BBC Music vs Gramophone

[eyeresist]

As I mentioned previously, YOU are apparently one of the elitist snobs that populate this forum. Is there something wrong with being a "populist" magazine?

Way to keep the conversation civilised, Iago. By "populist", I think Dundonnell means that reviews and articles are much shorter because for some reason people these days find reading "hard", this at the expense of information and ideas of interest to music lovers. Also, big features on "flash in the pan" celebrity singers, musicians and conductors who don't warrant the wordage. Also, religiously avoiding all technical terms because readers might be confused and frightened (my own technical knowledge is rather limited, but because I'm interested in music I'd rather read something slightly over my head than dumbed down to the level of a "lifestyle" magazine). By "populist", I think we mean lots of pictures and no big words, something a 9-year-old would be comfortable to peruse. Since I'd prefer something better than that, I guess that makes me a mere elitist.


I've only been reading Gramophone for the past three years, but online I've read lots of reminiscing/complaining - apparently it's been going downhill consistently since the 1960s!

[Dancing Divertimentian]

As I mentioned previously, YOU are apparently one of the elitist snobs that populate this forum. Is there something wrong with being a "populist" magazine?

There is when a mag starts out as NOT populist but over time morphs into populist. Such a move tends to alienate its dedicated readership, one which it's so painstakingly cultivated. And in Gramophone's case it's spent generations cultivating a readership. 

So throwing the readership over for more moolah (populist = $$$) is sure to draw fire. Deservedly so. And voicing our OPINIONS on the matter isn't 'elitist'. Get it?

[eyeresist]

Sorry, my previous post was a bit exaggerated. I didn't mean to suggest BBC Music and Gramophone are at the same level as the Classic FM magazine.

[Dundonnell]

Interesting!  I venture out of my normal area of this site(the Composer Discussion Forum) and I get accused of being "an elitist snob'!
Heyho!

I have no difficulty with popular/'populist' magazines dealing with classical music. These magazines cater to a market. They probably help to bring more music to a wider audience. They do so in an attractive syle. The BBC Music Magazine-presumably-sells. I like it for what it is. I shall continue to buy it.

Equally, there should be at least one magazine in which the reviews of new discs go into more detail about the music on these discs, which assume a certain degree of familiarity with core repertoire and which compare and contrast-in depth-particular interpretations with others in the catalogue, or introduce new music in such a way as to give the reader a genuine insight into what it sounds like.

'Gramophone' used to do this much more effectively than it does today. The reviews have been curtailed. Space is used for the sort of purposes described by eyeresist. That is disappointing for some of the long-term readership. That is why I cherish the lengthy, detailed reviews in International Record Review. Space is not 'wasted' in that magazine so just as much music can be reviewed.

And..no..I don't have any great technical musical literacy but I appreciate music critics who don't talk down to me
Does that make me 'an elitist snob'? Well...if it does...tough

[vandermolen]

Well last year I wanted to subscribe to a Classical magazine but couldn't really decide between the two.  So I subscribed to both for a year intending to decide afterwards which one to keep.  Well its been a year and I'm still no wiser.  I haven't really noticed much of a difference between the two.  They usually cover the same things (although sometimes an issue earlier or later than the other one).  I need to renew soon but I'd rather not renew both.  Any opinions welcome on which magazine you prefer (or is there a better one out there)?

The good thing about the BBC Magazine is the CD which contains complete versions of works (ie Andrew Davis's excellent Vaughan Williams Symphony 5 from the Proms). I hardly ever play the CED of bits and pieces which comes with Gramophone. My favourite magazine was CD Review but that folded long ago. Gramophone has some good articles like the recent one by Michael Kennedy on Vaughan Williams.

[Szykneij]

I don't suppose that by "golden age" you necessarily meant as 'recently' as the 60s and 70s but I started collecting the Gramophone magazine in 1963(I think! My older copies are in my attic!). I was at school at the time I have a complete set up from then through to 1984 and then again from 1989(I lost interest in classical music for a time in the 80s-don't ask!).

What an excellent resource such an extensive collection of that magazine is! It gives you a great opportunity to compare "then" and "now".

I certainly agree that the quality of the magazine has declined over the decades. Reviews of new discs thirty/forty years ago were far lengthier, better written and much more informative. There was obviously less of the appeal to the 'populist' and I suppose some would say that in appearance and content the magazine might be regarded as 'dull' compared to the glossy current makeup.

Isn't this decline common to just about all print media? We cancelled our TV Guide subscription when they gave up the digest format, making the publication basically unusable as a "guide". "Yankee Magazine", one of my favorites, suffered greatly in appeal when they changed their format, too. "Rolling Stone" is another example that pales, in my opinion, to it's heyday. Many outstanding magazines have gone out of business completely. Most daily newspapers across the U.S. are smaller and less inclusive than in the past. I think the problems we are dealing with regarding classical music publications are probably the same for speciality magazines in other areas, and these problems are due in large part to the growth of the internet that we all use and enjoy. It's just an unfortunate trade off in the way we get our information.

[eyeresist]

Re: My previous post. I now realise that I preferred Gramophone's Karajan issue to BBC Music's, not the other way around.

