Hi gang...

The last redesigns of GP were in 2004 (the big one) and then 2006 (refinements), so it's time to slap some new paint on the puppy again, and I'd like to invite all interested forum members to join the editors in forging the mag's next evolution.

I'll post notes up here from time-to-time regarding what stages we are in, and what changes we are considering.

I also want to encourage forum members to suggest changes.

In addition, we want to hear your thoughts on where we're blowing it. We appreciate it when readers tell us what they LIKE about the magazine (thanks), but, at this time, we are more interested in what we are doing wrong, than what we may be doing right.

In fact, let's start this collaborative process on that point...

Please post your list of the "TOP FIVE THINGS THAT GP SUCKS AT" right here.

I'll share the criticisms with the staff, and we'll start working on "not sucking."

Thanks tons for your help in this endeavor.

We're planning to have mockups of the "new" GP ready by Winter NAMM in January 2010, and a fully revamped magazine ready to rock soon after.

All the Best,
Mike

1) I like that you guys cover the internet hordes, but I don't think you do enough. A column containing practical suggestions for recording/presenting your stuff online: what gear, tips for improving vid/sound quality, maybe even what sites are best for online commercial release would be a gift.

In addition, I just went to a Entertainment Law CLE course in Austin to maintain my law license, and many of the speakers were discussing how to leverage your songs- even if you're unsigned- by exploring all kinds of new outlets, like local computer game companies.

To sum up, I guess I'm looking for columns detailing the business side of how to transition from an amateur artist to a professional one. Everyone has heard the gospel of practice, practice, practice, especially with other musicians, but few words have been directed at performers detailing how to actually become better businessmen, even at the most rudimentary levels.


2) The sheet music is always welcome, but it might be kind of cool to have the songs related in some way. Say...all of the songs are by the same artist, of the same genre, their subject matter is all similar, or even exhibit increasing levels of difficulty covering a certain bit of theory (like a certain scale or chord progression, a particular alternative tuning, or an unusual time sig).


3) In a similar vein, its nice that you publish sheet music, but its almost universally well-known stuff. Linking 1 and 2 above, it might be interesting to publish the sheet music for some of the lesser-known but quality songs or even unsigned bands that you guys discover...perhaps by means of an annual contest or just an Editor's pick.


4) Its great that you guys cover gear, but again, you focus primarily on the major manufacturers (except boutique amps and pedals). Where is the love for the luthiers and small-run makers? I know you guys hit the various guitar shows and I know that luthiers do as well (I met Jon Kammerer at the Dallas Guitar Show, and now own 3 of his guitars)- surely you've seen some stuff that your readers would love to see and maybe even own. A great review of a Fender might boost the company's sales 1%, but a luthier might see a 5-fold increase in sales or more.


5) Deeper exploration of ALL the genres. Christian rock isn't just Stryper, its Curtis Stephan (Razed Records) as well. Pop & techno aren't devoid of guitarists. And when was the last time you covered a young Classical guitarist? Segovia's been dead a while, and the Romero brothers aren't getting any younger.

Apologies- I just realized I confused certain aspects of your mag with those of another- you guys don't regularly post huge chunks of sheet music. That's what I get for posting while sleep-deprived.

The points, however, stand.

I will have to admit that after reading GP for 30 years that I let my subsrcibtion lapse last year. The quality of the magazine is as good as ever, but I found that instead of immediately sitting down to read it cover to cover the moment I got it, I had a stack from a year unread.

It's more a matter of my tastes changing than anything you have done wrong. I am most interested in classical, and even though you will occasionally have a good article, there isn't much coverage there. I have to say that I was exposed to classical and jazz guitar largely through GP in the late 70's, even if there wasn't an dedicated article, many of my rock heroes would mention unknown greats from other styles and that tweeked my interest.

I don't think GP sucks, but there are things that could be improved. A lot of the one page articles seem like little more than promotional bios, where you quickly go throught the style and equipment used and show a nice big picture. I get almost no information out of these and would rather have a more in depth interview/ article about what these artists are doing for guitar playing. It seems a little shallow to say you cover and present new music when there is so little information there. Keep the little blurbs in the record review section, but give us some groundbreaking artists with something to say.

I know it must be hard to present our heroes from the past who are still active, finding a way to acknowledge their great early work, and to see how they have changed and grown over the years. Case in point, I am reading the through the July 2008 Al Dimeola article (shows how far behind I am), and I think it shows how he is frustrated that the media makes it hard for an artist to grow. I am not blaming GP here, but since it seems that the big names from the past sell well, really focus in on what the artist is doing now, not 20 years ago.

