A friendly discussion with the "press"

this is a discussion that arose in the context of some email traffic with an adelaide music magazine ... I have edited some of the text (shown in [square brackets] ) to respect/protect the anonymity of the the author ... it interesting to get the other side of the story ...

A discussion about local music … with [ADELAIDE MUSIC MAGAZINE]

I wrote …

We would be interested in what you thought of the album (formally or informally). Do you still review local releases? (It seems the cd review section is getting smaller).

[ADELAIDE MUSIC MAGAZINE] said …..

We’ve found over the past few years that it’s better to use our space in the (local music section) section to promote bands via interviews every week rather than cover CDs regularly. That’s not to say we don’t review local CDs per se - there are often local singles and EPs covered in my Singles column particularly – but from the feedback we’ve had it seems that covering extra bands with interviews to promote new CDs is a more appropriate use of space in the [local music section] section to give local artists a voice.

I wrote ….

... our band (and probably many others) want to know what people think and where/how we sit in the "broader" picture (even the local scene is pretty broad) ...

I understand and agree with the logic of using the (local music section) pages in the way you described. I have a strong interest in local music and as a [ADELAIDE MUSIC MAGAZINE] reader I know where I can find it in your paper ... it is convenient and well organised and valued by local musicians. One of it's many strengths is that is is an encouraging and positive forum for local bands to communicate with the [ADELAIDE MUSIC MAGAZIN] readers ...

A short coming of the [local music section] is it is that it is mostly band "self promotion" which, by definition, is biased/subjective (and therefore a bit unreliable) ... what I value about "reviews" in any magazine is that they help me to filter what music I will pursue (both locally and globally) - a reviewer's description of the music is very useful (and more objective than a band's description).

Also a reviewer's taste helps i.e. I value the opinions of Scott McLennan (RIU) and in the past those of Andrew P Street (Db) because there is some similarity/crossover in our tastes ... [because of this I follow up on bands that they recommend and have found music I really like].

A consideration for the future [local music section]...

Given resourcing and "most effective use" issues ....

Rather than full reviews of local music perhaps something short, sharp and sweet ... a "recommended by" section for local artists that identified cds and/or myspace sites that had been actually listened to and recommended by your staff (or other industry people - band booker's listen to stacks of stuff) ...

Of course a quote from a rave review is a far more useful thing for a band in the self promotion stakes - "this record blew my head off. 5 stars" [ADELAIDE MUSIC MAGAZINE] ... would work wonders for any band.

[ADELAIDE MUSIC MAGAZINE] said …

I agree with many of your comments Matthew, and we certainly hope to overhaul [local music section] to make it more bite-sized and easy to digest in 2009.

I’d suggest that for a dedicated, considered review to be written, a writer must listen to a CD at least three times to get their head around most albums. That’s an output of at least two hours – even before pen is put to paper. If all reviewers take a similar approach to me, I feel that I’m doing any acts I review a disservice if a review isn’t considered and laboured over.

Rave reviews are certainly always a plus, but there are also many publications who have reduced their brand by extolling the wonders of some of the worst fly by night acts on the national and international stage.

Fears of parochialism also leaves community publications in an interesting situation when a bad CD requires a review – do you say it’s awful, attempt to look for the few shining lights about the release (at least it’s short?), earn a few more local enemies by bagging it or simply promote the disc via an interview, where the band earns a soapbox, a brief description of the CD can be given and the public can make their own investigations by way of MySpace referrals or by checking out the act at their next show? It’s a bit of a tightrope, which is why we’re constantly reassessing the best way to make our editorial work.

Thanks for taking an interest in the magazine – feedback is always appreciated and considered.

My response …

... this is a very interesting dilema and definitely of concern ... local acts are fragile (well we are) ... it is possible to feel "slighted" if we are ignored or overlooked let alone outrightly "bagged" ... but local = good isn't a feasible formula either ... noone wants to be patronised or fooled (it's the old "Australian Idol" audition issue "but everyone tells me i'm great sob sob") ...

... as always we (the band) want to know what “the press” think of it ... more specifically we want to know if anyone likes it ... you do have a different status than the people (friends and family) ... there is a difference between being liked by Marcia Hines or being liked by Mark Holden (to take the Australian Idol analogy way too far) ... of course we would rather any humiliation not end up in the public domain ... is there room/ a role for critical advice? ... not that i am sure anyone really wants that ...

... it is a tightrope ... i am sure a lot of what I am talking about falls outside the scope of a magazine’s work/business

... I also wonder where journalists get their "valued" feedback from ... who reviews the reviewers?