[Mark]

Well last year I wanted to subscribe to a Classical magazine but couldn't really decide between the two.  So I subscribed to both for a year intending to decide afterwards which one to keep.  Well its been a year and I'm still no wiser.  I haven't really noticed much of a difference between the two.  They usually cover the same things (although sometimes an issue earlier or later than the other one).  I need to renew soon but I'd rather not renew both.  Any opinions welcome on which magazine you prefer (or is there a better one out there)?

Like you, I subscribe to both. But if I had to lose one of them, I'd ditch Gramophone. Why? Simply because the BBC Music Magazine cover CD is the more valuable freebie. It consistently carries interesting performances from the BBC archives, whereas Gramophone has mere (and often, drastically edited) samples of current releases.

In editorial terms, I'd say that Gramophone might be considered the more intelligent. But as many who've read the title for years will know well, the quality has slipped in recent times. BBC Music Magazine takes a more beginner-to-intermediate approach in its articles, and that suits me rather nicely. So again, this is the one I'd choose.

[The new erato]

That is why I cherish the lengthy, detailed reviews in International Record Review. Space is not 'wasted' in that magazine so just as much music can be reviewed.

My favorite magazine as well, and they have a more thorough treatment of reissues (where is where the most interesting releases often are these days) than the two other magazines. And I have more than ten volumes og Fanfares on my shelf to prove that I know that magazine, too.

[Mark]

To return briefly to a point made earlier in this thread about buying a magazine to read, not listen to (a sensible proposition), I think much depends on why one might want to read either title.

For me, it's not a question of reading the reviews and making informed purchasing choices thereafter - the internet and my own gut instinct are help enough for me in most cases - but simply a desire to be generally aware of what's happening in a branch of the arts which I enjoy enormously.

If some of the more mainstream media channels carried as much on classical music as they do on contemporary music (or literature, which dominates most 'culture' supplements in the Sunday papers), I might even decide not to subscribe to specialist titles at all.

[MDL]

Fanfare 

I really liked both Fanfare and American Record Guide, but Borders and Virgin no longer stock them in the UK. Sulk. 

[Dundonnell]

My favorite magazine as well, and they have a more thorough treatment of reissues (where is where the most interesting releases often are these days) than the two other magazines. And I have more than ten volumes og Fanfares on my shelf to prove that I know that magazine, too.

Good to find someone else who reads International Record Review! Definitely the most informative about new releases in my opinion.

[mn dave]

I really liked both Fanfare and American Record Guide, but Borders and Virgin no longer stock them in the UK. Sulk. 

Can you subscribe?

[MDL]

Can you subscribe?

Dunno, actually. I've never looked into it. Probably. But I'm not really one for subscribing, mainly cos the post where I live is rather crappy and I'd worry about stuff going missing. I'd never subscribe to either Gramophone or BBC Music mag, for instance, even though I buy every issue.

While I'm noodling around on this topic, I should add that I prefer Gramophone to BBC Music, but the BBC CDs are a real bonus. Only last week, I was playing a BBC CD from the early or mid '90s which includes a Takemitsu orchestral piece, From Me Flows What You Call Time (or something like that!), which I don't think has been recorded by anybody else.

[Mark]

Only last week, I was playing a BBC CD from the early or mid '90s which includes a Takemitsu orchestral piece, From Me Flows What You Call Time (or something like that!), which I don't think has been recorded by anybody else.

I have that disc - paired with a corking rendition of Walton's First Symphony, right?

[hornteacher]

I really liked both Fanfare and American Record Guide, but Borders and Virgin no longer stock them in the UK. Sulk. 

They don't stock it in the USA either, which was part of my frustration to begin with.  An American company doesn't stock the American publication for classical music (although they do stock Gramophone and BBC Music).  Go figure.

You can subscribe to Fanfare but I was really hoping to browse through an issue before shelling out a year's worth.

[MDL]

I have that disc - paired with a corking rendition of Walton's First Symphony, right?

Yup, that's the one.

[MDL]

Good to find someone else who reads International Record Review! Definitely the most informative about new releases in my opinion.

I'm a regular IRR reader, too. It's a satisfying read without any gimmicks or rubbish. A proper grown-up mag.

[Dundonnell]

I'm a regular IRR reader, too. It's a satisfying read without any gimmicks or rubbish. A proper grown-up mag.

Well put

[Solitary Wanderer]

If some of the more mainstream media channels carried as much on classical music as they do on contemporary music (or literature, which dominates most 'culture' supplements in the Sunday papers), I might even decide not to subscribe to specialist titles at all.

Exactly the same situation here in New Zealand where the newspapers, especially the weekend editions, promote how many supplements they offer but its mainly sport and pop music/Hollywood movies as far as mainstream 'culture' is concerned.

The only serious Arts coverage [which includes reviews on classical music concerts etc] is now on a Saturday buried at the back of the Lifestyle section and consists of about 4 pages. Its a disgrace really.

I've bought BBC Mag a few times but haven't tried Grammophone yet. I enjoyed the magazine and may buy another one today