what's up with that??????????

[Ken Hughes]

Quick reality check on cover artists - As each of the editors has pointed out before, the cover is not a place to honor people. It's a sales tool. The cover's function is to sell the magazine off the newsstand. No more, no less. You will continue to see on the cover the artists who we feel will attract the most attention from casual readers and new readers passing the newsstand. You will not see "worthy" artists who are little-known. That's the magazine business. That's how every commercial magazine operates.

 

Jon Cleary, Warryn Campbell, Dallas Austin, John Legend, EWF, Ray Charles, Neal Evans, PJ Morgan, Alicia Keys, Lisa Shaw, Usher's keyboard players (names escape me at the moment) . . . the list of R&B artists with recent, timely coverage around a major release or project in the pages of Keyboard is longer than that, y'all. And by the way, the Ray cover was the worst-selling issue in years. What are we to learn from that? If you're a newsstand buyer, straight up - you get some of the blame for the nervousness we feel when we consider putting R&B artists, who tend to be people of color, on the cover (empirically speaking, we put people of color on the cover and you just don't buy. We put women on the cover, and you buy but write letters accusing us of using sex to sell the mag and/or complaining that the artists themselves are trading on looks and sex appeal rather than talent).

 

The revered Dominic Milano had just as much trouble and just as little success with Stevie Wonder as your current, allegedly inept editors do. It's just plain near-impossible to get access to Stevie. Stevie stories are plentiful among the past Eds-in-chief. (And ten bucks says Dom would have taken Keyboard in a remarkably similar direction by now were he still editor.)

 

I gotta be honest, friends. Sometimes when you guys complain about the artist mix my jaw just drops and I wonder if you're even paying attention. We're not on top of every artist you mention, but we're batting a helluva good average.

 

Constructive criticism is wonderful and is sincerely welcomed. We crave it, actually. Anything else is a waste of your time. You have this great opportunity to be in dialogue with the editors of this magazine and actually make the magazine better, but instead some of you spend a lot of time burning up space with talk that doesn't elevate anything. The choice is yours of course, but I'd expect that you smarter-than-average folks would see the folly in harumphing to each other that your pet causes/styles/artists/transcriptions/records aren't served. Who can publish a custom magazine for each of 60,000 readers? What's going to make the magazine better for all readers - the community of Keyboard readers?

 

We've proven that we listen to you. There are now regular features in the magazine and numerous small improvements made to both content and procedure based on your input. Keep giving us level-headed and meaningful feedback and you'll continue to shape the magazine.

[Joe P]

Man! What was up with that??????

 

Regards,

Joe

[Felix_dup1]

Interesting - when I first started reading this thread I was surprised to see that others felt that Keyboard catered to the electronic music crowd more than others. I'm an electronic music fan, and up to the recent Killers, Trent Reznor, and Depeche Mode issues (and I'm looking forward to BT as he's involved in a ton of things, electronic music and otherwise), I thought that Keyboard was intentionally headed in a "player" direction.

 

Feels like Keyboard covers a ton of bases and tries to address many genres. Recent issues:

 

Dream Theatre - Prog

Tori Amos - Pop/Alt

Chick Corea

Muse

Michel Camilo - Latin Jazz solo piano

Peter Cincotti - Jazz

John Legend - Soul

Gavin DeGraw - Pop

Keane - Pop

 

But ultimately, Keyboard is a business and has to sell magazines to stay around. Whatever works best to achieve that goal is probably the direction that makes the most business sense.

[burningbusch]

Ken,

 

Thanks for that bit of info. The cover thing makes sense I guess, but why don't Guitar Player and Bass Player follow the same formula? They have real players on the cover. Keyboard mag looks more like Teen Beat.

 

I'm still confused. Keyboard magazine is a trade/specialty publication (is that the correct term?). Do that many 14 year kids who have no interest in keyboard playing actually buy the mag off the stand because it has one of their favorite pop artists or some cutie on the cover?

 

And as I understand the economics, US subscribers get the mag at essentially cost. At $12/year you're just covering postage and printing. So subscribers give you the base to justify your ad rates. The only money you generate from sales of the actual magazine then are newstand. But it seems to "us", the subscribers that is, that our input is of less value because we're not paying the premium price.

 

I do think Keyboard does quite an extraordinary job of trying to balance all of the different styles and levels of playing--maybe to the point of trying to do the impossible. The cover thing has been disconcerting as I still see it as a place of honor (for this type of magazine).