Dannyalcatraz makes a good point that it would be good to have more articles on how to promote yourself over the internet, and more varied coverage of artists and the sites that they are using. I think we all know that that is the future of music. You have done some work there but could do more.

send me a couple of issues, and we'll talk about it!

Thanks!

But I'm also talking about the full spectrum of stuff:

• how to get your music into video games- even or especially those produced in some of the up & coming video game design programs popping up in colleges, universities and tech schools,
• how to get your music onto ringtone sites, including how to make your music into a ringtone,
• how to get your music into locally produced TV shows, movies or commercials
• how to get your music into major TV shows, movies and commercials
• basic marketing techniques,
• identifying developing markets
• identifying common attributes of the business techniques of successful artists
• cautionary tales

My top 5 things that GP sucks at:

1. Tiny, content-light articles/interviews with players. The magazine used to go into such amazing depth. You could tell that the interviewer had really done his homework. Nowadays the cover artist is usually treated properly, but most everybody else gets superficial treatment. I know you guys have economic considerations with loading so much content into a paper mag, so maybe you could post a lot more supplementary material on the web site for your paid subscribers (like me).

2. I still get the impression that you avoid reviewing the under-performing products. I've heard the rationale: We don't want to waste space on stuff that sucks. But your readers need to know about the stuff that sucks as much as the stuff that rocks. "Play better, sound better" is just an empty platitude, unless you take that on.

3. I hate to say it, but I think you guys lack much of an editorial identity. I look back on my 20+ year collection of GP magazines (yep, I keep 'em all) and I can see a strong editorial point of view reflected in the magazine's content and writing under its various editors. But not so much anymore. I wish you guys could sometimes be a little more challenging, critiquing, and maybe a bit irreverent.

4. Sometimes I roll my eyes at how shameless Molenda is about promoting himself. Pictures of himself with this or that artist, constantly reminding readers about his punk credentials, calling himself "Editor Boy" in faux self-deprecation, and so on. Oh, and the incredibly stretched metaphors! We get it, man, you're cool. Move on, the magazine isn't about you.

5. Seems like guitarplayertv is gone, so maybe this doesn't apply anymore, but I hated being referred by the magazine to content on guitarplayertv and have it not be there! I stopped going there. Keep it up to date, or don't bother.

D7

I'm going to do this piecemeal as items pop into my head.

The first thing that comes to mind (resulting from your recent post about the upcoming January issue) is that the magazine is not the best vehicle for reiews. Move those to the website. There is too-much of a lag between product release and magazine print date.

I agree with the previous post about the articles not having much depth these days. This really hit home with the recent issue with all of the Les Paul content. The LP articles were all excellent. Seemed like a big contrast to most other articles. I really appreciated them.

Here's somethinG I hope you will keep. I really like the page of commentary on the "unknowns" who have submitted internet links. It's great opportunity to get some tips on unfamiliar music and a great avenue of promotion for the musicians.

More later as they come to mind.

Multimedia synergy! I'm still waiting to see a tab in the magazine and be able to go somewhere online and hear it played. lesser mags have been shipping CDs and posting online lessons for years. Seems like your web and print staff don't even talk to each other. It's a waste to go online and see the exact same content as in the magazine. Give us sound!

One other thing. I'm sure you're going to get a million people saying "more gear reviews". I disagree. There's plenty of gear reviews already. There's so much more to playing than the hardware! In the big scheme of things, gear is one of the least important aspects and yet we give it so much attention. Lead, and help us be better players, not better consumers!

D7

DON'T DO

One thing NOT to do. Don't ever just put tab in the magazine without standard notation. Guitar World only prints tab exclusively and it makes their magazine look amateurish. Their average reader only listens to Slayer so it doesn't matter. Your readership has better taste and playing skills!

PLEASE DO

Sound files on the website for examples in the magazine. The British guitar magazines have CDs. Don't be left behind. It's 2009; everything includes (or has access) to audio/visual media.

Put videos on YouTube of the product reviews. If it's an amp. let us hear it. Ditto for pedals or rack gear. That poser magazine, Guitar World does it...you can do it better.
(That guy, Paul, who demos for GW gets the WORST tones out of anything he plugs into.)

I've been reading GP since 1976....LISTEN TO ME!!!
(Thanks!)

