Importance of gear ads and reviews

[Dan South]

[quote]Originally posted by jackpine: [b]It amazes me that every 60 days we make Craig go through this same argument. Reviewers review, you all know how to deal with it.[/b][/quote]I only asked whether people would buy a magazine without ads and reviews. No value judgment of reviews was implied. The underlying question that prompted this thread has more to do with ads than reviews. Should a musician who has little or no need for new gear be forced to wade through eighty pages of ads in order to get some information on music and their favorite recording artists? Or, conversely, are gear ads so attractive to musicians that a magazine can't exist without featuring them by the boatload. The editorial value of fine music publications was not called into question.

[Anderton]

<> Marv, it's always great to see you in here, especially since you don't live down the street, and we're both too busy at trade shows to be able to hang out. Hey -- I have an idea! Call up Val, say you're HORRIBLY offended by something I said in print, and it could ONLY be worked out over a lengthy sushi dinner between the two of us. Yeah, that's the ticket! A "good" ad varies, because they have different goals. Some ads are designed to make someone aware that something exists, nothing more, nothing less. These kind of "IT IS COMING!" concept ads can be very cool, but only if they're the first part of a coordinated campaign. Let's take the "Faces of Alesis" campaign. I don't like that kind of ad because it doesn't tell me what I want to know about a piece of gear. Okay, so Alex likes his synth -- big deal. BUT in this case, they were the right ads at the right time, making the right point. The Alesis story is well-known, especially the recent problems. The "Faces" ads said what needed to be said in a most unambiguous way: Alesis is still here, the products are still there, and they still fulfill dreams. Those points NEEDED to be made -- desperately needed to be made -- before the next round of "Okay, now you know we're for real, here's why you should buy an HD-24." I suspect this was your reasoning, but if not, it would be interesting to get your insights into how you viewed the purpose of those ads. To me, the ideal ad tells me the product's intended application, dispenses with the "Greatest achievement in the history of western civilization, producing god-like tones destined to carry you to the pinnacle of fame!" type of garbage, lists the 10 or so most important bullet points, and preferably, offers some kind of demo CD or place on the web where I can find out a lot more. I want information...wrapped in a graphically pleasing pacakge, of course. Then again, the PRS ads that just show his guitars have all the information I need .

[Anderton]

<> I know, but things get off-topic sometimes...I'm afraid that the answer to your question, really, is that there IS no answer. The amount of ads is decided on a pretty strict ad-to-edit ratio ("Okay, if we have X page of ads, we can pay for Y pages of editorial, and still have Z amount of money left over for salaries"). Ad-to-edit ratios have, in my opinion, gotten out of hand. I remember when magazines were more editorial than ads, but that is no longer the case. This is largely due to outrageous increases in postage and printing costs. Music biz magazines are particularly vulnerable to this because page rates are quite low compared to other industries, so more pages of ads are necessary to support the expense of printing the pages of editorial. Subscribers do contribute to the bottom line, of course, but it's so expensive to find and keep subscribers that often, what a subscriber pays just about covers the cost of finding them. You make money off of subscribers who renew year after year because you don't have to spend the money to find them. This is one reason why magazines are VERY concerned about reader loyalty. A magazine with 50% reader turnover is not in a happy place. Some people wonder why GM, the Gap, Dell, etc. don't advertise in magazines like EQ. Simple: compared to magazines like People, our page rate is so low that ad agencies don't think the 15% commission they would get is worth their time. Frankly, they're wrong -- I say this based on experience as someone who placed ads for a computer company, and would be willing to elaborate even though it's a pretty boring story -- but it's the "conventional wisdom." So for now, like it or not, we're stuck with lots of ads. Editors would rather run more editorial, advertisers would rather not get lost in the noise, and readers would just like more of everything. But the current economics of publishing work against any changes in the near future.

[Dan South]

Personally, I LIKE ads. I like gear and reviews, too. But for the sake of argument, I'm trying to see things through the eyes of someone who doesn't need much (or much more) gear. Perhaps I'm arriving at that point myself. My studio covers that bases that I need it to cover. My focus now is on getting the most from what I have rather than worrying about whether the new 192k blamophonic farkelizer will interface with release 9.3 of Splonkenvibe's Beat Machete. So as much as I like ads and reviews, I find myself glossing over a higher percentage of them than ever before. Maybe I'm alone. Maybe I'm not. Maybe there's a market for mags that are less gear centric. Maybe not. Maybe I'm just over the hill. :D

[RM]

