Bass Guitar Magazine

[William James Easton]

A couple of thoughts popped into my head whilst warming the throne this moring and browsing through an old BGM,

1 - When ever they review a book/cd/dvd they are always extemely nice about it...no matter how poor it is. A kind of well done attitude rather than a could of been better one.

2 - 'THE UK's NUMBER ONE BASS GUITAR MAGAZINE' - is there another?

other than that great read.

have a think

Warmest Regards

[budget bassist]

Yeah, i've never seen a bad review in there.... but then again, i've never really seen them review anything that i would class as "crap", they tend to give you a good idea of what gives you how much bang for your buck though, though it would have been nice for them to give the 25 beginner basses in the last issue or the issue before or whatever a rating, because some of that stuff i wouldn't have touched, having already owned some of them.

Edited January 19, 2009 by budget bassist

[MacDaddy]

[quote name='budget bassist' post='385175' date='Jan 19 2009, 05:30 PM']Yeah, i've never seen a bad review in there.... but then again, i've never really seen them review anything that i would class as "crap", they tend to give you a good idea of what gives you how much bang for your buck though, though it would have been nice for them to give the 25 beginner basses in the last issue or the issue before or whatever a rating, because some of that stuff i wouldn't have touched, having already owned some of them.[/quote]
yeah, I'd be interested in a review of all the beginners stuff.

[niceguyhomer]

I like the stock conclusions to gear reviews...erm...."...a fine addition to the range and one I'd recommend you try out" type stuff.

[budget bassist]

I suppose this sort of thing is highly subjective though, i mean certain basses aren't for everyone. P-basses really aren't my thing, but someone could find the tone they've always been looking for in a MIM precision. It's hard to say good or bad about a bit of kit, all you can really do is give people an idea of the sound and reccommend they try it. Unless of course it falls to bits or something.

[yorks5stringer]

I guess they are always keen to keep advertisers onside and continue to get items to review too? Also like has been said earlier, one mans meat.....

[Bass-ic]

Its a very small market, and i doubt they can afford to lose the revenue of any advertisers!

They still manage to give some excellent gera away tho. I got a free Guy Pratt course, so I'm pretty happy with the mag!
Matt

[leschirons]

It pisses me off to know that they don't want to rock the boat with their bread and butter advertisers. Have a rant about a Dingwall bass (unlikely I know, it's just a name example) and you may get your letter printed. Moan about the sh*te service from Fender or Peavey and you've got no chance as they each take about 6 pages in a mag like that.

Another thing (sorry, I'm in a bad mood) When Bassist mag finished, it was supposed to be incorporated into Guitarist mag. It was for about 3 months, then, as the months went by, you're lucky if they condescend to review one crappy £100 bass.

Bastards.

[Bass-ic]

[quote name='leschirons' post='385456' date='Jan 19 2009, 09:53 PM']It pisses me off to know that they don't want to rock the boat with their bread and butter advertisers. Have a rant about a Dingwall bass (unlikely I know, it's just a name example) and you may get your letter printed. Moan about the sh*te service from Fender or Peavey and you've got no chance as they each take about 6 pages in a mag like that.

Another thing (sorry, I'm in a bad mood) When Bassist mag finished, it was supposed to be incorporated into Guitarist mag. It was for about 3 months, then, as the months went by, you're lucky if they condescend to review one crappy £100 bass.

Bastards.[/quote]


...and breaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaath!

[wateroftyne]

I always buy it, and enjoy most of it. I agree that the reviews could be a little less like advertisements....

HOWEVER...

The interview with Geddy Lee in the last issue was embarrasingly laughable.

C'mon... it's Geddy Lee. Ask him something vaguely probing... please?

[ARGH]

Its still miles and miles behind Bassplayer,and Yes I know they have multi millions behind them,and yes I know its all adverts (which it isnt) and yes I know in the USA they have everything 3 months before us...

But its better......it just is.

[Musky]

[quote name='Absolute-beginner' post='385432' date='Jan 19 2009, 09:28 PM']They still manage to give some excellent gera away tho.[/quote]

Though of course they don't give the gear away - the distributors do. They pay for the competition as much as if they'd paid for a more obvious advert - in fact if I remember rightly it advertisers usually pay more for a competition page than they would if they took out a standard one page advertisement.

I don't trust the reviews in mags any more, ever since I realised that Bassist never gave [i]anything[/i] a bad review. You always had to read between the lines and spot when the superlative count was down. The only one I gave credence to was the Guitar Magazine. I still remember that Marshall acknowledged the Guitar Mag's opinion that the then new AVT range's speakers weren't up to the job as correct (and upgraded them), whilst Guitarist was slinging around ridiculous superlatives like 'perfect', 'greatest SS amp ever' and 'indistinguishable from all valve'.

Quite honestly I value the opinion of the good burgers of basschat over any magazine anyday.

[skankdelvar]

I reckon I've bought most issues of the UK guitar and bass mags for about thirty years, and, IIRC, the only time they've ever slagged a product is for poor finishing or set-up, which can then be put down to the review instrument being a one-off, thus sparing the Mfr's blushes.

