sullivan@acf4.UUCP (06/08/84)
For good classical record reviews, I always liked Fanfare magazine first, and Gramophone second. I feel that these are your best bets for just record reviews. I always felt that record reviews in audio magazines were often just extra fluff--the trying to please everyone syndrome. David J. Sullivan, WA1TNS SULLIVAN@NYU New York University ...floyd!cmcl2!sullivan
wjm@whuxj.UUCP (MITCHELL) (06/12/84)
----- News saved at Tue, 12-Jun-84 16:54:39 EDT <chomp chomp chomp> I am not too happy with the latest trend in audio magazines, specifically "High Fidelity" and "Stereo Review" to move toward very slick, glossy, paper editions of MTV. It started last year when HF decided to cut the size of the magazine, add more video information, cut back on the record reviews (all types of music, but especially classical), and adopt a very hard to read type face. (Not that I have anything against video magazines in themselves, but leave the video in a separate magazine that this videophobe can leave on the newsstand). So I dropped my subscription to HF when it expired this past May. Now I notice that "Stereo Review" is going down the same road. To the editors of said magazines (if you are on Usenet) - Don't forget your traditional audiophile, music-loving audience in your search for new readers. Needless to say, my SR subscription won't be renewed if they continue down this road. To fellow Usenet readers: What do you think??? Comments, please but send flames to a) the editors or b) /dev/null Regards, Bill Mitchell
rfg@hound.UUCP (R.GRANTGES) (06/13/84)
In the case of Hi Fidelity, they are trying to force us to buy their supplement "Musical America", or some such. Audio Mag. never carried many record reviews. As long as it does its thing, I will be happy. Stereo Review has no excuse other than that I bought a subscription years ahead. Serves me right. I'll just have to sit and watch them go to hell. (Of course they won't refund my subscription. That's an idea out of ancient history.) hound!rfg
wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) (06/13/84)
Another defect of the new-style HIGH FIDELITY is the games they are playing with reader-service "bingo" cards. They dropped the cards when they went to the new format, and since then have brought them back every now and then, irregularily. (It might be that they are "test-marketing" different areas of the nationwide mailing or newsstand distribution, but I doubt that, as they would have to have some issues printed with the "Circle No. 55" legends on the ads and some without; it's not just a matter of binding in the cards or not, which would be simple.) Anyway, I have always felt that one of the prime purposes of these "quasi-technical" hobby magazines is to serve as a conduit of info between the advertising manufacurers/dealers and the readership, and having Business-Reply-Mail reader-service was the best way to fulfill that function, in addition to the reviews and product-survey articles. Dropping the "bingo" cards leaves a gap in what the magazines offer to the readers in return for their subscription or newsstand money, and the information conduit is either broken or constricted. If you subscribe to or buy High Fidelity, and are writing to them anyway, complain about the missing reader-service cards. A few letters will probably make a big difference. Will
greg@olivej.UUCP (Greg Paley) (06/14/84)
The magazines I like best are the hardest to find locally, being either European or of a limited distribution. For record reviews, the most consistently trustworthy I've found are B.H. Haggin's in the quarterly "Yale Review". The hitch is that this is extremely hard to find, even in libraries, even though it is published in the U.S. I find his reviews worth the trouble of searching. To those who like extensive prose in reviews, though, he will be unsatisfactory since his comments are terse and to the point, often dealing with thirty records in a single page. For readers of German, I recommend "Fono Forum" and "Stereoplay". Many U.S. university libraries will have them, although they are next to impossible to find on newsstands. Their equipment reviews are much more critical than those in High Fidelity and Stereo Review, and always contain a "price vs. performance" judgement which I like to see, even if I might end up disagreeing. Of course, there is "Absolute Sound" but I can certainly understand those who find the egoism and adolescent writing style of many of its contributors irritating. I personally find their reviews of sound quality of recordings very reliable but those of performance quality highly unreliable (does anyone with any knowledge of music really think Antal Dorati is one of the podium greats of the age?). "Gramophone" is, at least locally, the most easily available of the imports, but I find its equipment reviews vastly inferior to the English mag "Hi/Fi News and Record Review". The record reviews I find about on a par with "Fanfare" - i.e., much better than High Fidelity or Stereo Review but considerably below Yale Review or Fono Forum in terms of reliability. This is, of course, very subjective since it indicates only the proximity of what the critics say with what my ears tell me. For vocal recordings, though, "Gramophone" has an inestimable advantage in John Steane, since he knows his stuff about the voice better than just about any other writer in the business. - Greg Paley
jho@ihuxn.UUCP (Yosi Hoshen) (06/19/84)
I concur with Bill Michell. There is not enough reviewing of classical music in the traditional audio magazines, Hi Fidelity Stereo Review, and Audio. What are the alternatives? The British Gramophone magazine has many classical reviews including CD recordings. The problem is that it is not easy to find this magazine on the news stand, or in libraries. There is another problem, the magazine is heavily advertized by the record companies, which may cast doubts on the objectivity of its reviewers. However, the Gramophone is probably offering the most comprehensive reviews on classical recordings. -- Yosi Hoshen Bell Laboratories Naperville, Illinois (312)-979-7321 Mail: ihnp4!ihuxn!jho