Thanks for the welcome, chaps. I realise it’s a little unorthodox for an editor to stick his neck out like this, but as I see it we’re all members of the bass community, so why not.
Points as I came across them above:
> Another change of editor?
Yes, but it’s all very amicable. I’m good friends with the three previous editors Adrian Ashton, Nick Wells and Ben Cooper. Ben quit after some years as an editor of two magazines because he wanted to go freelance, and is still writing a lot for the mag. More significantly, we have a new (and awesome) publisher.
> Joel, I'll do the proof reading for a free subscription. Nothing puts me off a mag more than poorly proofed bits!
Believe me, no-one is more anal about proofreading errors than me. Some of you may have read my books. When an error makes it into one of them, I’m ready to kill someone! With BGM, the assistant editor and I work really hard to nail any grammar/spelling/punctuation screw-ups before publication. In the new issue (Geddy Lee cover), there’s just one boo-boo that I’ve seen. Ten points for anyone who spots it…
> I think the bass guitar reviews in the mag are a bit non-critical to be honest, and - for whatever reason - if every bass gets at least four out of five stars, the system loses credibility and ceases to be of use to the potential buyer.
This is a fair point. In recent years the mag has got slightly stuck in a rut of mostly reviewing expensive, high-end instruments, and obviously those are amazing to play, hence the generally glittering reviews. But my writers and I have a clear policy of including criticism when it is needed – and this is never, as has been stated elsewhere on this forum, anything to do with advertising content. The ads and editorial departments are not beholden to one another.
From issue 82 there will be more sub-£500 instruments reviewed, too.
> But what I remember: in the review of a Yamaha BB1024x it was stated that it weighs 12kg.
I’ll hold my hand up to that error as it was my review. I meant 12 pounds, not 12 kg. Obviously I’d been on the brown acid that day
> review of a Yamaha BB424. It was stated that there is no way to adjust the height of the bridge pickup (which is NOT true), and that because of that strings have to be raised on the bridge so they don't hit the pickup when played, and that makes the bass much less playable. Now, who would buy the bass after reading that? Does someone not like Yamaha...?
We love Yamaha. Maybe the reviewer was sent a slightly dodgy review model? That happens sometimes.
> When I read a review of an amp, I really don't need to read that turning the "bass" knob clockwise boosts low frequencies. Or, in a review of a jazz-style bass, what general difference panning between pickups or rolling the tones makes. Rather than that, I'd like to know what specific difference is there between this amp or bass and other amps and basses.
Well said.
> the feature on young "alternative" bassists are annoying, when all of them just say that 5-string basses, or slapping, or practicing, or theory, or effects, or being in tune, are for w***ers, so they don't do it, because they are real musicians with soul
Ah, don’t be too hard on our Bassically Speaking section. Those pages are for young or new bassists who don’t yet have the profile to merit a full feature, and it’s their chance to let off steam. I know you used to be young and over-excited too
> The student report from The Institute is so old hat and repetetive as to be boring and irritating (maybe it's just me).
I hear you, but that page is designed to show the value of a musical education to young readers who might not get it otherwise.
> interviews with Bruce Thomas or Pino would be very popular amongst BCers and another pass at a fretless issue (only ever done once many years ago) would be very popular with me at least
We’re chasing an interview with Pino as we speak, and Thomas is on the list. Definitely yes to a fretless issue.
I'll be checking in here periodically and answering questions, so keep them coming.
Joel