Carl

I wouldn't mind a column that regularly features smaller name luthiers each month. After finally biting the bullet a couple of years ago on a handmade classical guitar, the difference is incomparable between that and what you could find in a store bought factory instrument. I am sure steel string and other acoustic instruments would have the same level of quality with a good builder.

Even though there are competing acoustic magazines, some of what I said in my earlier post applies here as well. GP used to be more eclectic, I learned so much about all facets of guitar back then. I am not so sure a young player would get the same results these days. You can find lots of information on the web, and I think GP needs to consider that they need some of the same level of eclectism to compete with what is in cyberspace. Hopefully, having somewhat of a trustworthy and well edited opinion would make GP the vehicle of choice for people wanting to learn about guitar.

I have to admit I skip over a lot of the artists I've never heard of that are featured in the pages of Guitar Player. Yet I'll read every word of a Brian May article even though I've read a million articles about him. So how about having Brian May (or some other superstar) write some little intro pieces for the newer artists you write about to hook me in. I would probably be more apt to read an article about an artist if it that artist was recommended by a superstar such as Steve Vai. Remember when Steve Vai was promoting Joe Satriani in his interviews? I listened to Joe because Vai recommended him and I was hooked on Joe's music after that.

I like the hardware reviews you guys do, but how about some tutorials about how to use the hardware featured in the magazine.

I know it may seem like a no-brainer but a quick How-To on setting up a compressor (or other commonly used effect) to create certain sounds would be invaluable to a lot of my students. I would have no problem saying "Look sonny, pick up this month's Guitar Player and there's a great guide for setting up this great new compression pedal to get some sounds you're looking for."

I've seen in the reviews where the writers will say "With a couple twists of the controls I went from a ringing clear sound to full on distortion." I'd like to see which controls you turned and where they were set for individual sounds.

I personally like any kind of technical instruction I can get. For example how to mic a guitar amplifier or how to make my recordings sound rich and full.

Yep, I'm a subscriber since the 70's myself...with a gap here and there while in the Air Force overseas.

* More boutique stuff for sure.
* How about a spinoff...like the difference between MTV & VH1
for we old farts?
* New luthier & amp builders section.

More later.

Randy

Dear Editor Boy, again you break the sound barrier by asking us what we think and even wanting to know more about what sucks...For the most part, nothing...the Magazine is number 1 in my book and there is no comaprison...I'll list no more than 5 things:

1). Keep doing what you are doing with regard to completing an article on each consecutive page until it's done. I hate having to turn to page (continued on page 173 or whatever) and I love being able to finish one article without having to skip through the magazine to find the last portion of an article...

2). Keep the Editor on task when writing editorials...sometimes he goes off in weird directions forgeting we are interesed in music, guitars, writing, performers, etc...

3). Make it easy to find articles by improving the index in the front section with some short descriptions of what each article contains...

4). More "How to" articles: like how to write songs, lyrics, progressions, etc...

5). Some nice looking women once in a while to sell adds, or at least run a few stories on them...I'm not looking for Playboy stuff, just want to see something besides Mega Death Metal dudes all of the time....

Thanks again, for letting us have a voice, Larryz

1) I like the ideas behind "10 Things You Gotta Do..." and "Master Class" sections, but back in the day there was also a section of five or six regular lessons (e.g. "Terrifying Guitar 101", the Rik Emmett column, etc) that I always looked forward too. Now it seems kind of scattershot...for a couple of months we'll get something on pentatonics, and then for another couple of months we'll get shred-type stuff. I'd like to see a return to the regularly recurring lessons covering a specific genre/style and maybe a general music knowledge lesson, like theory or songwriting or whatever, in addition to the "10 Things..." and Master Class.

2) I generally find "Round-Up" pretty useless as far as gear evaluations go. It seems mostly like a convenient way to tell a manufacturer that, yes, you plugged such-and-such pedal in and jammed for a couple of minutes, wrote about it, and thanks for sending the sample along. Most of the time the reviews all sound the same, too. I'd rather see more of the "Fight Club" style reviews.

Many years ago, probably sometime in the early/mid-90s, GP did a review of 30 some odd guitars under $750 or $1000 or something like that. I remember Carvin, Fender and Vester all had guitars reviewed (I remember the Vester because it got panned). It was really well done, I read it over and over again for months and I clearly still remember it well (a similar review was done on Tele style guitars a little bit later). If you can dig into the archives and find that article, I think it's a great model for what good gear reviews look like. It covered each instrument in a concise but in-depth way. I think the current incarnation of "Fight Club" and "Bench Test" captures some of the magic, but I'd really like to see all gear reviews follow that model.

