Archive

26 posts / 0 new
Last post
RE: Archive - A Backward step?

In the States, it appears as though we cannot buy an e-subscription--only the print version and then a surcharge for the archive. To have lost my access to the archives (as imperfect as most found them) is bad enough, but to bundle it only with a print subscription is a large additional expense.

I've been a reader of Gramophone since analog/LP days and understand that the archives should be a premium benefit for subscribers. But I do resent paying for two subscriptions, and I'm going to have to weigh the expense very carefully if this is still the case at my renewal time. I'm hoping that the company will heed the comments here and determine the real cost of reducing its subscriber base through a pricing policy it may amend anyway.

Best,

Bill

 

 

 

 

RE: Archive - A Backward step?

Hi,

US users can buy a digital-only subscription here by typing the code ADIGITAL12 into the box near the bottom of the page. If this doesn't work, please could you send an email to gramophone@haymarket.com?

Thanks,

Rachel 

Rachel Cramond

Gramophone Publishing Executive

RE: Archive - A Backward step?

Dear Luca,

 

Your comment to ganymede on 12 December wasn't exactly accurate: it's not £25, it's £25 per year. That adds up over a lifetime!

But I still feel that withdrawing the archive service without notice is unreasonable.

Peter

RE: Archive - A Backward step?

Luca Da Re wrote:

Hi ganymede,

Thank you for your feedback as it really helpful to get as much feedback as possible. O 

ne of the most frequent comments so far has been from readers who have only been to pleased to pay £25. Everyone's priorities and interests are different.

 

Many thanks,

Luca Da Re

Ever get the feeling that Luca Da Re is just full of shit.

RE: Archive - A Backward step?

Barely literate shit at that.

RE: Archive - A Backward step?

Like others on this thread, as a print subscriber I used to enjoy free access to the digital archive.  I principally used this to browse reviews (I think it used to be called GramoFile?) before purchasing recordings.

I appreciate your point about the costs of maintaining the archive.  I also accept that there is an argument for charging only those subscribers who wish to use the archive, and I would be prepared to pay a small annual charge for this facility.  However, this is not an option open to me.  My only options are to pay a further £25 a year for an iPad subscription or switch to a digital-only subscription that is clunky, slow to load on my iPad, and is essentially a digitised pdf file with web links built in - compare the MacFormat magazine to see what can be done with an app purpose-built for the iPad.  The situation must be even more frustrating for those who do not own tablets or smartphones.

My second point relates to the search facility.  From what I can see from the demo video on your website - and please correct me if I am wrong - there is no option to specifically target CD reviews in the flexible way that was possible with GramoFile - for example, to find all reviews of recordings of Beethoven's Sixth by Karajan.

As a Gramophone reader for several decades and a subscriber for much of that time I find the situation very frustrating.  I don't want a subscription in both print and iPad versions - why would anyone want that? - I just want a print subscription with access on my computer to archived reviews and (occasionally) back copies, and I am prepared to pay a small additional fee for this.  Is it too much to ask?

RE: Archive - A Backward step?

"The Gramophone" was one of the sources I browsed in every now and again because it was free. To block free readers only effects that even less people come into contact and become interested in classical music. To charge 40£ each year for back issues which are decades old and cause you no cost is ridiculous. 

RE: Archive - A Backward step?

I would quite happily pay an annual subscription fee for a properly searchable reviews database (like the old Gramofile)

RE: Archive - A Backward step?

Hi desmond.brannan,

We are working on a new product which I think you will be delighted with. Watch this space...

Regards,

Luca

Head of Marketing,

Gramophone

RE: Archive - A Backward step?

Hi Rachel,

I realise that this is several months after your post, but your link does not give me the option of entering a code and I can't seem to find a way to get a digital only subscription in the United States. How do I go about it?

Pages

Log in or register to post comments

Gramophone Subscriptions

From£67/year

Gramophone Print

Gramophone Print

no Digital Edition
no Digital Archive
no Reviews Database
no Events & Offers
From£67/year
Subscribe
From£67/year

Gramophone Reviews

Gramophone Reviews

no Print Edition
no Digital Edition
no Digital Archive
no Events & Offers
From£67/year
Subscribe
From£67/year

Gramophone Digital Edition

Gramophone Digital Edition

no Print Edition
no Reviews Database
no Events & Offers
From£67/year
Subscribe

If you are a library, university or other organisation that would be interested in an institutional subscription to Gramophone please click here for further information.

© MA Business and Leisure Ltd. 2018