In recent years, reviews have become much more detailed, and generally stricter than those of the early 80's. And there's a greater willingness to 'question' the thinking behind certain aspects of a product - e.g. "perhaps a different speaker might smooth out some of the highs".

But you'll never see an outright slagging of quality or function, because those are the rules of the game.

The only mag that I recall going outside 'the agreement' was the US publication Guitar Player, who 10-15 yrs ago trumpeted a re-launched reviews policy.

For a few months, they stuck the boot in; shoddy products were named and shamed; badly set-up review instruments were returned with maximum publicity; amps that blew up on review were ruthlessly exposed.

For Yanks, they got quite sarky. It was fun.

The result: The Mfrs and retailers pulled advertising, the editor was 'disappeared' after a discreet interval and the mag went back to soft-pedalling. It has since then, given stick where really merited, but covers it's arse with a "manufacturer's response" which gives the offender a right of reply.

That said, my real concern is not whether reviews are too forgiving of [i]all[/i] mfrs. I have a queasy feeling about the relationships between the mags and [i]certain[/i] mfrs.

For example: Guitarist has a policy of not reviewing what it calls 'copies'. What it means is, it won't review embarrassingly well-made Chinese sub-£100 copies. It's published rationale - they don't want to contribute to copyright infringement(!) - suggesting Fender, who have the most to lose, have a bit of issue with cheapies and Guitarist is helping them out.

Furthermore, there seems to be a distinct warmness towards certain manufacturers - maybe they've got better PR people, but PRS and Mesa seem to glide by on rose-petals, whatever they produce. Now, I wouldn't deny these are quality products, but it's funny how they can seem to do no wrong. OTOH, Gibson seem to have a lot of comms issues and get quite lukewarm reviews as a result. Fender only have to fart a minor variation of the J, P, Tele, or Strat and it gets 3 pages

The reality is that the relationship between mag and mfr is mutually beneficial, and no-one rocks the boat. It's pretty much the same in all areas of specialist consumer interest publishing - cars, boats, hill-walking...try getting a slag letter published in any of them. I'm aware of editors and journos who agree that Mfr X might be taking the pi$$, but they know they just can't publish that opinion. If they do, some ar53wip3 will ring them up and the pressure will be on.

To get round this, I suspect any number of review products get returned with a polite excuse. And in fairness, I've rarely seen a gtr or bass product that got a good review that turned out to be a [i]total [/i]turkey with bits falling off. Compare that to the last Hoover, kettle or plasma TV you bought.

Journalism's a funny area - It's not all investigative derring-do. If we were more aware of the conditions that surround - say - Beckham-type celebrity interviews (pre-vetted questions, no-go areas, preview of article with right to demand changes, picture approval) we might not be so hard on BGM and the poor schmoes who've had to turn a lovely hobby into a horrible job.

Edited January 20, 2009 by skankdelvar

[William James Easton]

[quote name='ARGH' post='385639' date='Jan 20 2009, 12:23 AM']Its still miles and miles behind Bassplayer,and Yes I know they have multi millions behind them,and yes I know its all adverts (which it isnt) and yes I know in the USA they have everything 3 months before us...

But its better......it just is.[/quote]

i might go back to reading that.


still no ones answered question 2.

[Tracer]

[url="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087332/quotes#qt0475910"]I'm with Egon on this one[/url]. When the survival of your publication depends on your advertising revenue what hope have you got of being truly impartial?

I certainly haven't seen another UK bass magazine in a while, and I spend an embarrassing amount of time in Borders.

[EBS_freak]

[quote name='Tracer' post='385806' date='Jan 20 2009, 11:02 AM']

[url="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087332/quotes#qt0475910"]I'm with Egon on this one[/url]. When the survival of your publication depends on your advertising revenue what hope have you got of being truly impartial?

I certainly haven't seen another UK bass magazine in a while, and I spend an embarrassing amount of time in Borders.[/quote]

2 - 'THE UK's NUMBER ONE BASS GUITAR MAGAZINE' - is there another?

No. Not in print anyway.

[Eight]

[quote name='William James Easton' post='385698' date='Jan 20 2009, 08:46 AM']i might go back to reading that.[/quote]
BassPlayer?

Is that the really thin, over-priced bass guitar magazine?

I like BGM. Ok yes, the reviews are probably a little on the dubious side but its a good read and I find the tips/technique/transcriptions stuff to be good.

[William James Easton]

just a point of note. i did refer to the little book/dvd/cd reviews. there equipment reviews are tip top.
carry on.

[Bilbo]

I used to buy Bass Player religiously when it first came out but, if you spend anytime reading these magazines, the interviews and reviews quickly all blend into one. So I stopped reading them. The only real downside is that you don't get to hear about new players until they become more mainstream but the is marginal becasue, as you get older, the influence of the new 'young lions' on your playing decreases because the music you play normally comes from a different place.

Gearwise, I tend to buy by reputation not as a consequence of advertising or reviews and I get that 'word of mouth' from talking to people and listening to what other players have to say. The workshop forums tend to be polarised between the very basic 'major scale in thirds' type colums and the unplayable 'Michael Manring open tunings, double tapping on a fretless' column. So I became an autodidcat. Advertising is the main loss - you don't get to see what's out there - but I can't afford to buy it so does it matter?

