and I read that

I'd feel a bit p'd off

I'd be thinking.....'Good for you'...'we worked bloody hard on that issue to just be dismissed as 'all a bit disinteresting for me'..'

and ultimately 'bugger off then' coupled with a DELETE_POST command

But its not

However wouldn't it be better to be constructive? - ie Perhaps a refresh of content/approach in certain areas might be even better..."This would be good" or "..that piece might have worked better if it was like this..."

Rather than invite people to come and say they also are a bit tired of it all....

If there were to be one issue sealed in a time capsule and dug up in a century's time to explain what print media used to be like at it's best, it would be this issue. Whether some of the articles serendipitously reflect the concerns of The Word bloggerati or whether the blog itself has been seeded in advance*, there are any number of splendid features, not least Francis Wheen's, which is a textbook example of writing to commission. Like the last series of Dr. Who, I simply don't want it to end. I rarely bother with the podcast these days btw.

*I know, it's hardly NI around here, is it?

taken the day off work to read a magazine?

If true I can't decide if that's sad or weird.

Tim Tunes: Having read my stream of conciousness post again I can't see that I'm actually critical of anything in this months issue or the magazine in general. Just that I'm starting to feel out of phase with the current direction of the content. And that is sad, cos I can see from previous experience where this goes.

I wouldn't presume to offer advice on content, cos I genuinely believe the editorial team don't write it aiming for a particular audience, they write it largely for themselves. I suspect thats why they all eventually left their previously highly paid posts on other publications and took the risk of starting Word.

Your not one of the team are you? No offence if so, but steady on.

Occasionally I'll flick through an issue and have nothing jump out at me. And that's with all mags I read regularly (WSC, Motor Sport...etc), not just The Word. You can't please everyone all of the time, I guess.

I still find if I read it all, there's always a few things that make it worthwhile.

This issue has been great so far, containing pieces on Stewart Lee and Suede, both of whom I really like.

in less than five minutes. Took six minutes last issue.

re read the one with keef interview a number of times

i hope it keeps the standard and that my interests remain in synch as I've just re-subscribed for 3 years.

that it's possible to fall out of love with a magazine. I had the NME delivered well into my 40s and I frequently didn't open the cover. My loyalty was down to the fond memories I had of the magazine in it's heyday of the 1970s. I also stuck with Q and Mojo much longer than I should have done. There are only so many Oasis (Q) and Beatles (Mojo) articles a chap can read.

There are issues of the Word that don't tickle my fancy as much as others. But I always find something interesting to read, there's always something new to discover and it's one of the main ways I have of finding what new music I might like. At the heart of my relationship with the Word is the feeling that they like the same sort of stuff as me and are writing the magazine for me. I never got that feeling with Q and Mojo.

Maybe it is the time for you to move on BernkastelCues. Call it a day, and pop back in a few months and see whether you feel any different.

My habit is to read the magazine before chasing the zeds at bedtime. Starting at page one and moving slowly to, er, the end. Even when skipping quickly through the reviews I could make it last for weeks. I want to savour it.

Recently, like a gripping blockbuster, I've not been able to constrain my urges to one or two pages and I'm through it and eager for more within a week. Last night I went straight to Gavin's piece on Ivor Cutler. A fascinating insight into a fan's obsession with a true eccentric and beautifully written. I don't imagine I could find that article written anywhere else, except on this blog.

Encore Word.

Takes day off (cancels two supplier meetings and two interviews in the process).

I bought every issue of Rolling Stone from 1984 - 1990; I did some uni work on it and ended the love affair. Everybody I spoke to about the felt that the magazine had changed not that they had changed. Each new reader feels that at some stage the magazine lost 'it'. I felt that the Rolling Stone became a bit porn lite around the time of the infamous Janet Jackson cover. I had to keep putting it down.

