Gramophone

[VodkaDilc]

Shame about the Fanfare, Micky. The IRR people would be delighted to hear that last recommendation. I know that Barry Irving, from IRR and formerly from Gramophone, was on the old message boards, so I hope he has joined here and sees that.

[Thomas Roth]

I too gave up many years ago. I got so tired of always reading that Simon Rattle is the best conductor ever.

[Chris Newman]

When I first read the Gramophone it still had connections with Sir Compton Mackenzie and Alec Robertson. It is a mere shadow of its former self. I stopped buying it in the late 70s. I glanced at one in Smiths the other day. Gosh, the print is large. I could read much of it without my reading glasses.

[Mahlerei]

I gave up my subscription some years ago. The ghastly redesigns bothered me as much if not more than the diluted content. Magazine design isn't an exact science but the key principle of readability has long since been sacrificed on the altar of gloss and glitz. Frankly the eye has a tough time knowing where to alight on the page, what with the ever changing fonts and column widths. And the teasers at the head of each review - I presume they still do them - were so trite as to be meaningless. Grimophone indeed :(

[MarkSealey]

I'm heartened by this thread: pretty much the only reason I keep my subscription going is sentiment… I first read it in the early 1960s and was struck then by its informed authority.

With the current emphasis on celebrities, trivia, competitions, hyperbole, misplaced and rather vapid pseudo-populism, the ephemeral, superficial and sensational (all qualities of R3 while we're at it) it's hard to justify paying as much as one does for it - given that it's neither authoritative nor particularly well-informed any more.

Is IRR significantly better?

[MickyD]

Hello Mark,

I had exactly the same feelings of sentiment in stopping my subscription after some 30 years; I kept making allowances for design changes etc thinking that I should move with the times. The decision to drop the CD without any notice to subscribers was another blow, particularly to those who had just re-subscribed to a magazine which advertised itself carrying a CD....some of those are very unhappy and asking for a refund, as you will see on the Gramophone Forum itself. But I think it was the dismissive attitude of some of the editorial staff on their forum which really got my goat - anyone who doesn't have computer access to the extracts (or who merely has no desire to sit at a PC in their leisure time) is cast off as irrelevant - either adopt the new technique or stop moaning and leave us in peace seems to be the message. The tone has become so sneering that I am truly amazed that the editor of the magazine hasn't stepped in and stopped what must surely be a lot of damage to his core readers. I wrote and told him so whilst cancelling my subscription but haven't received a reply yet, nor do I expect to.

As for IRR, it was, in my opinion, the only option available. Clear presentation, reviews of a decent length seemingly free from any pseudish talk and a marked absence of any of those Hello! style adulatory articles about artists etc and all the other items you describe. In fact it seems a little dry after Gramophone, but on reflection, maybe that's no bad thing. I have compared the two magazines for review content - IRR appears slimmer in looks, but when you subtract all the guff from Gramophone, the number of reviews are pretty much equal. I remain undecided as I have only just started my IRR subscription, but already it seems to be far more serious and digestible.

[Il Grande Inquisitor]

The IRR people would be delighted to hear that last recommendation.

Indeed. I hope you enjoy your new subscription, MickyD.

[VodkaDilc]

Indeed. I hope you enjoy your new subscription, MickyD.

I had completely forgotten your IRR connection. Thank you for the reminder; I have taken a final opportunity to check back on the BBC boards to remind myself of your identity!! I hope you will encourage Barry I to re-establish his presence here.

[Panjandrum]

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.

Micky, I can only assume that the last two christmas editions of Gramophone failed to reach you in your French chateau as the emasculating of the Critics Choice section goes back several years now.Some critics cleverly circumvent the editorial strictures by listing a number of recordings which just failed to make the top spot before making their sole recommendation, but by and large this much anticipated annual review is a shadow of its past glory. However, on the bright side, think of all the money we now save. In the old days, with six recommendations per reviewer this time of year could stretch the old purse a bit too far...

[Don Petter]

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.

Bryn,

Well, that was in 1980, with the start of Volume 58, so you didn't even stick it as long as I did! My first issue was bought in December 1957 (funny how these trivia can stick in the mind, even though I don't know where I've put my glasses) and some when in the 1990s an equally disillusioned friend and I went on to 'issue sharing' whereby he buys each issue and reads it, then passes it on to me to read and keep. We share the cost, so have halved our outlay, at least.

I haven't thrown any away yet, and have bound volumes from 1945 (early on I bought second hand volumes to go back to before I started) to about 2000 on the shelf. At that point Gramophone ditched its regular binding arrangement, and I haven't thought the quality to be worth getting it bound independently since. The later issues pile up on the floor, but I find I rarely look at them. I'm more likely to look up a review from the '50s of some interesting recording now re-issued (or not).

I have subscribed to IRR since its first issue, and can add my recommendation to others for those wanting to read sensible reviews, uncluttered by the dreaded visual fireworks which are so distracting to the eye and brain.

[VodkaDilc]

I am impressed to read that Don Petter bought Gramophone from 1957. My older issues are in boxes somewhere, so I can't check the dates, but I must have begun collecting around 1972. I caught the Gramophone bug from my Head of Department in my first job, in an inner London school. (I wonder if you're a member here, Rod!)

I began subscribing, rather than buying every issue from a shop, when I moved to a more rural location in 1986 - but I certainly have every issue from 1972.

I agree that IRR is the way to go now.

[MickyD]

Panjandrum, I think I must have seen the last Christmas editions of the mag as I had a regular subscription, but I really do think that the current issue is the worst that I can remember and certainly the final straw for me. I have just finished the October issue of IRR; in case anyone is wondering, I swear I am nothing to do with their editorial team and have no personal interests in promoting it, but WHAT a breath of fresh air it is. No flashy mastheads, no teasers, barely any ads, no silly articles or polls - just good, readable reviews in an erudite but clear style. Surely it can be the only alternative for those of us who liked Gramophone the way it once was.

[Suffolkcoastal]

I bought Gramophone regularly for a number of years in the 1990's but became frustrated with the standard of some reviews and which CD's it chose to review. I have still been browsing it on occasions in the Library but in the last year or so it has definitely got worse, it is far too full of adverts, there is a smaller and smaller number of discs being reviewed, the standard of reviews is getting worse (they are often very bity) and of course the final straw was a couple of months or so ago with that certain idiot critic about which I posted about on the R3 boards. I've looked up some of his other reviews at random and just shook my head, shall we say generally not someone I wish to take the slightest bit of notice of in future.

As for IRR, I haven't seen it for what seems like years. From the recommendations of other messageboarders I might try and obtain a recent copy to try.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

...with that certain idiot critic about which I posted about on the R3 boards.

Which critic was that? (If it's too contentious to mention it on a public forum, you could send a private message.)

I've always found certain critics can be irritating. The late Alan Blyth certainly knew where "doh" was and had great experience of opera; yet he favoured recordings that had the microphones rammed down the singers' throats. He said this was more like the balance heard in the opera house. I wonder which opera house he had in mind. Bayreuth, possibly, but not, I suspect, any others.

[MickyD]

Suffolkcoastal,

If you want to try IRR, I see that you can ask for a sample copy on their website and just pay for the postage and packing.