What do you think to the latest GWW?

[Anonymous]

It's in the title

 

[wizer]

as a non expert woodworker I have found it good. I liked Steve M's article. I notice they are changing the design/look in the next issue.

Are you refering to anything inparticular Tony?

 

[Gill]

I don't read it any more. The subscription department messed up our subscription and I found a 'Murrican magazine called 'Scroll Saw Work Shop' in the meantime that was more to my taste, so I've subscribed to that instead. If there appears to be anything particularly worth reading, I might pick up a copy of GWW from a newsagent in future.

Why do you ask, Tony? Is the latest issue particularly worth reading?

Gill

 

[Pete W]

I still think GWW is the best of the UK mags, but like much of the competition here they seem to be tending too much towards the DIY market for my taste. That might be a wrong impression but it's certainly been my feeling over the last few issues.

Another problem is the selection of projects in any given issue. If you don't need/want/have room for the stuff they choose, the interest level declines enormously. I find the US mags like Pop and FWW (and this is just my opinion) a much better read - GWW is usually read and finished the day it arrives; FWW and Pop often stay on my bedside table for weeks with many of the articles re-read several times.

 

[Alf]

I notice they are changing the design/look in the next issue.

Personally I tremble in dread that the content will get overshadowed by the "look"...

I wasn't wildly grabbed by this one, although who cannot of enjoyed the sartorial elegance displayed by a certain Technical Editor well known to this forum? Now 'scuse me while I go and think up a response to the Star Letter which I'll then never send...

Cheers, Alf

 

[Steve Maskery]

I liked Steve M's article.

Thank you Wizer, much appreciated.

I should point out that there appears to be a mistake in the drawing. It shows the umbralla support/column spacers at the top of the frame, whereas they are actually at the bottom. The brolly pole is supported at the top by the hole in the table.

The hole size has proved a real pain. When I made it, a couple of months ago, I didn't realise that our existing umbrella is no longer de rigeur. It fits, but is looking a bit scruffy. So when I went shopping for a new one, I was dismayed to find all these chunky wooden ones don't fit. I haven't yet decided whether to live with our old brolly for a season, in the hope that they will again become fashionable soon, or take the table apart and put in wider spacers. That would mean drilling out plugs to uncover the counterbored screws again. What a pain.

If you make it up, I suggest using 40mm spacers and a hole to match.

Also, despite me being VERY careful to get excellent mitres (they were all as tight as they should have been, honest), one or two are already showing signs of opening up. The DAY AFTER I made the ring, I saw Norm making one for a garden gate, in which he used loose tenons, cutting the slots on his dado. I wish I'd seen that first, its a better way of doing it. He had a good way of clamping up, too. Heigh ho.

Sorry about the dreadful grammar - how well the mitres are - I'm sure I didn't write that, did I? Actually I did, I just checked I can't blame that one on the editing process. It should be how well they are cut, or how good they are. Sorry to all defenders of the English language.

But what happened to the Startrite Morticer and the end of David Savage's article? The nation must be told!

To get back to the table, we used it on Saturday for the first time, 7 adults and two children. I can't say we all sat up to it like a dining table, we didn't, but we managed OK. I'd say 8 would be a pinch, but loads of room for 6 or 7.

Cheers
Steve

 

[wizer]

There was a question I wanted to ask on the subject, it escapes me now. I'll have another read tonight to job my memory. :?

 

[Steve Maskery]

I find the US mags like Pop and FWW ... a much better read.

Pete,
I can understand your preference. It doesn't give me any pleasure at all to say, yes, you are right.

But there is are two very simple reasons for that. Money and market size.

In the US there is a MUCH bigger pool of material resources. Even at the height of its circulation, GW was running at about 25,000, I think, and all UK titles are down on a few years ago (hence WHS's move to delete titles). No doubt Andy or Pete will put me right if necessary. In contrast FWW does 291,970 every month. Look at the figures. That's more than ten-fold. That means that every month they have ten times as many people who could potentially contribute to the mag, and ten times as much money that can be spent on production. OK the two don't automatically follow directly, but you can see my point. GW can only dream of having resources like that. On top of that, FWW only have to produce 6 issues a year, not 13. They can afford to distill the best of the best.

I don't really have an axe to grind here, I'm freelance and will sell to the highest bidder. But I do think that, with all its shortcomings, GW do a pretty good job under the circumstances.

Alf,
I know little more than you do about the re-vamped mag, but if it is only cosmetic I will be surprised as well as disappointed. Nick Gibbs is changing a lot of things, not just the style. It includes the way work is commissioned (and paid for) - I don't yet know how that will affect me in practice. But from our conversations I can tell you that his aim is to improve the quality of the content further, not just tart it up a bit.

To all,
I would urge you to drop a line to the mag if you feel something is particularly good or particularly bad. They really do want to produce the best, so feedback is important. And they really do listen. So if you want more Dave Roberts turning, or more David Savage, or less Steve Maskery (no, scratch that idea), then say so. Only if the editorial team have a good idea of what is appreciated can they continue to give the readership what we want.

Of course they will never be able to please all the people all of the time (Pete says its become too DIY, whilst a letter this month complains that the tool reviews are all at the top end of the market), but they really really do try to provide the best.

I'll shut up now.

Cheers
Steve

 

[beech1948]

Steve Maskery wrote:

Money and Size.

Obviously he is right...up to a point.

Europe is as big as the US. Thus seeing the circulation as Uk only is incorrect. language is not to big a barrier either as many EU people speak english.

The world is even bigger.