Craig... "Now here's a pet peeve: I was at a NAMM show where a manufacturer showed a cable that was "polarized" -- one end was supposed to plug into the guitar, and the other into the amp. When I asked why, I got some crap about how "the crystalline structure of the precious metals in the cable blah blah blah." Well actually, they had three conductors, with the hot and ground being inside a shield, and the shield connected at one end only".... Yikes, he must have meant noble metal? (there were some gold ones two years back) and the lifted shield sounds as if it's one aspect of the big and scary brand, done for RF reasons, usually the crystalline structure, would be in the direction of the printing on the jacket, read as left to right...and matter when using cables which are made using drawn wire...there are only a couple who do not (Smile) I know it wasn't us...we terminate both ends on every cable...yep, sounds like a guy who didn't recognize you, couln't read your badge or was just to pumped up from drinking the consumer branded cross marketed kool aid... :wave: Thanks, Rob

[RM]

Ethan... That explains why we scored so low...he loved the thick sounding mega stranded stuff...ours was umm..to use a metaphor...completly flat and accurate... Thanks Rob

[Marvster]

<> See? That's why you get paid the big bucks (and probably eat a lot of great sushi). Excellent idea. <> Thanks Craig, I don't like your articles, either. Seriously, thanks for the kind words but it would be inappropriate to discuss a client's marketing strategy with anybody, must less in a public forum. However, I will say this: The essence of your thoughts on messaging in the Alesis ads -- "our products fulfill dreams, they’re not just black boxes, they're made by a stable company" -- is part of what we hope to accomplish in practically every ad for every manufacturer. I get it when people say they want technology ads to be informational, but there's a difference between an ad and a brochure or website. Ads for most products can't possibly include enough specs with enough context to serve customers (unless it's a Mackie ad, which is a campaign approach they've had locked up for quite a while). More than just a spec sheet, an ad is a promise you make about the brand. It's a kind of customer mating ritual that says, "We care enough about your business to try and win a few moments of your time." How? By putting on a show. Think about dating (married guys ... try to remember): Do you go up to a woman and say, "Hi, I'm Joe. I'm an accountant, my IQ is 117, and I pull down about $60k a year. Would you like to hit the sack?" No, you try to be a little charming. Same for job interviews or selling a service or marketing toothpaste. Any salesperson will tell you they have to sell themselves before they can sell a product. (Anybody seen the Saturn "Sheet Metal" ads, where the people run around as if they're cars, with the Baroque pianoforte score? Wow, amazing ad that doesn't mention a single thing about the cars. They sell the company.) Lest we forget, even magazines -- bastions of credible information that they are -- try to win subscribers' attention with snappy ads or direct mail pieces. Yes, they include some info and a sense of what to expect from the magazine, but it's largely an emotional appeal. Someone once pointed out, in trying to convince companies they should leave marketing writing to marketing pros, that even the New York Times Company -- winner of 108 Pulitzers -- doesn't write their own ads. As for whether readers should have to suffer through pages of ads, I have to say I *far* prefer clearly delineated ads (except for certain online varieties) to other marketing channels such as product placement -- which while being a valid way to reach customers, always makes me feel just a little bit icky -- or advertorial (even ickier). I believe strongly in the value of being up-front, and that's what an ad is: "Hey you! Here's our product we want you to buy. Enjoy the rest of the magazine we help pay for." Simple. Clean. Hopefully powerful. Even with creeping ad/edit ratios, as I used to tell subscribers, if you're not getting at least $2 of value (two measly bucks!) each month you should absolutely drop the mag. Me, I think magazines are the best value on the face of the earth. Ads help subsidize that value and, better yet, they help build companies that make great products. Yes, I may be waxing poetic. But hey ... I'm in marketing. Cheers, Marv

[velvetoceansound]

[quote]Originally posted by Anderton: And, to think that publishers don't recognize the importance of reader loyalty is simply absurd, if not downright insulting. I'm not a publisher but note that we don't take advertiser surveys, we take reader surveys. I don't come to these forums to ask advertisers what they want to see in the magazine, I ask READERS what they want to see. When we spend hours agonizing over what to put on the cover, it's because we want to figure out what will draw READERS to the magazines. [/quote]Craig, and that is exactly why EQ is the only recording rag that I subscribe to. And, yes, I plan to renew for next year. Keep 'em commin.

[Anderton]

<> Marvin, that is SO correct. That is always a problem because as magazines try to "upgrade" their graphics, then look more like ads. I guess everyone goes to the same "fun with photoshop" school. There are times when I look over the page proofs of EQ and I think, wow, I like the opening graphics on that piece...then when the mag comes out and there's an ad opposite it, they fight each other. BTW you did note that I didn't say I didn't like the faces of Alesis ads, I said I normally don't like that TYPE of ad. I think the "faces" ads were effective, which is far more important than whether it satisfies what I want to see from an ad. I'm waiting for round 2!

