It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
TBH, they were utter shitheads in the late 80s and early 90s - I remember trying to get one of their journos to get off his fat arse to come and see our band back in the day... getting featured in there had more to do with who you were sleeping with, who you were drinking with and who you were supplying drugs to.
I totally sympathise with Ginger Wildheart's comment - they were utterly judgemental and at one point between them and the Maker, they had new music sown up. If they didn't like you, you were sunk - they were that powerful. Not even John Peel had the clout to over-ride their opinions.
I'm sure there were some good guys that worked there, and I feel sorry for them losing their jobs. However, their legacy won't be mourned in this corner.
It's great seeing all the various eras of NME discussed here. Pip I know hates it but that's true of most music produced after 1976. Most of you here are older than me so you saw eras I've never really been part of.
I started reading it in 1992. It was fucking great for about five years, fell apart from the end of Britpop, and then started trying to diversify which was a huge mistake. I actually had an interview for staff writer there in 2002 and got to the final round. The minute I walked in there, I knew I didn't want it and wouldn't get it. I wasn't hip enough for NME in those days.
Where it worked for me was finding the writers who I'd get to trust with regard to music. Ignore the big features, go with the small reviews.
Funny reading some of the replies on there. Apparently NME didn't like people who could actually play their instruments... must be news to Johnny Marr, Bernard Butler, John Squire etc.
And if NME sank bands for good, then how did the Wildhearts keep going? Rather disproves Ginger's theory.
(I did quote a Lev’s lyric back on page 1).
The NME was very influential in the early 90’s. The Suede ‘best band in Britain’ cover was I think before they released a single and gave them success and a huge buzz overnight. There was a lot on the us grunge thing and anything to do with Nirvana was essential. The live reviews were part of a healthy live scene. No it was not all healthy and I do have mixed feelings duch as the build em up and knock em down thing, eg the shoegaze scene. Slowdive were pretty much killed off when they released Slouvlaki, which is now considered a classic. I’d moved on from NME/MM by the time bloody britpop came round and got into metal and drum n bass.
Turned out to be quite prophetic.
Interesting. Maybe Motley Crue and Skid Row were considered cool in an ironic kind of way for 5 minutes in 1989? Or did someone who actually liked those bands somehow manage to blag his way into an NME job (presumably for a matter of weeks at most)?
Still, fair play. Joan Sims.
Bunch of phoneys the lot of them, spurred on by hack NME journalists desperate to jump on any bandwagon and then claim they started a “movement”
I rest my case.
It's like asserting that "Year of the Cat" by Al Stewart is a rip-off of "Living After Midnight" by Judas Priest.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
Perhaps they were referring to 'poodle perm' hairstyles.
When I was a kid and started buying magazines, I used to buy Zzap!64 and any one other that would catch my fancy - often the NME. I remember liking it and it introduced me to bands/artists I wouldn't ever have heard of otherwise.
Later though, I went to a few gigs that got reviewed and thought they must have been at a different show. Places that were jumping were written off and dull affairs gushed about. I don't think I concluded that it was a power game where the reviewers were promoting their favourites and dismissing those that weren't 'in' but rather that they simply weren't going to the gigs and making up the reviews to fill space.
There was a time when Queen were out of fashion and not hugely loved. That people would and did say things like "They're shit because NME said so" is demonstrative of a newspaper's power over stupid people.
Really NME was like a long running band itself. It moved in and out of fashion, had several changes of lineup, went in new directions that didn't always work, and then blew up before the final reunion tour.
I sold my collection last year, most of them went to a guy in Spain who was prepared to shell out good money for nearly 100 kilos of inkies. Reading back over my favourite period, 1992 to 1997... there was some good writing there. Stuart Baillie interviewing the Manics after Richey's hospitalization is wonderful. Music journalism depends on that balance between a good writer and a good subject to write about.