Guitarist magazine reviews why bother.....

Blaendulais

read the mag this morning.  Nothing gets less than 8/10 whether its a pedal, album, guitar or amp.   What on earth is the point?

or does 10 mean good, 9 only ok and 8 total shit

Loobs

I think there are a couple of things at play:

Generally these days guitar gear is of a pretty high standard, irrespective of price point. A 250 quid Squier is usually a really good guitar, especially compared to what was available for the same money 25 years ago! I remember plastic tuners on cheap Squiers when I was first learning.

If a company sends gear in for review, I assume it's really nicely set up and working absolutely perfectly. 

Guitarist has a lot of advertising in it. They probably don't want to piss off the companies who advertise in it too much! 

Snags

I used to think the trick with magazine reviews was to ignore the score and look at the words carefully for what does or doesn't get said. The scores are normally fine for all the usual reasons.

richardhomer

It’s the same in many other areas - Naim Audio’s Atom streamer gets 5 star reviews in hi fi magazines all the time. I think it sounds very little music and a lot like a box of electronics. I have one - and after half an hour listening to it, I want to turn it off. All reviews should be taken with a pinch of salt in my opinion.

King85

I think most equipment is pretty highly rated on here too tbh. It's rare that people say I've just got this and it's rubbish.

soma1975

Can't say it is shit if you're putting it in the classifieds the next week

Caffeine_Vampire

‘I can’t bond with it’ usually covers it

Sassafras

richardhomer said:

It’s the same in many other areas - Naim Audio’s Atom streamer gets 5 star reviews in hi fi magazines all the time. I think it sounds very little music and a lot like a box of electronics. I have one - and after half an hour listening to it, I want to turn it off. All reviews should be taken with a pinch of salt in my opinion.

That's not quite fair. One of the reviews I read was highly critical of the remote control's glossy finish for picking up fingerprints too easily.
Scathing stuff.

jeztone2

I imagine the writer submits their copy and the editor does the scores. But I really don’t know who reads Guitarist mag now? To me, its heyday was 86-95. It’s been slowly going down the pan. The last one I read had pretty much the same articles as another one a year earlier. Also this whole “the world doesn’t exist beyond the M4 corridor” approach has become quite laughable. 

monquixote

Subscriber numbers and and revenue will be a fraction of what they were. You can't be surprised the quality of writing will go down when it's a fixed cost.

Penn

I still subscribe. I’m not sure why though... 

TINMAN82

I still subscribe to Guitarist but agree issues are very “samey” and have been for years. Thinking of subscribing to Guitar magazine (edited by Chris Vinnicomb) instead. The guitar photography is of higher quality for a start. Look at the pornographic photos of the new Epiphone range in this months copy! That said, they all got 9/10!

maltingsaudio

I have a load of them going way back and you can pick anyone and it’s basically the same gear being reviewed only the price and model name have changed a strat is a strat if it’s a highway re issue California or whatever, a chorus is a chorus and dirt box is a dirt box. 

The only way to gauge what the reviewer really thinks of it is to have read many of his/her reviews and get what they are really saying. The points thing is pointless!

grappagreen

King85 said:

I think most equipment is pretty highly rated on here too tbh. It's rare that people say I've just got this and it's rubbish.

Lol - this is just so true. 'It's great but not working for me', 'Can't bond' etc etc. is pretty much mostly bollocks for 'I don't like it/it's way overhyped' but don't want to impact my resale prospects..

xchrisv

TINMAN82 said:

I still subscribe to Guitarist but agree issues are very “samey” and have been for years. Thinking of subscribing to Guitar magazine (edited by Chris Vinnicomb) instead. The guitar photography is of higher quality for a start. Look at the pornographic photos of the new Epiphone range in this months copy! That said, they all got 9/10!

Thanks for the kind words about the pictures, I’ll pass them on. I usually hate multi-product reviews in which everything gets the same score but in this instance, it’s hard to argue with how stonkingly good those guitars are for the money. I really don’t think there’s a better £349 electric guitar on the planet right now than that TV Special. 

Fuengi

Don't give up on Guitarist yet, I hear that next month they have an interview with Bernie Marsden and a six page spread of new photos of Rory Gallagher's Strat from previously unseen angles. 

barnstorm

maltingsaudio said:

The points thing is pointless!

This – I've no idea why they bother with it.

There are times when a negative review is worth publishing, but generally speaking mags want to give space (which costs money) to products that are good. 'If you haven't got anything nice to say, don't say anything at all' and all that.

Whitecat

Fuengi said:

Don't give up on Guitarist yet, I hear that next month they have an interview with Bernie Marsden and a six page spread of new photos of Rory Gallagher's Strat from previously unseen angles. 

Can confirm this is true. You can’t miss it, it’ll be the one with Joe Bonamassa on the cover. 

Matt_McG

Heh, @Fuengi. That is exactly right.

The high water mark for me was Guitar Player in the period up to and including the period when Joe Gore was editor. I learned so many things from the instructional stuff — Gore himself, Batten, Vai, Michael Hedges, various jazz players, etc — and the range of music covered was so broad. Of the current crop Premier Guitar, and Guitar magazine once Chris Vinnicombe took over, are all pretty decent.

I subscribe to Guitarist, but, really, it has been poor for years. The relentless focus on a tiny blues (and not even all of that, tbh), and blues rock style, and the endless stuff with guitarists who are my fucking Dad’s age and older, is tedious. Guitar magazine isn’t perfect, but it does at least cover younger — as in younger than 50! — players.

Jez6345789

As said read the words and the occasional pro's and cons comments. 
In general as guitarists largely dislike any form of innovation in guitars are their actually any bad guitars these days just ones you dont like due to personal taste.

I do think regardless of advertising revenue a good editor will still simply retain the right not to publish if they are sent something that was a complete mess.

Ultimately you were find better information around the internet these days if you avoid the paid for or influencer lead stuff. 

DrJazzTap

I only buy it at the airport