Why would I waste time saying this. I believe that GWW has a choice to make. Either it will remain a tiddler in the UK market or it will expand to become a world sized magazine. FWW has achieved this aided by a huge US distribution. GW will have to achieve it by the following:-

1) Aspirational content making nus want to see the magazine
2) Moving away from its current DIYish focus..see 1) above
3) Focussing onto "how-to" and skill building articles
4) Become aligned with the higher end tool manufacturers
5) A focus on the spectacular skills of the UK, the reputation of the UK toolmaking industry and the history of high end cabinet making skills we have.
5) Actually making a decision about its future which is not limited by a UK only view.

GWW is not alone in this dilema. F&C also face a future where Colin E-E's continuing fantasy re Felder is not good enough as text. Mr. Ley's projects are boring and they F&C seem to slip and slide between publishing strategies. F&C probably have the best position but the worst strategy.

Of course many of you will disagree. Thats OK too but as one whose work is devising company strategy this seems like a no brainer.

regards
Alan

 

[wizer]

being a non-expert... i think the DIY thing is good... just my 2 pennies

 

[tombo]

Since stumbling onto this forum and browsing the WREC my desire to buy mags has all but dried up.
If i want to know something i can get an answer almost immediately and often the projects are just not to my taste, i guess i'm a fussy pipper.
The kind of magazine i would buy would contain more technique and show a few examples rather than develop single project.
I would love to see interviews with famous woodworkers Norm perhaps. A section on software tools autocad, sketchup etc would be of great interest, and finally back to back comparisons of tools, expensive ones. I would really like to know how cast iron table saws compare Kitty, SIP and Xcalibur. Or how about a comparison of dovetail jigs Leigh, Woodrat and Incra.
I guess the internet is slowly killing off magazines would anyone like to predict what titles will be on the shelves of WHS in five years time.

Tom

 

[andrewm]

A section on software tools autocad, sketchup etc would be of great interest

And therin I think lies the problem. If I want to read about AutoCad I'll buy a computer magazine. Likewise DIY. Everyone has a different view on what a magazine should consist of and it is impossible to please everyone. There may be a large market in Europe but one single magazine is probably not going to address it. It seems that whatever the editors do someone will be unhappy.

As far as DIY is concerned I can see why building a stud wall might be construed as woodwork and I can see that drawing a dividing line between woodwork and DIY can be tricky. Taunton Press have down well with the divide between FWW and its sister magazine Fine Housebuilding, which like FWW is as much inspirational as practical.

It strikes me that the problem for any magazine that addresses a hobby which people try to improve at is that what the readership wants from the mag changes as their skills improve. But what the beginners - and hence new readers - want probably doesn't. I can't see an easy way around that.

Andrew

 

[cambournepete]

As far as DIY is concerned I can see why building a stud wall might be construed as woodwork

You've obviously not studied house-building 101 at Cambourne recently...

All the stud walls I've seen here are built using U-profile metal bits because "it's more stable than wood". While this is probably true with the quality of some of the wood I've seen round here, I guess is it's also rather cheaper as well.

Cheers,

Pete

edited to amend quoting error

 

[andrewm]

You've obviously not studied house-building 101 at Cambourne recently...

But I was talking about DIY. We all know that DIYers can do a better job than professionals because we can spend more time doing it and have more to loose if it goes wrong. :lol:

Andrew

 

[beech1948]

Tombo,

You are right in your examples. Its a sense of reputation and challenge that can carry such a mag. The items you list are of sufficient interest to us but not to DIY.

Cambournepete

The way to understand your point about varied levels of expertise is for GW to segment their market and in doing so to decide which market they will address and which they will not. This technique of segmentation is how products such as magazines decide if they live or die. get it wrong and they fail.

For those areas they choose not to address another mag will emerge. If they want to naddress high end woodwork and DIY they will fail. If they want bto address DIY I for one will not continue to buyb the mag.....sorry I almost said nag their...slip of tongue.

 

[Newbie_Neil]

GWW had a golden spell in the middle to end of last year where each issue was better than the one before. I'm sorry but I can't think of one issue in the last four or five months that I would say was good, let alone excellent.

The way to understand your point about varied levels of expertise is for GWW to segment their market and in doing so to decide which market they will address and which they will not.

I think this is the biggest problem that GWW has at the moment. It needs to decide exactly which market it is after.

Just count the number of pages of actual projects and non-advertising related editorial over the last few months. You will be :shock:

Cheers
Neil

 

[Gill]

Come on, Tony. Why did you ask the question in the first place?

Gill

 

[Noel]

Maybe sitting on the fence here but suggestions that GWW should choose a market and focus on that particular market is all very well if there was a decent specialist market out there. They're simply isn't a big enough interest in the UK. As regards Europe? I think the same applies with the added problem of language. Plenty of English speakers but not so many people who understand all the specialist terms involved. GWW and others have to, most of the time, be attractive to as wide an audience as possible in order to sustain sales and attract advertising.

Noel

 

[Chris Knight]

Come on guys - whilst we all need to bellyache about the UK mags now and then (and I am certainly one of them) let's not forget that Nick Gibbs was asking for input here not so very long ago.

I reckon the amount of interesting project type writing is just a function of the number of folk willing/able to write about it and the sad truth is that the UK is darn short of folk who fit the bill, compared with the USA. We can speculate endlessly about the reasons for that - I personally think it's due to a lousy education system and politicians who encourage the celebrity culture and show that success depends on soundbites - but then I am a grumpy old man so I would say that wouldn't I?

 

[Alf]

I reckon the amount of interesting project type writing is just a function of the number of folk willing/able to write about it

Or maybe the amount paid is disproportionate to the amount of effort involved... :wink: Actually, my problem is I can either do woodworking or I can write about it, but I'm not up to doing both. As long as the required submissions are for projects, I'm stuffed. I simply don't make enough! Anyone wants ramblings on woodworking theory though, I'm your woman. :lol:

Cheers, Alf