By the way, you needn't consider this a plea for more gear reviews...just a different style of gear reviews

3) I like the "Riffs" section, but it's too heavy on filler (I don't really care about "The Joint" in Las Vegas reopening) and could be condensed into a page or two. I'd rather have another "Feature" than four pages of "Riffs."

4) Since "Product Spotlight" is advertising, which helps you guys pay the bills, can we drop "New Gear", which doesn't indicate that it is? The two seem redundant. Since a lot of us are on the Internet and frequent discussion boards (like this one!), we get most of the new gear scoop online. Maybe make "New Gear" and online thing instead of a print thing?

That's really it for me! And please note I'm being super-picky.

Refresh the content for today. Mix the full page color slick copy with product placement more in touch with today's readers and buyers. I think the guitar market has changed considerably. Many player/readers feel they can "out play" many of your featured artists. Also, the "star struck" reader is less of a commodity.

1) More "every man" features about this and that unknown guy or maker. Generate revenue with product placement in the "everyman" segments.

2) Plugs for "off the beaten path" must see artists. I really couldn't give a rats ass about what Carlos Santana thinks or says. As a matter of fact, I'm tired of just about all of them. I'm looking for fresh, unknown, little known masters of techniques and skills that maybe long forgotten or recently overlooked. Classical, bebop, rock, country, swing, etc.

3) Make sure that if you feel compelled to have a contest, the winner isn't a winner buy some measure other than guitar skill. That last contest you had left me feeling cheated by some politically correct double standard. I canceled because of it BTW. I think contests are dangerous for that very reason. You don't have to apply the affirmative action rules in a public contest.

4) More detail in your content about gear. Detail or don't bother. It's "killer" is one of my favorite things to type on this forum because it's ambiguous. I'm not getting paid. If I were, I'd provide as much detail and diligence as is due from a professional reviewer. Reviews for product placement "features" are evident in the lack of detail.

5) Drive web hits to multimedia content and links from the mag. Get better, current and timely multimedia content and start racking up $ from ad servers.

Several suggestions.

1. I'd like to see more material targeted at beginners -- people in their first few years of play. This could be a regular column perhaps called "Year One", or something similar.

Assuming guitar playing is like many other activities, lots of people take it up but few stay with it for long, and so the population of guitar players is at any point dominated by the inexperienced.

2. A regular column on classic guitar recordings, including a discussion of why this month's CD is attention-worthy.

3. Pointers to nifty guitar material on the web. There's lots of stuff out there, but a lot of it is crap. Point out the good bits.

so what you really want is a subscription to Songwriter, Music Market, or Taxi rather than Guitar Player.

I haven't read guitar player since they started interviewing guys with big hair and pointy headstock guitars. So my opinion may have no validity.

But I read until the last year or so Keyboard, though I am in no way a keyboard player. Why? They covered recording. They covered sample libraries. They covered computer issues and sound cards. I'm pretty sure that they even covered mics now and again. They were more often correct and more accurate than EQ or EM. Most musicians want to know about that stuff, no mater what they play.

What I remember about Guitar Player..

I really liked the Rare Bird column.
I like the history stuff.
Revisiting a classic song, with interviews would be alright.
I wanted more about acoustics.
I wanted more about fingerstyle.
I wanted more about unknown players who are exceptional, just to inform me and introduce me to their music.
I wanted factory visits with photos. There have to be as couple of hundred guitar manufacturers and quite a few amp manufacturers in the US alone.

I'd like to see a regular 'myths exposed/tips and info' column or sidebar. Could be a little informative 'did ya know?' piece without having to be a full length article.

Bill and Terrell nailed it!!!

No offense to the others, but I'm not a fan of the "no name" Guitar Player issues.

I really couldn't care less about what some guitar player out of such and such a city, who has played a few gigs and is becoming really popular in such and such a country, has to say about his gear. My feelings are usually, "Who the heck is that guy and how did he wind up on the cover"?

I want to hear from the guys that "made it" I want to hear how they got that great tone and how they were able to get as far as they did. I tend to avoid issues where a no name player is the focus. Fact is, if you haven't earned a spot on the cover by "making it" and being someone I've heard of, then you probably are doing something wrong. Following that logic, why would I want to listen to someone who is doing something wrong?