Q had a fab Dylan issue in around 1989 and then I bought it regularly until Mojo emerged in 1992. I never bought Q again. Bought Musician 1989 - 1995 (loved that magazine - subscribed!) but then I found exactly that I was no longer inspired to read it. When I found Word in 2005 I loved everything about it; especially the stuff on the digital revolution. I admired and still do the whole package which successfully creates an entire sense of community and incorporates this whole organic approach. I find it to be one of the most interesting and successful attempts to create an online community that I have seen. The thing is alive.

Personally, though, my musical interests are moving towards Baroque. I love Telemann and am really only just discovering Bach. No idea what I am doing. Would love to see an article about "classical" music in a popular music culture mag like Word which explored an even more silenced musical form from the point of view of beginners who are familiar with other musical forms. Eventually I will go looking for such articles. I am a consumer.

One of the major things about Word for me - I think somebody touched on it on an earlier post- is that it helped to introduce me to new artists and music.

One of the things I've identified as causing me current ennui, is that the new artists and music all seem to be a bit samey. From within a pretty narrow rock/folk/guitar/various keyboards spectrum.

Remembering that a fair number of Words constituency is baby boomer, most of us have probably seen/heard all the rockular genre popular music we need. For example: Eels and Flaming Lips are two (relatively) new bands championed in Word in the last few yeats. Now, I'm absolutely sure their splendid, and offer no critisism of them or anyone who really likes them. But I just thoyght "nah, heard most of it in other places before in my 40 odd years of soaking up western popular music"

However, I remember hearing Fraser Lewry talk on a Podcast about some South American throat singing thingy he attended and thinking "Thats new,I wouldn't mind hearing that". Similarly with Jazz and classical, or other forms, such as African music. Why not dip our collective toes a bit more into those murky waters? Stuff were we're maybe not sure whats going on, what the references are and whats gonny happen next?

I'm not saying lets turn Word into Classic FM magazine, but perhaps something a bit broader to tickle our (or mibbees just my) jaded musical pallette.

Sigh...

..and haven't seen the new issue yet but I'm not sure that the content has changed much in its PIF ( Personal Interest Factor ) that much over the years I've been reading it. There are always general themes that don't interest me - Heavy Metal, for example, or Indie bands - but there's usually other items that unexpectedly grab my attention. Much the same with other magazines and newspapers. It's a Pick n' Mix world.

who feels a bit disengaged from the world out there, I like the fact that Word doesn't just concentrate on music. After all Mojo does seem to have cornered the in-depth 20 page muso piece pretty well. In the latest issue, have disagreed with Jim White's assessment of Twenty Twelve and am sure I will disagree with more but what I still like about it is the fact that the overall quality of the writing makes me want to read about people and things I wouldn't ordinarily give much notice to. I was tickled by Mark Ellen's dismissal of Howard Marks, a weed stained bore talking about a life of tireless underachievement, very good.
Call is a fiver Mark, usual address.

Notable publications I stopped reading when the editorial vision moved away from what I first loved:

Creem Magazine (deceased) - went big on hair metal
NME - decided the Mighty Mighty Lemon Drops and Stump were better than the Beatles
Mother Jones - identity politics took over everything
Rolling Stone - shifted to celebrity journalism
Four Four Two - less content and more 'ad sponsored' features
Mojo - incipient 'Q'ism
National Lampoon - goodbye scathing satire, hello gross-out humour

This, and crappy postal service, is why subscriptions don't appeal to me.

It doesn't seem so long ago I would've gone straight for the feature, read it twice and started cutting out pictures from it to stick on my bedroom wall.

God that illustrator's good though.

...to find the time to keep up.

I love reading Word and used to work methodically through every issue, not flicking through beforehand because I really enjoyed not knowing what was on the next page until I got there and discovered the joys within. I wouldn't start a new issue until I'd finished the last.

Thing is I found myself last month still on the December issue as more and more were landing on the doormat and I found that what I was reading was getting older and older and all the interesting gigs and festivals which were advertised at the back had been and gone by the time I got there and the piles of unread mags taunted me. I even took about 4 issues on holiday with me but still didn't make a dent on them as I preferred to go walking on the cliffs rather than sit in my campervan ploughing through my Word homework.

