Editor's Choice
Fri, Jan 13 2012, 9:02AM
Bit disappointed to see that the Editor's Choice feature at the front of the magazine now merely quotes from the reviews. James Inverne used to write a para or two on each of the chosen recordings which did at least lead one to believe that he'd listened to them. Now it feels more like 'Review Editor's Choice' which is a shame as there's an opportunity for the new Editor's personality to emerge in this section, which I think is a good thing.
Sat, Jan 14 2012, 3:31PM
#2
RE: Editor's Choice
Thanks, Martin, appreciate the response. I hadn't realised that the refresh to the mag just before you took over had re-badged Editor's Choice. Personally, I rather regret it, as I would like to have your personality come through, and frankly, cut'n'pasting a bit of the review in the front is a bit of a waste of two pages of editorial space. But thanks for letting us know it wasn't your call!
Sun, Jan 15 2012, 7:16PM
#3
RE: Editor's Choice
All aspects of a magazine are open to review and reconsideration of course, but for now hopefully my editorial pieces and any articles I write will suffice to offer insights into my personality! But many thanks for the feedback.
Martin
Hello,
Though in fact a change that occured while James was still editor, I'm happy to explain. The idea is that the change of title to Gramophone Choice was to emphasise that the recordings we highlight in this way are the result of consideration by critics who are leading experts in their specialist areas of music (ie, our reviewers), as well as of course the view of the editor and the wider editorial team: that the accolade is an expression of Gramophone's advocacy, not just one person's. That said, I can assure you I do listen to all the ten recordings, and of course many more each month in the process of having created that list in the first place. I hope that helps.
Martin
Editor, Gramophone