Which Magazine?

[joiner_sim]

Hello everyone,

I popped into WH Smith today and had a look at their quite large selection of woodworking magazines. I had a look but was bewildered as which one I should buy, so I didn't!

My question is, which one do you buy and think is the best?

Thanks for any input you may have for me.

 

[matt]

None... You can buy a book for the same price as a magazine (or two) these days and the latter does not have all the adverts nor does it spew out the same articles in circulation.

 

[Alf]

If none of them took your fancy sufficiently to buy it, then I'd also say "none". :-?

(My favourite is The Woodworker from the 1920s to the 1950s, but it's not terribly hot on power tool use. F'rinstance, the only dominos are black with white spots. )

 

[worsley947]

Or even older white with black spots

 

[jimi43]

The greatest magazine in the world is called GOOGLE IMHO.

There are so many free articles, videos, blogs and websites dedicated to all aspects of woodworking these days...it hardly seems worthwhile to decimate the forests to achieve the same satisfaction.

One thing though...as yet, I have to solve the problem of Googling in the bath...(OMG that sounds slightly...rude... )

Also, I would agree with others here, books are a wonderful source of hand tool information...especially old ones....pick them up at bootfairs for 50p or so....

Old magazines are a delight....as are catalogues.

Jim

 

[joiner_sim]

Thanks for the opinions guys! I think I'll have a look over on Amazon for some books. I appreciate theres alot of info online, however, I want something real to read.

 

[yetloh]

There is a place for new magazines and a lot of us enjoy reading them. If that were not true, they would not survive. It all depends what your interests are.

If you are interested in basic low level woodworking, choose from any of Popular Woodworking, Good Woodworking or the Woodworker and any others aimed at that end of the market, they are pretty easy to indentify. They cover a wide range of not very difficult things but the designs of projects are generally rather clunky.

If your interest is in fine furniture making and design with a bit of a bias towards the contemporary, try Furniture and Cabinetmaking. If your interest is a bit broader than that but still with the emphasis on high standards, try British Woodworking. It also tends to include some thoughtful stuff on a range of related topics.

The American magazine Fine Woodworking concentrates on the skilled end too, as its name suggests, but is firmly backward looking in design terms.

Take your pick.

Jim

 

[Steve Maskery]

OK - Declared interest, I earn part of my miserable little existence from writing about woodwork. Nick Gibbs kindly publishes me every other month in British Woodworking and LegnoLab publishes me in Italy. It's by far the best Italian woodworking magazine (i.e. it's the only.....)

Woodworking magazines still have their place, fortunately. I'm sure that Woodbloke (F&C) Andy King (GW) and Nick (apologies if I've left anyone else out, it's nothing personal) all agree with me that we hope that that continues to be true for a long time to come. It is more difficult, of course, given the vast amount of stuff on the internet, much of it "free", but there is something about a good mag that has yet to be replicated cyberly.

The problem arises when magazine editors let standards slip. I remember a time when GW went through what one member here called a "golden age" of woody magazine-ness, every issue seemed to be better than the last. And I've been writing long enough to recognise when we are in a trough, too. When Nick set up BW he was hailed as the new benchmark for mags. Now I see a few posters saying they won't renew. I'm sorry to hear that, as I still think he does a superb job, but then I'm not exactly unbiased.

Magazines are for woodworkers at a particular point in their development. Beginners, certainly and some cater for the aspirational intermediate. A lot of intermediate woodworkers long for a top-end mag. The problem is that the market is small to start with and those who know the market better than I do will tell you that it is simply not viable. There are probably too many titles as it is, without diluting the income stream any more.

There is not a ww mag on the planet that has not had its ups and downs. Even FW, the grand-daddy of them all (in quality, not longevity - I believe that goes to WW) is not a patch today on what it was 20 years ago (or, perhaps, 20 years ago it was just right for me and now it's not..)

And there is the nub of the problem. We woodworkers move on, so what was suitable when we started is old hat now. So we think that the mags are getting worse. Well, maybe they are, sometimes, but it's just as much us moving in the other direction.