So... I took the leap and skipped 6 issues and started on the July one last month. I'm halfway through that now and already another has fallen on the mat waiting to be read. Add to that about 5 podcasts (I keep up better with those) and the Something for the Weekend emails and you can see the content overload that is already building up just from Word.

I'm not necessarily a slow reader but do have a lot of other stuff to do. There's an unwatched (I know I know) Wire box set on my bookshelf glaring at me nightly. I did manage to get through The Killing but those 20 hours might have been spent on the Word. I wonder if I'll ever find the time to listen to or read any of the books/CDs that Word recommends.

Any ideas? Do I need help?

You sound like an Enneagram 1, Richard - perfectionist judge (I can do better, I must do better). I am with Spartacus - give yourself a break; there is no Word exam coming up as far as I know. Is there? IS THERE? Blimey, they never told me...

the new issue but I knwo what it was that got me into the Word in the first place and that is great features on areas of music not usually covered by other mags. Not specific artists necessarily but the 'behind the scenes' stuff. Sidemen, business side of music, downloading culture, etc.

First the podcast and then a cover for a marginal schmindie band. Surely Slade would be a better fit and Dave Hill a better interviewee than boring Bert?
Mind you, haven't got the new mag yet so I suppose it's possible that the feature is an expose about how the fey quintet aren't much cop...in which case - well done chaps! You really nailed those dastardly thirdrate dame-apers!

Come on, you can't just call Suede a marginal 'schmindie' (whatever that means) band. OK, I'm a fan, but that's because they're a damn fine credit to British music and often go overlooked. Seeing them recently in Dublin was like the 10 years or so that had passed since their last tour was just a couple of minutes. They've lost none of their vigour, performance and ability to captivate an entire audience that they held in their prime. And as far as guitarists go, Bernard Butler (along with James Dean Bradfield and Graham Coxon) and later Richard Oakes were the only guitarists at the time (early 90s) to be doing anything remotely interesting amongst the mush of landfill 'indie' players that followed. Rant over.

As for the magazine, I still love it. I even read the bits about artists/stuff I'm not interested in because the writing is usually so damn good. The blend of podcast/web/concerts/print is so brilliantly done. All magazines have a format. All magazines (usually) have a set structure, it's the content that matters, and I think it's really rather good.

Difficult to say what I think of this - I'm not overwhelmed, but it's not underwhelming. I think I'm just whelmed.

I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Word one day going the way of Q; but for me at least, it's a long way off that sorry fate. It takes me a while, but I read almost every article in the end, and it's never the same features that I enjoy most. Last month, it was Sylvia Patterson's piece about Snoop Dogg (an artist in whom I have zero interest) which made me laugh and sticks in the mind. I haven't read everything in this edition yet, but the Stewart Lee and Molly Parkin interviews are bloody good.

I've been a subscriber for a few years and always look forward to the next one arriving. Long may it run.

to all people. I certainly buy other publications to cater for my other interests. Although Fortean Times did recently have a 2 page article on Kate Bush for no reason other than she's 'a bit odd'.

Mojo - like the bigger features
Uncut - wavering. Like Allan Jones but find it becoming a bit niche in musical tastes (Fleet Foxes school of woodsman homespunness)
Q - about to cancel. Suddenly dawned on me that I was disappointed when it dropped onto the mat that it wasn't one of the others. Time to go.
CR - still love it. My era of bands, it loves all the backstage angles
Word - I realised a while ago that I don't subscribe to this because of the music, the film or anything else. I buy it for the writers. I love the quality of ME, DH, CSM, AH, KM, DQ writing and I love the pieces about producers, engineers, unseen musicians etc.I buy it because of you lot. I look out for regular Blog contributors in the Review section and smile when I find one I recognise. There was a period of the NME in the 70's (CSM, Kent, Danny Baker)that was my absolute favourite era of great writing about my passion. I feel the same way about Word. I'm not the remotest bit interested in Suede but I'll read the feature because people whose opinions I respect have taken the trouble to feature them in my fave mag. Nuff said.

of the magazine and this space that they have created an ethos wherein people feel comfortable voicing some of the opinions above. I would guess anyone coming here and criticising current content does so out of a sense of loyalty and ownership. Meaning that something quite good and valuable has been created here.