Aside from that,

The world is changing. More and more musicians are sitting at home and recording on their computers. Because of this, they need help with techniques, software reviews, tips and tricks, set ups, hardware reviews, OS tweaks etc. etc. A magazine that provides that help is certainly a great asset to the new generation of musicians. What it is to be a guitar player, is changing and I think it's important that, any magazine that want to "keep up with the times", needs to be on top of those changes.

" but I'm not a fan of the "no name" Guitar Player issues..."

I don't think that they should be an issue, but maybe a half page introduction with links to MP3s? And like you, I could care less what they have to say about gear. The mag is Guitar PLAYER. That is what I am interested in. I don't need another shill for Fender or Gibson or Marshall.

Let me refine this one a little bit. i went back through some old issues and actually a lot of the Round Up features were pretty good. What I was thinking of was the huge spread on pedals (like 37 different ones) and cables that was recently published. Roundups of five to ten similar products are fine...a jillion is a bit much, though those old articles I cited still rule.

I recently gave an amp roundup issue and a guitar roundup issue, both probably from the 1980s, to a group of friends who have been into their straight jobs for 20 years and have just emerged with the time and money to take up guitar, so they have done so and help each other along. They are digging the mags. (I also gave them about 20 issues of Guitar for the Practicing Musician,which was primarily a big hair mag, and they are digging playing the included songs.)

Yeah, yearly roundups are okay. What bores me about most 'music' mags these days (and keeps me from reading them) is that they are more about equipment... the latest and greatest from xxxxx... than they are about playing and players, and resources to help players. And in many cases, there is no research involved, it is just a restating of the publicity released by the manufacturers.

Yes and no.

The fact is, the stuff I'm talking about can help any guitarist, especially those who are trying to "make it." And with the industry becoming more decentralized and outlets for exposure increasing with every affirmation of Moore's Law, the more important it is to get that kind of info into the hands of as many artists as possible.

And lets face it- Guitar Player probably has a circulation equal to Songwriter, Music Market, and Taxi combined.

"...the stuff I'm talking about can help any guitarist, especially those who are trying to "make it.""

I don't think so. I think that your requirements specifically target writers who just happen to be guitar players. No matter, I don't care if that stuff is in GP, one way or the other. I'm saying that the focus of GP should be on the P of G. You're assuming that all guitar players write and will write anything to make a buck, and you want a specific subset of resources aimed at helping a writer 'make it'. (shrug)

"Guitar Player probably has a circulation equal to Songwriter, Music Market, and Taxi combined."

Which has nothing to do with where writers, no matter what they play, will go to try to find an outlet for their writing. The New York Times has them all beat, and on a daily basis. But none of us go there to try to find out how to sell what we write. Neither do I expect to find such info in GP. But as I said above, "shrug", makes no difference to me, just seems OT. In my own list of suggestions I cover the wider aspects of recording a players music, and they all might not want to do that, either. I feel that many more players want to make a recording, if only to give to the girls and to grandma, than want to write, let alone write commercially. (again, I shrug. none of this is a big deal.)

Not sure if I've ever read any issues or not; may have picked a few up over the years.

I'm a computer programmer by the day; guitarist at night. I have subscriptions to a few computer rags. What do I want (and get) from them?

I get information about computer gear; new and what's upcoming. I don't care who uses/plays it, I want reviews and KNOWLEDGE of equipment I may buy in the future.

I really don't give a crap about articles on other artists; 10 times out of 10, I can get that kind of information off the Internet (Wiki, YouTube etc.).

And for gear reviews, I want to see a 1 out of 10 rating and benchmarks done on the same "base" rig. For example, a review of a TS9 on a Fender Strat through a Twin Reverb and the same box on a Gibson LP through a 2x12 Marshall Combo. Odds are "most" of us are using something similar

I don't read the other magazines so for me having all sorts of stuff in GP is a good thing...this includes: writing, recording, gear, tech stuff, featured players, demo links, etc....but keep it in tune (no pun intended) with guitar playing and basic music concepts...and keep it fun.

Well, if it's not out there now (and I don't pay attention) then I suggest GP do on offshoot magazine GG.com; "Guitar Gear dot com" and "Guitar Gear" magazine.

Like I said, I'm a full-blown techie; I read magazines for knowledge. I have no time for a 5 page article of:

GP: So, where did you get your Kramer?
EVH: Oh, I made it from a bunch of other guitars and painted it.

For me, I really don't care; you want ME to subscribe, give me information as a GUITARIST that I can use.