Personally I think that the mags should concentrate on giving the reader what the internet cannot (at the moment) give very well, and that is A Darned Good Read.

But I think that all mags are going to be facing the same challenges, I hear today that my local WHS is to close I'm not totally surprised, it's empty whenever I go in.
S

 

[jimi43]

Good article Steve....and I am sure the positive aspects you mention are valid...BUT...and its a HUGE but....

Magazines are far too overweighed with advertisements...not just WW...ALL magazines. This is the only way they can operate. Unfortunately the balance is slipping towards the advert rather than the "good read" side.

Ultimately, of course, this will have the opposite effect in that dwindling subscriptions, caused by lots of adverts will kill subscriptions, sponsors won't get the coverage...they will walk...magazine dies.

I think the only reason that any are hanging on by their fingertips is because of the demographic of the readership...traditional, older, wealthier (yeh right!) segment of the market...but a new generation is coming....this current type of reader is dying...(literally!)....

I am not a magazine owner so I am likely to be wrong...but I think those that survive are (will be) ones that also publish electronically...appear on Kindles rather than kindling and move with the times...

Jim

 

[woodbloke]

Steve and Jim...an excellent view of the current situation, I agree with both of you - Rob

 

[matt]

I don't disagree that a magazine is quite a "comfortable" way to kill some time (on the train, to hand when I'm loafing on the sofa). I generally go for one of the really cheap ones if something on the cover catches my attention but, more often than not, I choose to go without. What I don't understand is how Computeractive and similar can produce something so cheaply? Is is volume alone?

 

[yetloh]

Well said Steve; I completely agree. I should also have declared my interest (F&C) although my financial gain from this source is pretty miniscule.

I particularly agree about FWW, having subscribed for many years but nor renewed. I have no axe to grind with BW but do agree that Nick is doing an excellent job.

As to whether electronics will replace paper I don't know but I do think it will take a very long time if it does happen. Paid for content is in its infancy and may in the long term prove to be the only viable model for woodworking magazines and is the only alternative. If paper ceases to be viable and a viable paid for content model not established our magazines will disappear and I for one believe the woodworking world would be a poorer place for it. For me, a Kindle (or whatever) is no substitute for a proper paper magazine, which does not have to have its battery charged and can sit on the shelf outside the bathroom door ready for a few minutes quiet browsing with no notice.

The influence of advertisers has always been problematic in publishing but I think most reviews are honest (certainly, mine are) and we should not run away with the idea that internet reviews are necessarily reliable. It is far from unknown for apparently independent internet content on any number of subjects to be subject to undeclared interests. At least, in paper publishing, the possibility of bias is implicit and readers can and do have the opportunity to judge honesty over time with the help of forums such as this. It is an imperfect world.

Jim

 

[Alf]

And there is the nub of the problem. We woodworkers move on, so what was suitable when we started is old hat now. So we think that the mags are getting worse. Well, maybe they are, sometimes, but it's just as much us moving in the other direction.

This comes up every time, and nothing personal, Steve, but I think it's a load of spherical objects. If you keep targeting content only at the beginner, then yup, that's the only person it'll appeal to. It doesn't actually have to be that way. What I liked about the late-lamented (advert-free) Woodworking Magazine was its ability to cover a basic topic but with enough intelligence to make it worth reading for the intermediate woodworker as well. A lot of that has to do with good writing, which is something the magazines could provide that the internet often doesn't. For a quick refresher course in, I dunno, how to cut a mortise, the internet wins. For a detailed article on how to decide on mortise proportion and when, perhaps, a double mortise rather than a single one is better, and maybe a few practical examples, I'd hope there'd be a good magazine article. I like a physical bundle of paper to hold myself, and it troubles me that there currently doesn't seem to be any magazine creating a buzz on any of the woodworking fora. It used to be you'd know when BW or GW or FWW had a new issue out, because we'd be talking about it; that rarely happens now.

