Members Ostracized Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 You never see a bad review in a guitar magazine. Even when the reviewer finds a fault, it's something totally obvious like "This Les Paul doesn't have a trem option", or "This Fender Twin can't do death metal". Another magazine I read, PC Gamer, is not afraid to give reviewed games terrible review (as low as 5% score) when deserved. So what are guitar magazines so sycophantic? More critical reviewing in the mags would probably lead to better products. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ibanezman06 Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 why do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ostracized Posted January 9, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 I think if the mags were more critical, companies would still advertise in them. Guitar companies big or small still need to get their products out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HEPNOTIC Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 they're chicken{censored}. same reason why 99 percent of famous bands will never talk {censored} about another band in a published interview. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hudman Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 It pays the bills (and the writers / reviewers get a lot of free {censored}). Same as most magazines, newspapers and TV shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Treborklow Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 There would be no magazines if not for the ads. No mag is going to piss off an advertiser. Much like Television, where the programing is just something to do between the commercials, in magazines, the articles are only there to fill some space between advertisments... and that is the simple truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members guitarNed Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 With a very few exceptions, no magazine or TV series will offend an advertiser. That's just how it is, and has always been. I used to work for a weekly newspaper. The newspaper needed to sell advertisements. So there were never stories that were in any way negative to any local business. The townspeople understood the rules. Nobody was misled. We looked to the newspaper for true news about everything EXCEPT local businesses! Same with guitar mags. Just imagine that each review had a red stamp at the top: THIS REVIEW WILL NOT PRESENT ANY NEGATIVE INFORMATION, BECAUSE MANUFACTURERS ARE ALSO ADVERTISERS. WE APOLOGIZE FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE THIS POLICY MAY CAUSE FOR OUR READERS." It's not a big deal, really. I read guitar mags in order to get one-sided product descriptions, much as if I sent away for a brochure or company-supplied product description. I'm a big boy; I can read between the lines and see what's not there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Thri11_H0use Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 Originally posted by Ostracized You never see a bad review in a guitar magazine. Even when the reviewer finds a fault, it's something totally obvious like "This Les Paul doesn't have a trem option", or "This Fender Twin can't do death metal".Another magazine I read, PC Gamer, is not afraid to give reviewed games terrible review (as low as 5% score) when deserved.So what are guitar magazines so sycophantic? More critical reviewing in the mags would probably lead to better products. +1. I long time ago, i read a review on this game "Extreme Paintbrawl". got 6% i think. They completely ripped into that one. M,any other games from big companies that got hyped up got the {censored}ty scores they deserved. There is no excuse why guitar mags shouldnt be doing the same. If the advertisers dont like negative exposure, then they should not be releasing {censored}ty products. Infact, you would think that the possibility of a negative review would push them to MAKE SURE that their product is of good quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members jerry_picker Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 Because panders and koalers are such cute fuzzy critters, that's why! Pander Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EdMan63 Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 Simple. Advertisers pay the bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ALX Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 " Everything is good" "They laughed when I said they could have Perfect Pitch, give me 139$ and save 30$ right now and join the musicians around the world who have been broke back mountained" They promote "Tony Burnet", The guy who can "quickly turn even a 12-year-old rookies into monster shredders and jazz fusion maestro almost overnight. Wait I will find something else he said... "He can take a raw 12-years old kid... and have him soloing in jazz fusion modes in just a few weeks. Vicious, tasty, and absolutely mahavishnu-quality lead guitar" This guy looks to have something for 12-years old little boy... How can we thrust and take seriously magazine where we can read {censored} like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members suxatguitar Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 I hate how often times Guitar World and Guitar One will review the same thing within a month of each other and sometimes in the same month. Or how about the Crate Powerblock. Both mags praised it and now its discontinued or on its way. Moral of the story is play what YOU like... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members xupernaut Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 I haven't picked up a guitar mag in years but i have a couple lieing around.One has a review of an Ibanez rg that reads more like an advertising blurb,actually pretty funny stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Treborklow Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 I check out lots of the guitar mags looking for pics of guitars and it's pretty sad that pretty much most of the pics are in the ads. It seems that many of the mags are full of TABS and stuff I am not interested in. I like to see pics of guitars I don't have and fair honest reviews. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DarknessFury Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 Originally posted by ALX "This guy looks to have something for 12-years old little boy...How can we thrust and take seriously magazine where we can read {censored} like that. I like how you say that that guy looks to have something for 12 year old boys and then say thrust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members joie Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 Originally posted by Treborklow There would be no magazines if not for the ads. No mag is going to piss off an advertiser. ... and that is the simple truth. Then why are the British and Japanese guitar magazines not afraidto publish the brutal truth with reviews??, They have a 1-5 star system and they give plenty of single stars on gear. If anything, they have way more ads in their issues than U.S. mags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members GarysBlues Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 Whats up with the Crate Power Block anyway? Man that thing has been on sale for a freaking YEAR! How damn many did they BUILD? I thought it sounded pretty good? But It definatly sounds BETTER through its OWN cabinate! I really don't think you can beat it for $100 bucks! Look at the reviews? Whys it discontinued? Or is it SO CHEAP to build, that they are just putting as many as they could in players hands? REALLY how freaking long would it take to sell out the damn thing? Not a METAL or High Gain amp. But blues and Rock? I like it. and I grew up on Twin-Reverbs and Bandmaster/Reverbs! Have them sitting here and play through the BLOCK? