Favorite Mags

[dagosto]

I usd to subscribe to a bunch of different music production mags but let them expire because they started to suck so much. Mags like Electronic Musician, Keyboard, even Tape Op have seemed to fall off the boat a bit.

I am starting to find that the articles have no real world applications and the reviews sound more like advertisements with some sound engineer fluff thrown in (ie "The upper mids sounded wide open with minimal harshness").

The only two mags I trust now are EQ and Future Music. They both speak heavy tech and seem to be a bit more critical in their reviews. Mix is good too, a lot like EQ. Tape Op can be OK but they used to be a lot better IMO (whatever it's free).

[Bellringer]

I agree that most magazines have begun to serve the manufacturers. Tape Op used to interview people who made their own records. People doing with what they had. Now they seem to be interviewing mid level studios. The reviews also fell off. They used to tell you about anything old or new, now they sound like they just want to be a clone of the big players. Sad the influence $ has on people.
I haven't subscribed to anything in a few years due to most magazines being readable in about 10 minutes. Nothing good in them. I buy only if the cover shows enough content to make me hope for the best. Of course Tape Op is still free!

[puffpastry]

It's an unfortunate relationship, I suppose. In order to publish a magazine, you need money. In order to get money, you run ads. In order to maintain advertising relationships, sometimes magazines go too far. Take the example of EQ magazine completely retracting a negative review of a particular Pro Tools product because Digidesign complained.

I love TapeOp, but lets face it--it's striving to do something that usually is reserved for the ultra-schlock magazines, the giveaways that are nothing more than flimsy excuses to sell ad space. Despite this, TapeOp has still managed to maintain at least SOME credibility.

[dagosto]

I didn't catch that EQ retraction. That's a shame.

[johnS]

I still dig tape op. Despite that one interview with Pink Floyd's personal studio guy, who went on way too long talking about the "directionality" of the wiring in their gazillion dollar houseboat studio on the Thames. Apparently this guy took it upon himself to wire everything up twice--once with the wires going in one direction and once with them going in the other direction--too see which sounded better. Dood, you have waaaaaaay too much time on your hands.

Call me crazy, but I'm guessing the directionality of studio wiring isn't something DIY recordists stay up nights worrying about.

Even so, TapeOp is still cool. Seeing the insides of real studios and hearing professionals talk about how they do things is valuable to me.

[Chaorta]

Sound on Sound, Future Music, Barely Legal.

[silenced]

UK is such a small market compared to US and yet they really know how to put together a magazine
sound on sound, future music, computer music, even the guitar ones

my theory is that these UK magazines contain a lot of retailer advertisements rather than vendor advertisements like US ones. the us publications all seem so timid - they definitely don't want to offend the manufacturers. every piece of equipment is the best for something. most gear these days is pretty good, but the us publication reviews don't smell totally clean and independent. also, they aren't as detailed and nerdy.

i grew up and learned most of what i know on keyboard magazine, but it's been a while since i learned anything from it. i learn something new everytime i read a british mag.

one thing i think is silly though is those attached cd-roms (maybe dvds now). that is big overseas and i never really got into. anybody ever use one of those?

[puffpastry]

Barely Legal

Their article about tape machine biassing was outstanding!

[Chaorta]

Originally Posted by puffpastry

Their article about tape machine biassing was outstanding!

I read it for the pictures of naked girls.

[johnS]

Originally Posted by silenced

UK is such a small market compared to US and yet they really know how to put together a magazine
sound on sound, future music, computer music, even the guitar ones

Same goes for the way they cover the music scene. I was way into Select and Q in the mid-90s Brit-pop era, and I thought they really put US rags like Spin and Rolling Stone to shame. They were much more cheeky and irreverent, and when they were snide--which was most of the time--they were way funnier . . . because they had the stones to laugh AT the celebs--not just wink along WITH them, like the timid sycophants at Spin and RS. Oh, and they wrote better captions.

And most importantly, they so weren't waterlogged with "significance." You never felt like they were berating you for not liking the classic rock. I mean, Rolling Stone is STILL penning flatulent tributes to the Grateful Dead, Dylan, Mick Jagger, et al. Absolutley snooze-inducing. (Don't get me wrong--I like 60s music, but let it go, people, it's 2005. Jan Wenner berating us for not caring enough about the 60s is ridiculous. I mean, were the kids in the 60s lectured endlessely about the Cultural Significance of the flappers of the 20s? I think not.)