Gramophone

[MickyD]

A few days ago, VodkaDilc passed comment on the annual Critics Choice feature in Gramophone. I have just received my copy and am similarly appalled - each reviewer used to give about six choices for their CDs of the year and it made for fascinating reading. Now it has been slashed to just one CD per reviewer and the typefaces are enormous, thus padding out the pages. It is a travesty of what it once was.

For a moment last week, I did have some hesitation in cancelling my subscription and switching to IRR, but having seen this, plus the ridiculous contest for "The World's Best Choir" in next month's issue, I am sure I have done the right thing.

The debate about dropping the cover CD goes on over at the Gramophone Forum, but anyone still trying to plead their case is dismissed or ridiculed by a hard core set of contributors who obviously feel that if you don't want to listen to extracts on a PC, then you are yesterday's man/woman. Because of this I can't be bothered to add to the argument anymore on their boards, but I would seriously love to know just how many readers have dropped their subscriptions over the last few months.

[mikealdren]

Hi Micky,
I had less patience than you and gave up Gramophone a couple of years ago or so. I was increasingly irritated by short reviews, endless, ridiculous lists, dumbing down of content and unnecessary changes in format. Despite my increasing long sight, I don't even need the larger font they have chosen to hide the reduced content.

In short, I happened to look back at an older copy and was shocked at how poor the modern magazine was in comparison. In the 1970s copy, I read the review of the original release of Kleiber's Traviata - have a look on line and you'll see what I mean.

If I wanted what Gramophone has become, I would have bought the BBC music magazine, I've always found that rather shallow and still do, unfortunately Gramophone is now similar.

Mike

[Don Petter]

My patience ran out much longer ago than that. The general consenus in 'the other place' was that the rot really set in when the magazine was sold to the Haymarket group in 1999. Being a bit of a fuddy duddy, I hold that the rot can be traced back even further to June 1991, which was the first issue in Volume 69. This was the volume which discarded page numbering sequentially through the year, and presumably the point at which they no longer expected readers to bind and keep the issues for reference. It certainly made indexing and referring very ungainly from then on, having to refer to 'November, page 64' rather than just 'page 1364'. But they probably even then thought that attention span was universally waning, and big numbers like that would frighten off the punters.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

My patience hasn't run out yet. I keep on hoping for better things. It's as though the Channel 4 moguls have taken over magazine. Or perhaps FaceBook. Perhaps they'll want us all to "sign up as a friend" before we can access their online music that has replaced the cover CD.

[BBMmk2]

I think mine musty be extremely short!! I havn't had Gramophone for ages now! BBC Music Magazine has probably the right balance.

[MickyD]

Interesting replies, folks. I'd agree that things started going downhill a long time ago, but in fact I would actually say that I have seen significant deterioration in just these last few months - there is a feeling of desperation in sensationalising articles and presentation. The current December issue is a case in point. The Christmas edition was always such a bumper read, but now it is a very flimsy, lightweight effort.

[Nick Armstrong]

I still buy it every month, as I have since 1983... Some of the articles are of interest, but I now don't keep the copies for reference (and happily was able to pass my 20 odd year collection of back copies to a friend, a fellow member here). I suspect I shall keep buying it as there is sufficient of interest for the moment, to offset the 'desperate' aspects MickyD highlights.

[Bryn]

As mentioned elsewhere, many moons ago, I cancelled my subscription shortly after they started including advertisements on the editorial pages, rather than resticting them to pages (indeed sheets) devoted solely to adverstisements. It used to be so handy, form a storage point of view, to simply rip out the ad. pages and keep the rest.

[Gordon]

I also cancelled my sub many moons ago for the same reasons as others have given - the last issue on the shelf is March 2001. The earliest issue I have is September 1952 - LP was all the rage then!! What a difference of editorial management.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

It seems that we have a situation with no winners. People cancel their subscriptions because of the dumbing down. The editorial team, seeing falling sales, try to make it more "popular" in order to reverse the trend. This does not appear to have worked, though Gramophone's sales figures may tell a different story. Rather than trying to modernise the layout, perhaps they should modernise the title, since very few people use a gramophone any more.

[VodkaDilc]

I'm glad to see that the Gramophone debate lives on - and I was honoured to see that Micky gave me a mention in the first post. I also think that the decline set in pre-Haymarket, though it got much worse once it was under that banner. I can't put a date to it, but I wrote to Christopher Pollard, the Editor at the time, when some reviews started appearing in coloured boxes, disrupting the flow of the pages. (A trivial thing now, but it seemed revolutionary at the time!) He responded by PHONING me!! Imagine that happening now. We had a long chat and he asked opinions about some of the newer reviewers. It seems like a different age!

One more question for Micky: Did you get hold of a copy of Fanfare, as you thought you could via one of your widely travelled friends? Any opinions of it?

[VodkaDilc]

Eine Alpensinfonie: Do you know the sales figures for Gramophone?

I think the argument for maintaining the title was a valid one. It would have gone through a number of changes over the decades; Gramophone had a timeless quality about it. Would we have had "Record Player", "CD Player" and so on? And would we be heading towards another change to "Downloads"? Best left alone in my opinion (and that goes for the original style of the magazine too!).

[Bryn]

Well, I still think "CD Magazine" has a fairly apposite ring to it as far as the current manifestation of the publication is concerned.

[DracoM]

Bryn

Good to see you on this forum. Have missed tyour commnets on t'other side.
Good that many of the gang seem to be migrating.

[MickyD]

Hi VodkaDilc,

Thanks for your kind words. This debate is quite right to go on in my opinion, but I feel more inclined to discuss it here with rationally-minded people rather than the techno-brigade who are obviously calling the shots on the Gramophone debate site (and I have distinct suspicions that the most fervent of those are probably members of the magazine's staff).

A personal phone call from Christopher Pollard - ah, those were the days. I have heard before that he was a real gent.

Sadly my friend tried to no avail at various newsstands in New York to get hold of Fanfare. But quite coincidentally, the vendor suggested a copy of IRR, which he duly brought back and seeing that crisper, waffle-free magazine was the thing which made me switch subscriptions this month!