What makes you think you would like classical music?

This Sunday morning I was half awake and listening to the radio at something called 6.47am and the presenter of Radio 5 breakfast, Chris Warburton, was talking about his cultural new years resolutions. One of these was to learn more about classical music. He had a chat to some violinists at the BBC symphony orchestra, not sure why violinists, probably because they could play clips on the radio easily. They started off suggesting Ravel, on the grounds that everyone knows the Bolero.

The question that didn't get asked was what had made him think he should investigate classical music? The clues were there in the interview. Another of Chris' resolutions was to listen to Jazz pianist Bill Evans. Now Evans, who many non Jazz listeners will still have heard on Miles Davis' "Kind Of Blue", was influenced by some aspects of classical music, principally Bach, as well as by Jazz players like Bud Powell. Having said that this article suggests as do other sources that Evans had a lot in common with impressionist composers like Debussy, and Ravel, and also Chopin from a bit earlier. So it looks like the violinists Chris was talking to got it right for the wrong reasons. I admit to knowing nothing about classical music, but I do understand that the description classical music is a bit like bracketing, Kylie, Napalm Death and Aphex Twin all under 'Pop'. This means that you won't like all of "Classical" any more than you will necessarily like all "Rock" or "Jazz" or "Hip-Hop", so a starting point that relates to what you like already will help your explorations. Chris mentioned recommendations for Brahms and Schubert which even with my limited knowledge seem unlikely  jumping off points for someone who said he likes Jazz, Soul & Funk.

Every form of music has it's snobbery and maybe I detected a hint of this in the suggestion of Ravel to Chris, as it seemed to be based on the assumption that most of us only connect with a violin through ice skating and adverts. I have always thought that I may like modern classical music and my few explorations seem to suggest I would. What I need is a place to start; anyone like to help?





By the way Chris, if you ever read this, Bill Evans, start with the classics, Everybody Digs Bill Evans
Sunday at the Village Vanguard and pretty much anything featuring his trio with Paul Motian and Scott LaFaro. I have a very good compilation of his final years, "We Will Meet Again - The Bill Evans Anthology 1977-1980" and after that you're off on your own.

Will the last reader please turn off the lights

The December 2018 issue of Jazz Journal was the last print edition after 70 years. We are constantly hearing about the hardships of print in the face of the online world, but your local WH Smiths has hundreds of magazines on the shelves, presumably selling in quantities good enough to keep going. So why did Jazz Journal fail and what lessons can we draw from it for the wider print world.

To jump off the shelves a magazine needs a certain amount of kerb appeal, something to engage the casual reader and prompt an impulse purchase. Compare Jazz Journal’s gloomy often black & white images and subdued colours to the big bright glossy images of its nearest competitor, Jazzwise, and other niche music titles all shouting their wares and it seems almost designed to sit on the racks. I recognise this was a cost issue as was the cheaper paper stock, and the frankly skimpy page count, but no attempt seemed to be made to make the magazine attractive to anyone other than the committed reader seeking it out. 

It’s worth comparing Jazz Journal to another niche music magazine, albeit one catering to a different audience that has adapted and certainly appears to be thriving, Fireworks - Rock and Metal. This started in 2000, and having bounced between monthly and bi monthly the publishers settled on a quarterly magazine sometime ago. Since then the magazine has grown to 150 pages, and a cd with mp3 and PDF files on it. Plenty enough to read for three months. As many of these types of magazines are part time ventures this takes away the pressure of deadlines or providing a news service, leaving space for articles, interviews and reviews to stretch out. The magazine title has shifted, the original Fireworks is a very obscure album title reference, and the original strap line “The Melodic Rock Magazine” (a niche within a niche) has been replaced with the current on "Rock and Metal" being larger than the title, beating its potential audience over the head with the message. Better covers, better design, better writing as well, make the magazine an attractive proposition both on the rack and leafing through it.  

Jazz Journal stayed rooted in 1966, appealing to a long-term core readership that dwindled with each passing year. Recent attempts to update were too little too late and met with vitriol from the readers. The casual Jazz listener, me, found nothing in it except complaints about change, and nostalgia for the way things were. In the end unwillingness to compromise with the audience killed it. Oddly with the resurgence in Jazz over the last year or so the market for a Mojo style legacy magazine covering Jazz is probably larger than ever, and Jazz Journal could easily have become that, republishing material from its past in much the same way as Uncut exploits the Melody Maker archive. 

The importance of an online presence to back up the print edition can’t be overstated. Fireworks works with the Rocktopia website, adding unique content to the site, which also acts as a news resource for the magazine. That coupled with an active, colourful social media presence, and being active in the online community means the print magazine is always reaching out to its audience. Jazz Journal’s sporadic mostly text only tweets and Facebook posts are another light under bushel moment. 

It sounds like I’m being harsh on a magazine with a long and distinguished run, but it’s the market that decides who survives, and it has delivered a judgement on Jazz Journal. The message is clearly; adapt and survive, stagnate and fail.