Gramophone resurgent!

[jayne lee wilson]

Well, we thought it would never happen, but... have you SEEN it yet? The January 2014 issue of Gramophone has 122 pages, of which 60 are devoted to reviews, with an extra reissue section - James Jolly in addition to Rob Cowan's replay. The reviews themselves are longer too "more reviews of greater length, spread more expansively throughout the magazine" as Cullingford says. And much of the trivia has been ejected, fewer bits and pieces. Good features as ever, including Geraint lewis on Robin Holloway. The whole feel of the magazine is changed and whatever one thinks of individual reviewers (, oh YOU know, 'twas ever thus etc...) we now have two review magazines "for the serious classical collector" available once again. If, like me, you take IRR as well, there'll be just too much to read!

I would still like more comparisons and more venue/date info in reviews, but I feel thrilled that the G. has recovered something of its true role under the ownership of the Mark Allen Group, and with the wonderful archive it's a marvellous resource. I suspect Martin Cullingford should take most of the credit. (And that luridly jazzy cover is probably conceived as a counterbalance to the substance within!)

[MickyD]

This is encouraging news indeed...I look forward to further opinions before I take the plunge. For the moment, IRR satisifies my needs, but I might just be tempted...

[BBMmk2]

Sounds great JLW. Imight purchase a copy and have a peruse! Might even go back to it as well!!

[pastoralguy]

Sounds great JLW. Imight purchase a copy and have a peruse! Might even go back to it as well!!

Yes, I was impressed with the 'new & improved' contents. I really hope it continues. I couldn't help compare the review in circa 1963 for Karajan's complete set of Beethoven symphonies (a full page!) with the tiny reviews given to recent sets.

Let's hope this is going to continue.

[amateur51]

Perhaps a letter of modest congratulation on the rescue to Martin Cullingford and Mark Allen group, with suggestions for further improvements?

I'll have a look in WHS later today & buy it if it looks good

[VodkaDilc]

Is this the first copy under the new ownership? I will certainly buy one and give it another try.

[mathias broucek]

I too was quite taken-aback by the improvement.

[Beef Oven!]

Although my instincts warn me otherwise, I am going to seek out the January 2014 copy, and see if Gramophone has washed its face.

[DublinJimbo]

It all sounds very promising. Still, Gramophone has been so bad recently that I'll wait for the new approach to settle in before committing myself to buying it again.

[VodkaDilc]

It all sounds very promising. Still, Gramophone has been so bad recently that I'll wait for the new approach to settle in before committing myself to buying it again.

That's wise, I think. I bought a copy this morning and, after a brief look through it, I still find it rather trivial and superficial. Perhaps it has improved - I have not seen a copy for over a year, so I might have missed the low-point. It still has an unsatisfactorily untidy look to it, there are some very cursory reviews, the non-review content seems superficial, it still has some very substandard reviewers (the man from Crossroads is STILL writing about the piano), the audio section is still written by the man from What H-Fi (surely he should be replaced soon - I recalled the days of Geoffrey Horn, John Borwick et al with a sigh!) and it just feels like an inferior product alongside IRR. AS DublinJimbo has said, let's give it a chance to settle under the new ownership - but it has a long way to go before I resume subscribing.

[Nick Armstrong]

the man from Crossroads is STILL writing about the piano

What's the problem? He actually made a record, you know!

[VodkaDilc]

Now Benny was a star - not Jill Richardson's umpteenth husband.

[hafod]

Like others, I will wait to see how the changes develop. I first took this magazine in the late sixties when it was more of a journal than a magazine and was disturbed by the downward spiral that began on Jolly's watch when Haymarket acquired it in 1999. The downward plunge accelerated under the disastrous Inverne to the extent that in 2009 it was an easy decision not renew my subscription. Cullingford took over (I think) in 2011 and the occasional look at the magazine in the library and WHS revealed no signs of improvement. The timing of the reported improvements suggest that the trigger was the new owner. Interestingly, the Gramophone blog passes off these changes as 'true to our heritage'. Would that be an admission that the backside of the Jolly years and the Inverne tenure got it horribly wrong?

http://www.gramophone.co.uk/blog/the-gramophone-blog/gramophones-new-issue-an-even-stronger-emphasis-on-recordings-and-reviews

[Beef Oven!]

Like others, I will wait to see how the changes develop. I first took this magazine in the late sixties when it was more of a journal than a magazine and was disturbed by the downward spiral that began on Jolly's watch when Haymarket acquired it in 1999. The downward plunge accelerated under the disastrous Inverne to the extent that in 2009 it was an easy decision not renew my subscription. Cullingford took over (I think) in 2011 and the occasional look at the magazine in the library and WHS revealed no signs of improvement. The timing of the reported improvements suggest that the trigger was the new owner. Interestingly, the Gramophone blog passes off these changes as 'true to our heritage'. Would that be an admission that the backside of the Jolly years and the Inverne tenure got it horribly wrong?

http://www.gramophone.co.uk/blog/the...gs-and-reviews

It doesn't give confidence that the article is undersigned by a grinning Bertie Wooster!

[Barbirollians]

That's wise, I think. I bought a copy this morning and, after a brief look through it, I still find it rather trivial and superficial. Perhaps it has improved - I have not seen a copy for over a year, so I might have missed the low-point. It still has an unsatisfactorily untidy look to it, there are some very cursory reviews, the non-review content seems superficial, it still has some very substandard reviewers (the man from Crossroads is STILL writing about the piano), the audio section is still written by the man from What H-Fi (surely he should be replaced soon - I recalled the days of Geoffrey Horn, John Borwick et al with a sigh!) and it just feels like an inferior product alongside IRR. AS DublinJimbo has said, let's give it a chance to settle under the new ownership - but it has a long way to go before I resume subscribing.

I shall pick up a copy and see whether it is worth subscribing again . At least it does not have Michael Jameson or Raymond Tuttle.