New EQ layout

[Chip McDonald]

I don't like the new "more" layout. Content is what counts; it would seem the "virtual rococo/gaudy" style of corporate web pages has influenced the style, to it's detriment. It *looks* nice, but I feel like I can't skim it as fast, it's more tedious/less enjoyable.

 

I always thought the straightforward simplicity of the old format was refreshing; if there was a pulled edit column it generally seemed pertinent. Consider that when you shade columns, and randomly choose to reverse color type in different colors, you blend *your* editorial content into the look and feel of the advertisements. Which might be someone's "brilliant" idea; but your bottom line is having readers to flog ads to and I think making the *content* of the magazine more difficult to absorb lessens the value of it. Nothing personal to whoever came up with it, it looks visually appealing - but the function of the magazine is to present information.

[Uh Clem]

After trying on a few of the new issues, I have to agree with Chip.

[Anderton]

<>

 

I can't speak for the editor, of course, but having been involved in the magazine business for a few years, I have a few comments...

 

1. Whenever a magazine does a re-design, letters pour in that are just about equally divided -- "love the new look," "hate the new look."

 

2. Re-designs are works in progress. I've talked to Mitch Gallagher, EQ's Editor, about the magazine, and he always sees things in each issue he'd like to change for the next time around. So keep making your comments, because he pays attention.

 

I feel that the magazine does indeed look far more visually appealing than it did in the past. However, we are always working on new ways to present information. For example, I just did a review of Cubase 5.0. I took the top ten reasons to upgrade and broke them out into a sidebar. For someone who just wants a quick skim on the high points, this should take care of it. But we'll see how people react.

 

Another example of visual presentation is the use of "colorized" text in the MusicPlayer.com articles. We've received no negative comments, and quite a few positive ones. In my articles, for example, I use dark violet on text that, if physical, I would highlight with a pen. This way, if you want to skim the article, you can just read the dark violet parts and get the gist of the piece. Headings are in red to separate them, sidebars are in teal...that sort of thing. It sounds like it could be chaotic and gaudy, but people find it helpful.

 

There are a lot of ways to present information. I'm sure you'll see fine-tuning at EQ in months ahead. This isn't meant as an apologia, but simply a description of how the magazine business works.

[breakwaybellatlantic.net]

It seems that style is becoming more important than content. The demographic people, in order to justify their jobs, come up with "figures" that purport to show how the readers will respond more positively to "jazzed up" ink and graphics. It seems that every magazine re-tooled this year...Automobile is one that irked me, as did Eq...you need a 1kw reading light to read the white-on-black type-face....if you don't pass something good, thinking it's a paid advertisement!

[Mr. G]

Yeah, what Craig said....

 

Seriously, I appreciate your comments. I've been pleasantly surprised; the response to this redesign has been overwhelmingly positive.

 

But that doesn't mean I don't want to hear about what readers DON'T like. It's nice to get the positive comments, but you learn from the negative ones.

 

Thanks for your input, keep it coming.

 

 

 

------------------

Mitch Gallagher

Editor

EQ magazine

[alphajerk]

i will say that the new look is extremely nice. but as for content went this last issue... lets just say 'sound on sound' kicked yo booty up and down the proverbial block. i guess thats why i spend $10 per issue for the import. content wise, a lesson or two could be learned. some of the writing lately has become very mundane. in ALL american industry magazines [Mix (whose last issue blew the biggest chunks of the year), EM, etc.]

 

i dont know which tradzine somebody reviewed the amek 9098, but they were comparing it to a mackie pre, A MACKIE!?! what the hell is that? they should be immediately fired for writing such trash.

[Marvster]

Layouts come and layouts go, but I enjoy the mag more than ever -- the content is *much* improved, IMHO.

 

Isn't this fun, Mitch?

 

Marv

[Anderton]

>>i will say that the new look is extremely nice. but as for content went this last issue... lets just say 'sound on sound' kicked yo booty up and down the proverbial block. <<

 

Isn't comparing SOS to EM more fitting? I've always thought of EQ as being more specialized.

[alphajerk]

i cant find an american counterpart to compare SOS to. EM definately isnt it.

 

the writers are where its at with SOS. most of the time, they tell it like it is in the reviews, not what the manufacturer tells us. thats the problem with most american mag reviews, its basically written off the manufacturers fact sheet. there is no news to it. now there are exceptions to that, but not often.

 

hell, this board kills what most magazines have these days.

[russreign]

I personally think the redesign gives the book a modern edge without making it look too "tacky." Definitely makes it easier to read; sidebars and new graphic implementations really make love to the reader's eyes http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif