Classic Rock Magazine Moan

[Gibbo]

 

I think the difference between Classic Rock and Kerrang during its heyday is the fact that Classic Rock comes across as stiff and stuffy. Professionally written articles and layouts etc, whereas classic Kerrang was kind of a reflection of the music it represented. It was bright, brash, in your face and came across as a magazine made by fans who just happened to be journalists. It was more relaxed, less formal.

There were in jokes. Bands could do interviews that were totally not serious. And even the letters pages were fans saying whatever they liked instead of pontificating or kissing arse (hell I remember them printing my letter about what a miserable bastard Richie Kotzen was at the Poison signing session at Tower Records, London).

 

I think with the state the music industry is in these days, it would be impossible to capture that spirit in a magazine format that would sell to the masses. Kerrang really was a product of its time, and a true case of lightning in a bottle.

 

Interesting view. Sounds like a challenge (to someone) and you're probably right. Until recently, I was an avid reader of Terrorizer and still rate it as the best metal publication, but they seem to have fewer reviews in there these days and the articles are a bit samey, so I only buy it when there are bands featured that I really like.

 

It does lead me to wonder what a magazine could do to make me (for example) want to read it. I find these days that I enjoy the 'fun' articles, such as bands scoring points for guessing what tracks are from brief samples, naming their ideal mixtape, etc, far more entertaining than the usual interviews about the latest album. They all end being the same, i.e. "this is our best album yet", "we really feel we've matured as a band", blah blah blah. Maybe getting band members playing games, answering 'silly' questions, etc is the way to go...

 

 

You'd buy anything that published naked photos of Tarja ... job done ...

[JamesEagle]

 

 

I think the difference between Classic Rock and Kerrang during its heyday is the fact that Classic Rock comes across as stiff and stuffy. Professionally written articles and layouts etc, whereas classic Kerrang was kind of a reflection of the music it represented. It was bright, brash, in your face and came across as a magazine made by fans who just happened to be journalists. It was more relaxed, less formal.

There were in jokes. Bands could do interviews that were totally not serious. And even the letters pages were fans saying whatever they liked instead of pontificating or kissing arse (hell I remember them printing my letter about what a miserable bastard Richie Kotzen was at the Poison signing session at Tower Records, London).

 

I think with the state the music industry is in these days, it would be impossible to capture that spirit in a magazine format that would sell to the masses. Kerrang really was a product of its time, and a true case of lightning in a bottle.

 

Interesting view. Sounds like a challenge (to someone) and you're probably right. Until recently, I was an avid reader of Terrorizer and still rate it as the best metal publication, but they seem to have fewer reviews in there these days and the articles are a bit samey, so I only buy it when there are bands featured that I really like.

 

It does lead me to wonder what a magazine could do to make me (for example) want to read it. I find these days that I enjoy the 'fun' articles, such as bands scoring points for guessing what tracks are from brief samples, naming their ideal mixtape, etc, far more entertaining than the usual interviews about the latest album. They all end being the same, i.e. "this is our best album yet", "we really feel we've matured as a band", blah blah blah. Maybe getting band members playing games, answering 'silly' questions, etc is the way to go...

 

 

You'd buy anything that published naked photos of Tarja ... job done ...

 

 

...and there's the answer.

 

Make it Tarja, Vibeke and Cristina and I'll take out a subscription!