 

[Steve Maskery]

What I liked about the late-lamented (advert-free) Woodworking Magazine ...

And that's the point, Alf. Subscriptions, by themselves, do not provide enough revenue to support a mag. So such a mag goes bust. My Italian friends are facing the same problem. Fantastic quality mag EIIDSSM, but not, as yet, attracting enough advertising revenue. It wouldn't be a problem if readers were prepared to stump up ten quid a copy, but they are not, so where does the revenue come from?

Now you might just say that the content isn't good enough, but in that case, who is going to write better? And why should they do so? Do you find any WW writer driving around in a Jag or a 4x4? I think not.

This is a question to which I do not have an answer.
S

 

[Alf]

It's not the point at all, Steve; content is the point. The advert-free bit was just to make sure everyone knew which one I was talking about. Anyway, if you don't have subscribers, you don't have advertisers either.

As to finding the writers, perhaps the mags should be a bit more proactive and say "this is what we're looking for, what have you got?" Yes, there may be no end of dross submitted, but if you find enough people to submit stuff then you keep some freshness of thought and approach, which would be something. I dunno, perhaps they already have, but if the next Bob Wearing happens to miss that one issue...

 

[Chataigner]

Personally, I find the debate about value etc. a bit odd. People who spend hundreds on tools or the price of a year's subscription one one meal out for two are reluctant to spend a few quid on a magazine. They all have limitations, sometimes the content does not meet expectations, but they stimulate ideas.

We have a solitary hobby/business, you cant take your woodworking to the village hall for a meeting of like minded people every wednesday evening, magazines are a good way of keeping in touch. (As is this and other forums).

 

[Steve Maskery]

It's not the point at all, Steve;

Then I suggest we have to agree to disagree.
S

 

[woodbloke]

It's not the point at all, Steve; content is the point. The advert-free bit was just to make sure everyone knew which one I was talking about. Anyway, if you don't have subscribers, you don't have advertisers either.

As to finding the writers, perhaps the mags should be a bit more proactive and say "this is what we're looking for, what have you got?" Yes, there may be no end of dross submitted, but if you find enough people to submit stuff then you keep some freshness of thought and approach, which would be something. I dunno, perhaps they already have, but if the next Bob Wearing happens to miss that one issue...

I think that what's being suggested here is that those of us who do put fingers to keyboards and submit copy to whatever mag they write for may not have sufficient intellectual gravitas to merit the 'content'
Which then begs the question Alf, if you don't like the content...why don't you submit something? Writing copy for a mag within a set framework of tight time deadlines, word count and decent quality photography (and not the dross you so often see on t'interweb forums) is not easy. As I've said before, if folk don't like what's in the mags, try writing for one...I've yet to see any article (and would be happy to be proved wrong) in any current paper magazine from your good self - Rob

 

[yetloh]

Well, Alf, they actually do keep asking, or at least F&C does. The problem is that UK magazines are, of necessity, run on a shoestring. The number of people out there who have the necessary woodworking, writing and photography skills and are prepared to write for what is in effect an low hourly rate of perhaps half what a skilled tradesman would get is very small. I wouldn't do it for nothing but I do it because working with words is something I have done all my working life and I still enjot it. Small wonder that the number of professionals writing for magazines is so small - even if they have the writing skills, they can make more from making furniture and it is pretty tough to make a living doing that.

Jim

 

[matt]

Personally, I find the debate about value etc. a bit odd. People who spend hundreds on tools or the price of a year's subscription one one meal out for two are reluctant to spend a few quid on a magazine. They all have limitations, sometimes the content does not meet expectations, but they stimulate ideas.

One or two, maybe three thoughts...

Firstly... Perhaps those who spend on their tools do woodworking rather than read about it?

Not everyone spends a lot on their tools and what they do spend is at the expense of other things.

My spending habits are not dictated by association - I derive value from tools but not magazines, therefore buy tools but not magazines (i.e. my reluctance is driven by the value I derive not a reluctance to spend money - why would anyone want to buy something they do not intend using?).