 

The race thing remains a dividing line. I'm a 51 year old white guy who only plays/listens to, what I consider to be black music, i.e. jazz, fusion, smooth jazz, latin, R&B, soul, neo-soul, funk, etc. If the world of popular music consisted only of rock, country, prog rock, metal, etc., seriously, I would no longer be a musician because it just doesn't interest me. But I'm talking about styles. It makes no difference to me whether it's Joe Sample or Bob James or Keith Jarrett or Herbie on the cover. I thought young white kids (apparently your target market) were more open and into hip hop and contemporary R&B. Guess not.

 

Busch.

[Ken Hughes]

Busch,

 

Simple - Their readers are different. Guitar players and bass players are different. Besides - put yourself in the shoes of a 13-year-old and look at a picture of Hendrix. Of course you'd wanna be him! Not so true for a picture of McCoy Tyner. Or Bill Evans. Why would we all have to follow the same formula? Ick!

 

We're not a trade magazine. We're not just for some self-styled club of existing professional and hi-end hobbyist keyboard players. We're for everyone interested in keyboard playing - why else would we include content for beginners?

 

We're not trying to reach kids with NO interest in keyboard playing. That would be delusional. We're trying to use the cover artists to hook younger players - beginners - and nurture their interest so they'll one day become advanced players and lifelong readers. A handful of them will hopefully become cover artists themselves someday. Frankly it's in our best interest to try and make more keyboard players. I think it's in the best interest of the planet, actually. What better to promote than musicmaking?

 

Teen Beat? Right. I'm pushing back: When has this editorial team put a non-playing "pop artist" or "cutie" on the cover? Fair enough, we put the lead singers of Maroon 5, the Killers, and Keane on the cover, but it was the whole band, and the keyboard players were front and center where they belong.

 

Actually let's look at the Killers: In their case, the lead singer is the keyboard player. Say what you like about his talent, but he glamourizes keyboard playing to a high degree - the rig is encrusted in rhinestones and hit with spotlights onstage. Talk about keyboard glory! That oughtta fire up a few kids. When a Killers fan opens that issue, he'll/she'll get an Eddie Palmieri montuno lesson, a primer on studio monitors, an introduction to Bob Moog and why he's important in Ernie's letter, exposure to Count Basie, an interview with Derek Sherinian, and on and on. All because of the impression made by a glam rhinestone-encrusted keyboard rig played by a charting artist. We exploit the cover artist to hook people into buying the mag which is filled with content that will make them better, more informed musicians. It's shameful, isn't it?

 

Emerson and Wakeman were once young turks. And as much as they were deservedly lauded, both were also derided for placing higher prority on flash than substance. Keyboard got nasty letters for covering them instead of "real players." 30 years later, we've got a whole contingent that lambastes us for "forgetting" about them and many others, because they're "real players" and our current crop of artists "aren't." Ain't nothin' changed.

 

We need you guys around because you're going to help teach the younger generation. But at some point the torch has to be passed, you know? The spotlight is moving off of your generation and onto the next one. It can't be stopped, and we're not the ones moving it. The young ones are taking it from you, as you did from the generation before you.

[Markyboard]

Originally posted by Ken Hughes:

[QB] Busch,

 

 

Actually let's look at the Killers: In their case, the lead singer is the keyboard player. Say what you like about his talent, but he glamourizes keyboard playing to a high degree - the rig is encrusted in rhinestones and hit with spotlights onstage. Talk about keyboard glory! That oughtta fire up a few kids. When a Killers fan opens that issue, he'll/she'll get an Eddie Palmieri montuno lesson, a primer on studio monitors, an introduction to Bob Moog and why he's important in Ernie's letter, exposure to Count Basie, an interview with Derek Sherinian, and on and on. All because of the impression made by a glam rhinestone-encrusted keyboard rig played by a charting artist. We exploit the cover artist to hook people into buying the mag which is filled with content that will make them better, more informed musicians. It's shameful, isn't it?

 

I originally refrained from what would have appeared as "trashing" Keyboard again. But since you brought up The Killers I can't help but mention that in the cover story article the mention of anything keyboard specific occurred all of 3 times; One about the studded keyboard appearance, one about him quitting when he was 14(?) and was there one about some keyboard he uses? That's it. I hear what you're saying about using this kind of band in the cover story to reel young kids in. But once the cover story was decided, did Brandon Flowers have absolutely nothing to say about actually playing the keyboards? I'm not asking for anything specific like transcriptions or keyboard chord analysis. But something about keyboards. Even if he hates them and feels like a geek behinmd them tell us. Did he ever get laid on or next to one? Even that would have been more relevant then what was presented.

I got the impression that Brandon Flowers really couldn't give a shit about playing keyboards and exploited YOU guys by presenting himself as lead singer/songwriter. And the editors/author saw the apparent lack of keyboard material and said "let's go through all the songs and comment about the keyboarfd sounds in each of the songs on their CD.