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JimboJ Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 I think the answer is simple. Manufacturers send the products to the magazine to review. That means they hand pick one with no flaws. And the fact is, in 2007 with CNC machines and the technology we have, it really is hard to make a bad guitar. Its even difficult to find negative things to say about the $200 Squiers. I think the reviews are fair for the most part. They point out what they like and don't like. When you're talking about something as subjective as guitar tone, one person's opinion has limited value in that regard anyway. I don't believe they give special treatment to advertisers in the reviews themselves, but I think they may choose to review a guitar based on whether they are an advertiser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Grantus Posted January 9, 2007 Members Share Posted January 9, 2007 Originally posted by Treborklow There would be no magazines if not for the ads. No mag is going to piss off an advertiser. Much like Television, where the programing is just something to do between the commercials, in magazines, the articles are only there to fill some space between advertisments... and that is the simple truth. I disagree. There are certainly many magazines that work hard to keep from pissing off advertisers, but there are plenty of examples of ones that do negative reviews about advertisers products as well. There is good journalism and there is bad journalism. It's true that video game magazines aren't afraid to give products terrible reviews, even if the products are produced by advertisers. Newspapers and some business magazines do hard-hitting journalism. The LA Times just did an investigation of the kinds of investments the Gates Foundation makes, and I'd bet Microsoft advertises in the Times. I'm a technology journalist who works for a group of magazines covering the computer industry. I don't do product reviews but I've done plenty of stories that could be considered negative news about major advertisers. I've never, in close to 20 years of journalism, been asked to tone down a story because it was about an advertiser. As for the original question -- I'd guess that guitar magazines have all fallen into the same kind of rut. Few people expect them to do hard-hitting reviews, so they don't. (And they get free stuff to review as well, but so do video-game mags.) Also, the guitar magazines seem to be fighting over generally the same small list of regular advertisers. If you piss off one or two, that could hurt. The same small group of advertisers have plenty of choices. It would be nice to see a guitar magazine started that wouldn't be afraid to give a name-brand guitar an 11 percent rating. Grant PS Sorry for the novel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gpeditor Posted January 24, 2007 Members Share Posted January 24, 2007 Hi all... Advertiser pressure on publications that review products is definitely an issue all editors and publishers must face. GP is committed to being fair, comprehensive, and NOT misinforming our readers, and yet the trust issues between some readers and our editors remain constant. We have even ASKED forum members to bust us in the GUITAR PLAYER forum if anyone sees us publish a review that obscures the truth or misses the point or just blows it. To date, few (if any) have gone on record with explicit and specific criticisms. We still offer this check-and-balance system, because we WANT to be fair and accurate DESPITE the advertising connection. Readers can even e-mail me directly at mmolenda@musicplayer.com if they want to rant about a review they feel we weren't honest about. I hope you'll take us up on these opportunities, because I kind of hate the fact that these trust issues continue on and on and on. And for the record: [1] Not all manufacturers sent us hand-picked gear. Most, in fact, send stuff right off the same line that goes to consumers. [2] Not all manufacturers hate negative reviews. They're in the minority, of course, but some are fine with accurate and fair criticisms of their products. [3] Most gear we test is pretty damn good, so an 11 percent rating would be an oddity. That's it for now. I appreciate all these types of comments, because they help GP build a more reliable product-review section. Cheers to all,Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members stanfield Posted January 24, 2007 Members Share Posted January 24, 2007 they're chicken{censored}.same reason why 99 percent of famous bands will never talk {censored} about another band in a published interview. That is rubbish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blackdog2 Posted January 24, 2007 Members Share Posted January 24, 2007 Then why are the British and Japanese guitar magazines not afraidto publish the brutal truth with reviews??, They have a 1-5 star system and they give plenty of single stars on gear. If anything, they have way more ads in their issues than U.S. mags. The lowest i have ever seen in a british guitar magazine was three stars i think, some class of cheap hofner!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sohc1971 Posted January 24, 2007 Members Share Posted January 24, 2007 Guitar magazines are terrible. They have, and always will be, flavor of the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members zepfan976 Posted January 24, 2007 Members Share Posted January 24, 2007 maybe they dont test {censored}ty gear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ririzarry Posted January 24, 2007 Members Share Posted January 24, 2007 You never see a bad review in a guitar magazine. Even when the reviewer finds a fault, it's something totally obvious like "This Les Paul doesn't have a trem option", or "This Fender Twin can't do death metal".Another magazine I read, PC Gamer, is not afraid to give reviewed games terrible review (as low as 5% score) when deserved.So what are guitar magazines so sycophantic? More critical reviewing in the mags would probably lead to better products. Consider the difference in costs. If a game vendor isn't willing to provide a product to review, a gaming magazine could easily purchase it themselves. Now compare the cost of a game to guitars or amps. Can you imagine having to purchase every piece of guitar equipment you reviewed? Regards, Rob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.