I think I would rather read a Jazzwise/Jazztimes/Downbeat type magazine as its the music that matters not the bass (oooer! Controversy!!)!

[obbm]

The editor of BGM came up from Devon and supported the SE Bass Bash in September. He had his own session and talked about the magazine and answered a number of questions about the magazine, some quite pointed.

At the end of the day it's a commercial undertaking. If you don't like it OP then I challenge you to start a rival magazine and make it pay.

BTW I have no connection with BGM, it's editorial staff or its publishers.

[dlloyd]

One of the problems with reviews is that there isn't that much equipment out there that is truly terrible. It tends to range between 'bland but kind of does what it's supposed to' and 'pretty good, could live with it'.

There's also the problem that there is inherent variability in quality of what comes off the production line. A manufacturer or distributor is not going to pick an instrument at random and send it as is. It's inevitable that they're going to choose one of the better ones and put in a little bit of extra effort in preparing them for review.

[synaesthesia]

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='385850' date='Jan 20 2009, 11:39 AM']I used to buy Bass Player religiously when it first came out but, if you spend anytime reading these magazines, the interviews and reviews quickly all blend into one. So I stopped reading them. The only real downside is that you don't get to hear about new players until they become more mainstream but the is marginal becasue, as you get older, the influence of the new 'young lions' on your playing decreases because the music you play normally comes from a different place.

Gearwise, I tend to buy by reputation not as a consequence of advertising or reviews and I get that 'word of mouth' from talking to people and listening to what other players have to say. The workshop forums tend to be polarised between the very basic 'major scale in thirds' type colums and the unplayable 'Michael Manring open tunings, double tapping on a fretless' column. So I became an autodidcat. Advertising is the main loss - you don't get to see what's out there - but I can't afford to buy it so does it matter?

I think I would rather read a Jazzwise/Jazztimes/Downbeat type magazine as its the music that matters not the bass (oooer! Controversy!!)![/quote]

Downbeat's a lot less penetrating these days too. The articles are shorter than before and because of the internet, nothing's really news in print anymore.

FWIW, BGM is typical of many UK magazines money correlation ethos. The ethos is the same. In hifi mags, if you have a 200 quid amp, you must use a 200 quid pair of speakers. God forbid you drive any Martin Logans with a 200 quid amp. The logic is the same in BGM. I have a copy in my loo...bought one to have a gander, the one with the US precision and Jazz on the cover. The article on leads is a right laugh. If you have a Fodera then you must use a £150 quid lead. If you have a Stagg spend no more than a fiver on a lead. I'd step out and say that the article is completely misleading. I also find it really funny that J Gwizdala who constantly brags about quitting Berklee to play teaching anything in print or in a school.

The ads are the same as guitarist mag, or SOS, useful for 'street' retail prices. Email has largely eradicated the letters to the editor sections that always get the same letters like "can we have a section for beginners please? I don't understand what you are on about".

The thing about US rags is that they get the global trendsetters contributing, it is not that the UK does not have them, it is that they go stateside and put their two cents there.

Edited January 20, 2009 by synaesthesia

[William James Easton]

[quote name='obbm' post='385863' date='Jan 20 2009, 11:47 AM']The editor of BGM came up from Devon and supported the SE Bass Bash in September. He had his own session and talked about the magazine and answered a number of questions about the magazine, some quite pointed.

At the end of the day it's a commercial undertaking. [b]If you don't like it OP then I challenge you to start a rival magazine and make it pay[/b].

BTW I have no connection with BGM, it's editorial staff or its publishers.[/quote]

you should read my post.

[iamthewalrus]

I think BGM is an ok magazine, I'm not particularly fond of the way it's set out, & I'd like to see more in depth interviews as they seem a bit brief to say the least. The lesson articles are excellent, & the reviews are ok.

As it's the only UK publication, I'm quite happy with that - the magazine is an improvement over the dying days of "Bassist" magazine - once they started to put that cartoon in, the writing was on the wall (it wasn't even mildly amusing, but perhaps that might have something to do with my sense of humour). In the first year of it's existence, "Bassist" was a great magazine.

I think BP is slowly starting to get back to what it once was, although I still find the amount of advertising annoying to say the least, but if that's what helps to keep it going, who am I to say otherwise?

Cheers,
iamthewalrus

[William James Easton]

[quote name='dlloyd' post='385881' date='Jan 20 2009, 11:59 AM']One of the problems with reviews is that there isn't that much equipment out there that is truly terrible. It tends to range between 'bland but kind of does what it's supposed to' and 'pretty good, could live with it'.

[b]There's also the problem that there is inherent variability in quality of what comes off the production line. A manufacturer or distributor is not going to pick an instrument at random and send it as is. It's inevitable that they're going to choose one of the better ones and put in a little bit of extra effort in preparing them for review.[/b][/quote]

on that note did you see the p bass on front a while a go? you could still see the plastic around the jack input. made my failed photograpgy a level of ten years ago blood boil!