That said, these guys are pros. If the content is changing but circulation and ad revs move skyward, then the content is correct. To paraphrase Mark Ellen 'Keith Richards on the cover is a sellout issue. Mick Jagger on the cover is a warehouse full of unsold copies' or words to that effect.

Producing a magazine is only a part of the process. The reader has a part to play too.

I usually flick through the mag first and quite often my first instinct is to mumble things like." Never heard of him", "Don't like 'er", "Not another indie band" etc etc.

Then comes my read through, usually spread over a fortnight. Nine times out of ten I warm to the article.

I used to ensure that on a main read through, every word would be read and every picture examined. I'm less strict with myself of late and if an article doesn't grab me I may move on, but I'm still finding that I read far more than I skim.

My horizons and (inversely as a result) my bank balance have been well and truly broadened by the magazine, but not every section will grab me. ( I'm finding that I increasingly value the columnist sections.)

All that said, it really does depend upon my mood as to how rigorous I am with the content. Coming back to the magazine after a day or two (or even a drink or two) can often open up new perspectives and insights that I was previously immune too.

I've dabbled with other contemporary publications but none of them have the consistency and value for money that word represents for me.

If I could contribute to a wish list for future issues, it would lean towards the styles of World, Jazz, Classical and other specialist genres. It seems to be where I am heading as a consumer. Going "too specialist" would not necessarily be a selling point for the masses but quality writing around a variety of topics will do for me.

The recent redesign, sent the magazine in the direction on the New Yorker particularly the first edition in that format. That's no bad thing in my book either.

and read it from front to back over the course of the month. Perhaps my quality control faculties have been affected by my loyalty to the brand and I no longer read it objectively. I don't really care if that's true or not because the magazine gives me so much pleasure.

Its continuing appeal is that the style of the magazine has become more important than the matching of the content to my personal tastes. It is a cool magazine in the Miles Davis sense of the word: being composed in an aesthetic way, rational and measured. So I'll read about a band I can take or leave - like Suede - because my interest is piqued by the fact that Word has a piece about them. I trust the judgement of the magazine and writers even if I don't always agree with the opinion expressed or have an interest beyond the article itself. Besides, the idea of spending nearly £5 a month on a magazine only to use it to decide whether or not to buy a CD, DVD or book is unfulfilling and prescriptive; it's not why I invest in the magazine. I sometimes think the cover CD is a distraction: it pigeon-holes the magazine when it really defies categorisation as a "music magazine". I'd welcome a small collection of unpublished/republished articles on a theme as a cover "CD".

Sometimes, more often than not, I get the double whammy of a great article with a great incentive to buy or investigate further but even if serendipity of reader and writer coming together on a "product" doesn't materialise there is still the voice of the writer to be enjoyed and savoured. That, for me, is the point of Word: to have voices that come off the page and float around in your head for a while. That's what reading is all about isn't it?

So, Word's USP is that the quality and process of communication is as important to me as the content itself.

And that USP is also its biggest problem and weakness.

Word is really a collection of esoteric voices rather than one voice with many repetitive echoes. It is not lead by an ideological agenda other than the idea of bottling enthusiasm or interest or opinion in someone or something through the written word and sharing it. That lack of ideological artifice is very liberating but it also makes it more difficult to pin the magazine down.

Never forget that most of us are sheep in the world even if we like to think we're not. Who wants to read writers that write as sheep, primarily by writing to reinforce stereotypical opinions around which a crowd has gathered? Answer: most people.

That's why I think Word struggles to position itself in the market: it doesn't move to the standard 4/4 beat of printed media by saying a lot about a little nor does it chase the zeitgeist. In conjunction with its multiple time signatures it also places a very specific demand on its readers: keep an open mind.