 

Hey again Ken I understand you guys need to do whatever to bring in the bacon. That's reality. But some 14 year kid off the street is more likely to get negative vibes about playing keyboards from this article then making the cover himself some day. IMO.

[Felix_dup1]

Markyboard, I disagree somewhat.

 

Someone reading the Killers article would have seen:

 An example of a guy who is a frontman and a keyboardist

An example of a band who has written killer hook-laden pop songs

Some pretty cool examples of influential music (Depeche Mode, The Cars, The Smiths, Bowie, Otis Redding, The Commodores, Bruce Springsteen) that may inspire a young keyboardist to listen to a variety of styles to see where Brandon came from.

 I like the track-by-track breakdown of sound programming

Lots of songwriting talk

 

I really like The Killers - but the keyboard parts are not prog-complex by any means. Brandon doesn't pretend to be a virtuoso player - but I can respect the part that keyboards play in The Killers music. There should be room for articles about an artist who uses keyboards in this way as much as there should be room for a Jazz solo piano guy IMO.

 

I don't think the article is a throwaway by any means, and there's a bunch of other stuff in that issue that rounds it out.

[burningbusch]

Simple - Their readers are different. Guitar players and bass players are different. Besides - put yourself in the shoes of a 13-year-old and look at a picture of Hendrix. Of course you'd wanna be him! Not so true for a picture of McCoy Tyner. Or Bill Evans. Why would we all have to follow the same formula? Ick!

 

We're not a trade magazine. We're not just for some self-styled club of existing professional and hi-end hobbyist keyboard players. We're for everyone interested in keyboard playing - why else would we include content for beginners?

The last few issues of Bass Player had Bootsie and Paul McCartney on the cover. Do you really think 13 year old kids want to be like them? Whether the magazine is aimed at guitar players, drummers, sax players, etc. the EXPECTATION is that the front cover highlights the BEST-OF-THE-BEST, LEGENDS. It's a place that's earned. When you mess with that expectation, you tick people off.

 

Teen Beat? Right. I'm pushing back: When has this editorial team put a non-playing "pop artist" or "cutie" on the cover? Fair enough, we put the lead singers of Maroon 5, the Killers, and Keane on the cover, but it was the whole band, and the keyboard players were front and center where they belong.

I can't keep track of the editorial teams, I just know that over the years Keyboard has become increasingly pop focused. I remember a few years back Madonna was on the cover one issue and then back on the cover two issues later.

 

Emerson and Wakeman were once young turks. And as much as they were deservedly lauded, both were also derided for placing higher prority on flash than substance. Keyboard got nasty letters for covering them instead of "real players." 30 years later, we've got a whole contingent that lambastes us for "forgetting" about them and many others, because they're "real players" and our current crop of artists "aren't." Ain't nothin' changed.

I was around when Keyboard first came out, were you? Chick, Herbie, Emerson all made the cover early on. Whether you liked their particular music or not, no one denied that these cats could (and let me remind you STILL CAN) play. Now the coverage is on the lastest pop/rock band that happens to have a keyboard player a little more front and center. I read the Muse piece. The kid talked about how he spent weeks trying to learn the bass line to "That's What I Say" and how he didn't play for years and never took lessons. Then we find out that much of the synthesizer work everyone seem to like was done by producers. Nothing's changed??? What BS. Everything has changed.

 

We need you guys around because you're going to help teach the younger generation. But at some point the torch has to be passed, you know? The spotlight is moving off of your generation and onto the next one. It can't be stopped, and we're not the ones moving it. The young ones are taking it from you, as you did from the generation before you.

Keyboard mag used to cover all generations: Eubie Blake, Oscar, Dave Brubeck, Wakeman, Billy Joel, Stevie. It used to highlight players from all genres.

 

I wonder if there is a discconnect between the people the editorial staff is trying to reach and the audience your advertisers are selling to. The Korg OASYS ad is targeted at ME, not junior, as I have the discretionary income to be able to afford it. The VSL ad is aimed at ME, as I own it. What's the average age of the person buying Ivory, a PEK, Voyager, Nord Stage? I wonder. We see the posts from Dad asking advice on a first keyboard for junior... would like to keep it under $1,000...you know, not sure if Skipper is going to follow through on this.

 

It would be one thing if you were covering the Brad Melhdau's of the world, but you're featuring people who appear to be fundamentally unskilled players.

 

And how is your shocking revelation that you're hesitant to put a person of color on the front cover not form of racism? Really, how different is that from an employer not wanting to hire blacks because he feels they don't produce as well as whitey does? One difference is that there are federal laws that apply to discrimination in the workplace. You, evidently, can put on the cover, i.e. promote, whomever you please in order to sell more issues. But is that being a good corporate citizen? And it's not like there's a shortage of amazingly talented black keyboard artists. Really, I think that's pretty sad.

