Rolling Stone published its official review of Guns N’ Roses’ Chinese Democracy today, and reading it made me think to that day some two and a half years ago when Spin, ever the prankster, tried to pull an April Fool’s joke by running a Chuck Klosterman-penned review of Axl’s magnum opus, despite it being only sort of close to finished at that time. So I decided to read both reviews back-to-back, and what I saw–well, it inspired me to give all of you a little test. Can you tell David Fricke’s real album review from the one that was written with tongue in cheek? Let’s find out!
Most critics have a love-hate relationship with album reviews. On the one hand, they’re an absurdly limiting format, forcing you to find things to say about albums you don’t care about, limiting your thoughts on albums you do care about, and requiring a bottom-line consumer reccomendation that might not really encapsulate your honest feelings. On the other hand, in these hard times for music scribes, record reviews are the one unique service we can provide that the public always seems to want. Which is why it seems crazy that Alernative Press was considering removing album reviews from its print edition.
Once again, we present Rock-Critically Correct, a feature in which the most recent issues of Rolling Stone, Blender, Vibe, and Spin are given a once-over by a writer who’s contributed to many of those magazines, as well as a few others! In this installment, he looks at the new issue of Rolling Stone:
Yesterday, I came across a recent interview with Amanda Petrusich, the author of the new It Still Moves, in which she basically nails the conundrum facing music writing today. Take it away, Amanda and questioner:
RD: Being largely a writer for print, what is your stance on blogs?
AP: I read a ton of blogs, every day. I think the onus is really on print magazines to step up the game. They’ve got to do stuff blogs can’t or won’t or don’t want to do – long, thoughtfully researched articles with lots of access that take months to write – in order to stay alive. But they just keep printing … lists.
Once again, we present Rock-Critically Correct, a feature in which the most recent issues of Rolling Stone, Blender, Vibe, and Spin are given a once-over by a writer who’s contributed to many of those magazines, as well as a few others! In this installment, he looks at the new issue of Rolling Stone:
Mailboxes and newsstands will feel a little emptier come Oct. 17, when a slimmed-down version of Rolling Stone hits the newsstands. The magazine’s dimensions will be shrunk down from its current 10″ by 11 3/4 real estate to the standard 8″ish by 11″ish size used by most magazines. It’ll also use glossier paper and be perfect-bound on the side, no doubt so various Mick Jagger aphorisms can run up and down the spine. (Might I suggest “I am in the basement / Looking for the truth” for new issue No. 1?) How does founder and publisher Jann Wenner feel about all this? He’s trying to put a brave face on it: “All you’re getting from that large size is nostalgia,” he told the Times, although he did admit that he was “kind of torn about” the change. But is that really the only difference? Let’s look at the photographic comparison of the two covers that was helpfully supplied by the Times and a stubbled, familiar-looking spokesmodel:
The Jonas Brothers! They’re everywhere, and they’re going to be in even more places very soon, what with their recent booking on the MTV Video Music Awards and their Tiger Beat-ready mugs gracing the cover of the new Rolling Stone. (Nice that the editors gave a tip of the hat to last year’s Efron shirt-tug in the cover photo.) Now, obviously we’ve been covering the boys’ ascent since they first got sucked into Disney’s pop machine. So why is there something about all this JB love that seems a little, well, weird, even though it’s synced to the Aug. 12 release of their next album, A Little Bit Longer?
Take heart, those of you who fear the imminent demise of the era where people read about music on stapled-and-printed pages: Seven music-related periodicals have made the short list of the Chicago Tribune’s annual “50 Best Magazines” list. More »
Take heart, those of you who fear the imminent demise of the era where people read about music on stapled-and-printed pages: Seven music-related periodicals have made the short list of the Chicago Tribune’s annual “50 Best Magazines” list. More »
Once again, we present Rock-Critically Correct, a feature in which the most recent issues of Rolling Stone, Blender, Vibe, and Spin are given a once-over by a writer who’s contributed to many of those magazines, as well as a few others! In this installment, he looks at the new issue of Rolling Stone:
