues are through the floor because of the internet and journalists haven't worked out how to make money out of websites.

As a result there is no money to pay writers and so the writing isn't very good. What money there is, is rightly targeted towards the magazine buying demographic which is essentially people who don't know how to use the internet otherwise known as old people so all the articles are about things they care about like JoBo and R8s.

If Guitarist was raking in money then Rabea  and Danish Pete would no doubt be working for them, but as it is they work for Lee Anderton because the big audience with money to spend have moved to YouTube.

But on the plus side reading isn't as important as it used to be. You can now find out everything you need to know by watching YouTube ;-)

Much more in fact.

On the one hand you could read a written opinion of what something sounds like and on the other you could actually hear it.

I used to subscribe to Q magazine and read all of the album reviews now I just listen to new releases on Spotify.