We Say, You Say
Welcome to a different kind of musicians' magazine, upholding old traditions and breaking new ground.
FROM WHERE YOU'RE sitting - at home, in a studio, on a bus, at the back of a college lecture, wherever - this first issue of MUSIC TECHNOLOGY should look quite impressive. Revealing interviews, thought-provoking features, and tell-it-like-it-is equipment reviews, and more of them than ever. A brighter, more accessible layout, with more colour than ever. And a new name that's made your favourite magazine easier to get hold of and talk about, without (sighs of relief all round) having any effect on the E&MM we all knew and loved so well.
But whatever your surface impressions of MUSIC TECHNOLOGY'S inaugural effort, there's one thing you'll never appreciate: just how much work it takes to get a relaunch issue like this one off the ground. Let me tell you a little of what has happened here in Cambridge in the build-up to making this magazine what it is.
Simon Trask, our Reviews Editor, has developed arthritis through having his hands on keyboards permanently for a fortnight, in preparation for a whole range of instrument reviews which he has since been dictating into a tape machine because his hands are too sore to type.
Music Editor Tim Goodyer is now deaf in one ear, having sifted through piles of readers' demo-tapes and transcribed endless interviews with big-name artists, most of which didn't even make this first issue.
Trish McGrath is suffering from acute depression after discovering that the extra work she now needs to do for the extended Patchwork section (not to mention many hours' further proofreading without any hint of a wage increase) means the interior decorating at her maisonette won't now be completed until 1987.
And Art Editor Stuart Catterson is still reeling from the shock of discovering that an extra 24 pages take longer than 24 hours to paste up, and that none of them will give him scope to paint life-size portraits of sheep, build model garages out of Meccano, and generally do the sort of thing Art Editors like to do.
As for the Editor himself, these last four weeks have been complete and utter chaos, during which eating, sleeping and breathing have all stopped at some time or other, and even drinking has been under threat. For him, though, the sunshine of California - and MUSIC TECHNOLOGY'S American office - beckons halfway through November, so there has been light at the end of the tunnel.
Now, all of us enjoy leading this sort of lifestyle. Which is why we all work for a company that produces music magazines, not fibreglass paperclips or industrial mouldings.
But as a reader, there is one thing you can do to ease our burden: share it with us. How do you do this without becoming completely insane? Easy. Simply take part in what we in the publishing business call Reader Participation.
You can go about this in a number of different ways. First, write us a letter, either to our Communique page (where readers air their general comments about life, the universe, and five-pin DIN sockets) or to the Interface section (where readers air their problems concerning life, the universe, and five-DIN sockets, and we try to answer them).
If, for example, you aren't terribly impressed with an element of MUSIC TECHNOLOGY as it appears to you, tell Communique about it. Or if, by some rare chance, your equipment isn't working quite as you might want it to, tell Interface, and you may suddenly find your problems solved overnight.
As from next month, we'll also be starting up a readers' chart section to which you can contribute lists of music and/or equipment, together with brief explanations of what makes them special to you.
Even readers who can't write can participate in the magazine, simply by sending their own synth sounds to Patchwork (sorry, Trish), or by sending cassettes of their own music to Demo Takes (sorry, Tim).
In fact, so keen are we to hear from you in whatever way you choose to make yourself heard, we're offering free subscriptions to those readers who - in our view - make the biggest contribution each month.
So, that's 12 months' worth of MUSIC TECHNOLOGY winging its way to the writer of the best Communique comment and the sender of the most interesting (but ultimately solvable) Interface problem; to the creator of the best demo-tape and the most intriguing readers' chart; and to all those whose synth programs are judged to be good enough for publication in Patchwork. Every month.
Why are we so keen to get your side of the story? Well, apart from the fact that every reader's message helps relieve the drudgery of having to deal with our advertising department (once again, they had it easy this month), we want to know what you're doing because you're the people that matter to us most. And everything you say to us - through whatever medium - enables us to make MUSIC TECHNOLOGY less our magazine, and more yours.
Editorial by Dan Goldstein
Next article in this issue:
mu:zines is the result of thousands of hours of effort, and will require many thousands more going forward to reach our goals of getting all this content online.
If you value this resource, you can support this project - it really helps!