Keeping an open mind is quite tiring when nature, age and the way of the world seems to expect you to close it once you've reached a certain level of maturity. God knows I fight against it and Word, in its own little way, helps that fight.

I've been a subscriber for around 3 years now, and I *have* noticed a couple of things - it might just be perception, but the Foreword part with "stories" etc is getting bigger? It goes up to page 44 in the new issue, and at one point I thought there must be a printing error and they'd printed the same pages twice as I flicked through.

Also - and this isn't just the Word - I really get sick of huge spreads of pictures of loads of brilliant things that we did when we went that that festival that you didn't go to. Cue "Wasn't Latitude Great everyone" spread(s) next month. :)

Also, I think the number of completely "one step removed" articles has dropped a little (an example, when I started subscribing there was one about Arthur Conan Doyle, more recently Alan Lomax) so there are more of the "foreword" type bits, and less meaty articles.

I'm probably wrong, but that's how it feels.

Also, I'd love more proper album reviews, period, but I know that's terribly old fashioned.

That said, it stands head and shoulders above any competitor that I've bothered to purchase (for my demographic ;)) in recent times...

Keep up the good work everyone, but stay on your toes. :)

What the need to do is start hacking in to the mobile phones of Pop stars to get some real stories!

That could be really effective and give the buying public just what they want.

I like word of mouth, & not just celebs, I used to enjoy reading the subscribers recent likes & dislikes.

Film reviews - Surely I am not the only reader who thinks that the photo of Jim White at the top of his film review column is dreadful? I always think it makes him look as if he is asking someone if they have spilt his pint.

I take the Daily Telegraph, & his photo in that is a lot less scary.

Just a shame that the article wasn't a great deal longer, I was really looking forward to settling in with that one.

They've been around 20 years - it's not as if they put Brother or The Horrors on the cover. As I said on another thread, 90s music is standing the test of time and I for one am delighted that The Word's editorial excellence is being applied to Suede. Pulp next please. Then Noel Gallaghjer. Then you can get back to the old folkies

I don't read the Word for new music (I'm not into AOR / nu-folk). I don't read the Word for the tales of television in the 1970s (I wasn't alive). Or the alternative acts from your youth (such as the incredibly tedious Richard Thompson / Dr Feelgood), because 70s rock has been bettered. I don't read the Word because of its podcasts (some people just don't interest me).

I read the Word because it deserves to be read. A fascinating article here, superb insights there, controversial opinions and the BEST/WORST bit. Quite simply, a well thought-out, interesting read from cover to cover. Even if I'm not interested in half the things in it, its always worth a read. Would be nice to have longer articles about music's fearless visionaries (not just Stevie "slap-bass and clavichord" Wonder or Edwyn "one song" Collins), but truly out-there people like Tom Waits and Scott Walker, who use their whole life as art statement. For example, the cover with Tom Waits on recently had one paragraph about him. Not impressed. More coverage for less obvious genres such as Hip Hop and Scandinavian post rock would be fantastic for me, but I suspect not for everyone.

Above all, the more diversity the better, and keep up the good work!

I skimmed it all in ten minutes. Read some of Mark's stuff at the start, the "Best & Worst", skimmed the reviews (nothing caught my eye), and put it into the recycling box, and both CDs in the bin without a listen. Almost a fiver well spent then.

Maybe it's time to stop buying it? We'll see if things improve.

I went to my local shop intending to buy, but no Word!! Either it had sold out or they stopped carrying it. So I need to search more widely.

THIS JUST IN they had some today so I bought one!

self-indulgent? I have to be honest...the bit I definately never read is what Mark Ellen has been up to. He could do a blog that I won't read if he wishes to keep everyone abreast of his doings.

been way more interesting and more fun than the actual mag for quite a while.

because WH Smith were promoting it and Nick Cave was on the cover. Had that cover been in any way Beatles/Stones/Zep/Springsteen related, I probably would have walked on by.

The funny thing is, I'm still reading it at issue 102 despite the high content of said artists, whose music does so little for me. I just find that the features are often so much more entertaining than the music.