[Marvster]

<> Yep, hence the fine art of dummying a magazine. (For non-publishing types: Part of this process is where staff decides which ads go where.) I don't know how it works at other MI mags, but at Keyboard it was always the ad guys who dummied the mag. They're the logical choice given the hornets' nest of purchased positions and advertiser politics ("Next issue I want to come *before* the MIDI Mutilator ad!"), but when the editor or art director isn't involved you get those bad opener/ad collisions. And in fairness, even then sometimes collisions are unavoidable because of the reasons above. BTW, you may have noticed that some mainstream consumer advertising actually tries to look more like editorial in an attempt to flip that problem on its head. The readers just can't win. <> I understood and appreciated your words perfectly. You're just one of the few people on the forums I know well enough to be that big a smart ass with, so I took the opportunity. You know I love your writing, Bubulah. Marv

[Gato]

I like the gear ads and reviews, too. Don't see why to change that.

[Dan South]

[quote]Originally posted by Marvster: [b] More than just a spec sheet, an ad is a promise you make about the brand. It's a kind of customer mating ritual that says, "We care enough about your business to try and win a few moments of your time." How? By putting on a show. Think about dating (married guys ... try to remember): Do you go up to a woman and say, "Hi, I'm Joe. I'm an accountant, my IQ is 117, and I pull down about $60k a year. Would you like to hit the sack?" No, you try to be a little charming. Same for job interviews or selling a service or marketing toothpaste. Any salesperson will tell you they have to sell themselves before they can sell a product.[/b][/quote]Oh, brother! I'm not looking for gear that will make me laugh, show me a good time and ditch me in the morning. I'm looking for cold, hard facts about what a piece of gear will allow me to accomplish and how it stacks up against the competition. By the way, I have some old gear that I'm ready to sell. Anybody up for "sloppy seconds?" ;)

[Salyphus]

LOL Dan ;) [quote]Originally posted by Anderton: [b]There's one techniques article related problem, though. If you do them for specific pieces of gear, then readers who don't have that gear tune out. But if you make the pieces generic, a lot of readers find them too basic. Any thoughts on how to overcome this problem?[/b][/quote]I was thinking about this when I was reading through the November issue of SOS recently. There is an excellent article about the use of tempo changes in DAW software, and how this often overlooked feature can be put to interesting and powerful musical uses (probably a subject worthy of its own thread, but I digress..) The article presents lots of useful info which applies to any DAW, and there are also sidebars covering specific techniques for many (most?) of the major software platforms. In fact, the Sonar section was written by some Anderton guy :D Seriously, I don't know if you've seen the complete article, but I think its an excellent example of striking the right balance in a techniques article.

[Jeff Klopmeyer]

[quote]Originally posted by Dan South: [b]I'm looking for cold, hard facts about what a piece of gear will allow me to accomplish and how it stacks up against the competition.[/b][/quote]I've been avoiding this thread like the plague, for obvious reasons...I'm certainly one of the cuulprits, since I've created a whole lot of the audio product ads you've seen over the last 12 years in my tenures with Alesis and TASCAM. Dan, I'm not going to tell you what you want or don't want in advertising. But I would predict that if I created what you're asking for -- ads that resembled spec sheets or competitive matrices -- I'd sell less products (and lose my job to boot). Here's a little spec for ya: I (the advertiser) have 0.4 seconds to capture your attention while you're flipping through the pages of Keyboard, EQ and the like. In books like these, packed to the brim with lights, knobs, faders and meters, it's hard to stand out from both the other ads and the editorial content. On the other hand, I don't want to resort to only using your primal responses (sex, food and so on) to get that attention...I feel it detracts from the more important information about the gear you are indeed looking for. So, in good music/audio product ads, there's a balance of attention-grabbing images and messages along with the info you want to properly make a choice in a catagory of gear you're considering. I think I've got a pretty good handle on this...the products my ads have represented have been some pretty decent sellers. I don't credit the ads for this, though...theey are good products. But at least I haven't done what truly bad ads can do...detract from the product's capabilities for the sake of creating a cute, clever page in a magazine. End of sermon. ;) - Jeff

[Anderton]

<> Amen! The worst ones were the signal processor ads from the 60s and 70s. "Create swirling galaxies of sound, transporting you to a dimension of sound where tone reigns supreme"...I never could figure out what a lot of them were selling, except possibly a new religion, or perhaps drugs .

[KenElevenShadows]

I like gear ads/reviews, but would definitely purchase a magazine that doesn't have them, and do all the time. My favorite music magazine is The Wire. Most people reading this forum probably would not be that interested in this magazine, as it tends to favor music that some people label as more "esoteric" (the banner is "Adventures in Modern Music"), but it's fine. Not one gear ad or review. There's others, too, but I like this magazine a lot, so I figured I'd plug it.

[KenElevenShadows]

[quote]Originally posted by Anderton: [b] Amen! The worst ones were the signal processor ads from the 60s and 70s. "Create swirling galaxies of sound, transporting you to a dimension of sound where tone reigns supreme"...[/b][/quote]Hey, wowww, where can I get one of those?

[the stranger]

Bump