 

My criticism of Keyboard mag is leveled solely at the cover artists and associated article. I think the rest of the magazine is excellent.

 

Busch.

[Markyboard]

Originally posted by felix:

Markyboard, I disagree somewhat.

 

Someone reading the Killers article would have seen:

An example of a guy who is a frontman and a keyboardist

 

(Markyboard)If it were text only you would barely know he's a keyboardist

 

An example of a band who has written killer hook-laden pop songs

 

(Markyboard)Absolutely - and well covered.

 

Some pretty cool examples of influential music (Depeche Mode, The Cars, The Smiths, Bowie, Otis Redding, The Commodores, Bruce Springsteen) that may inspire a young keyboardist to listen to a variety of styles to see where Brandon came from.

 

 

(Markyboard) Were they influential as far as keyboards go? We'll never know from the article.

 

I like the track-by-track breakdown of sound programming.

 

(Markyboard) Would have been nice if it was from Brandon's perspective instead of someone guessing what was used.

 

Lots of songwriting talk

 

(Markyboard) Lots

 

I really like The Killers - but the keyboard parts are not prog-complex by any means. Brandon doesn't pretend to be a virtuoso player - but I can respect the part that keyboards play in The Killers music. There should be room for articles about an artist who uses keyboards in this way as much as there should be room for a Jazz solo piano guy IMO.

 

(Markyboard) I totally agree there should be room. They just almost did not cover the keyboard aspect at all. I like the Killers too.

 

 

I don't think the article is a throwaway by any means, and there's a bunch of other stuff in that issue that rounds it out.

(Markyboard) The rest of the issue was great - I should have said so originally.

[Ken Hughes]

Markyboard,

 

I have to concede that your argument would be entirely sound if the only content of the mag was the Killers interview. You'll get no argument from me that the content of the article offered little or nothing to a seasoned pro as I presume you are. But this is the thinking that frustrates me so; everything in the mag is not for you. It never has been, it never will be. We never set up that expectation. Stop holding on to it. We said it was our goal to make sure there's something in each issue for everyone. We'll kick our own patootie to make sure you get great value out of a year's subscription, but there's a whole lot of other people with different interests and different tastes who deserve the same. You're gonna get some stuff you don't personally care about or even understand. Everyone will. I always did as a subscriber. (14-year-old me: "Ivo Pogorelich??? No, thankyou.")

[Ken Hughes]

Busch,

 

Actually the advertisers are leaning on us all the time to deliver new buyers. Younger buyers. Thankfully, that lines up with our need to replace the readers who are "aging out."

 

I'll agree that there seems to be a disconnect in some cases between what they're asking of us editorially and what products they're producing and advertising. We can only point that out. Hopefully they'll do something about it. They were universally pleased with the number of young people we delivered to Musicplayer Live. But then many of them showed the kids four-figure guitars, big mixing consoles, and hi-end workstations. Their bad. (The smart ones also brought lower-end instruments and gear, and made sure their stuff was available to the School Of Rock stage.)

 

Re: people of color on the cover, it's the newsstand readership that's shown a bias. The newsstand buyers are apparently ageist, too. The subscribers seem to be mildly sexist, judging from the mail. There is no bias on the staff. None. But are we supposed to commit newsstand suicide on principle? That'd be sorta like exercising racial and gender quotas, and that's just as messed up. How long could we keep that up before the magazine shriveled up entirely and was no longer around to feature anyone of any color? If it were people in hats that sold poorly on the newsstand, nobody would be outraged. What's the diff? It's just an appearance thing. If you can get over the idea of the cover being an award bestowed on a worthy artist, the issue of their color becomes irrelevant. That people are in the issue at all says that they're interesting, instructive, inflammatory, inspiring, somehow worthy of attention. Screw the cover. It's just a fish hook.

 

Printz Board had more to teach. What does that say about whitey Brandon Flowers, both as a musician and as a human being? They stand or fall on their own, folks. We don't put extra English on the ball.

 

Bottom line, I'm sorry you hate the covers and glad you can look beyond them anyway. We're working harder than ever to give you great content. Let's just not have more misunderstanding about the cover being an award of some kind. No magazine uses their cover that way, no matter how much the artists and the public might assign that function to it.

[Markyboard]

Thanks Ken. Looking forward to the swimsuit edition.

[Ken Hughes]

Didn't you hear? That's next month!

[bigbaby987]

thank you all for taking a minute to write about this.. i actually like "keys-mag" but lately i have had basically no interest into what's going on.. no offense to what you guys are doing.. it's just not giving "me" what i'm lookin for right now... i'd love to see some more great articles like you always have on a more wide variety of a "key" players. thanks.