I like the bits I like and don't worry about the bits I'm not that fussed about; and I also seem to be in a minority in that I play the CD more than once - a great way to find new artists.

And even if I only spend two hours reading an issue, I've still got more enjoyment from it than a Big Mac and fries, which cost about the same.

But I've never forgiven the Word for not including Earthworm Jim in the Best & Worst cartoon feature!

But my comment in another thread about using my sibscription budget to buy an iPod Touch for the podcast app wasn't really a joke ...

I could easily live w/o the mag nowadays---I'd really miss the podcasts ...

Do we like it at the moment or not?

Yes
No
Meh

...The Word is still head and shoulders above other music and men's mags and its choice of interviewees shames most Sunday papers.

I stopped buying Mojo and Uncut a few years ago because they seemed to cover the same narrow subjects - The Beatles split/Sgt Pepper's, Jimi Hendrix in London (Ringo's house, testcard inspiration), a bit of alt country and some old bores dissecting Dylan lines.

Men's magazines seem to be aimed at vain swaggerers or sniggering idiots, while The Observer is the best of a bad bunch on Sundays, saved by its sports coverage and occasionally decent articles in The Review.

The Word is particularly strong this month with the Kershaw and Lee interviews. (Is anyone else shocked by Kershaw's comments on Peel?), but I often find the best parts of the magazine are things that aren't covered elsewhere - like the session musician featured earlier this year or Jude Rogers' piece on her dad - or articles that breathe new life into well-trodden subjects - Du Noyer on Brian Epstein or Ellen on Keef.

a pint?

it has issues where there's a lot of articles that interest this reader, and others where there are relatively few.
But please spare us in the next issue a ten page spread of photographs of Latitude - or Lattetude as Stuart Maconie refers to it in his new book.
And yes, the forewword section is now far too long, to the detriment of the rest of the magazine.
Nevertheless, the consistently high standard of writing makes it worth buying.

I think the point of the cover is not how many records the artist has sold or whether they are indie schmindie or beardy; The one thing just about all cover stars have had in common over the years is that they mean something to a lot of people in the massive and beyond and / or have stood for something original and been influential in their work, Dido excepted.

Suede are curious in that they've done it twice, they had an absolutely fanatical fan base and they clearly influenced popular culture first time around; Suede really mattered to so many people, and many are falling in love with them again, harder, such as Forde of this parish.

This mag put Peel on the cover, John Martyn, Richard Thompson and others that don't particulary shift units but mean something in our world. Now and again someone will turn up on there that means less to you personally, doesn't mean they're not deserving of it in some way and next month you'll probably love the cover.

Cover complaints to me are a bit like buying a nice pie and grumbling about the wrapper. The stuff you eat is on the inside surely.

Some of us think the Word isn't as good as it used to be and some of us think it is better.

Some of us think this issue is better than the previous few and some of us think the previous few were better.

Some of us think the music covered is too modern and some of us think it is not modern enough.

Some of us think it used to be a music-only magazine and some of us think it always covered a wider range.

Some of us think it should be shouldn't cover things that are only relevant to a British audience and some of us think it should cover fewer big, global stars.

Some of us think the CDs are rubbish, some of us think the CDs are OK and some of us think the CDs are great.

Some of us have read it cover-to-cover and some of us have only skim-read it.

Some of us think the Word should be a broad church and cover things that may not interest us all the time and some of us think every word and article should interest us all the time.

Some of us like some of the articles and some of us like different ones.

Is that it? Excellent, all sorted then, marketing people.

*Ronna Cameron

One for IACGMOOH fans

Is Neil Codling Richard Oakes' cousin (box) or Simon Gilbert's (text)? Is FooFighers' pre-show ritual a 'band prayer' (text) or a 'bad prayer' (caption)?

Am I being terribly old fashioned about this sort of thing?

That if you complained about the new issue AND are attending tomorrow's booze cruise you will be ceremoniously made to walk the plank into the Thames.

Why do you think there is no delete button eh? Cunning plan.