|
jonjones
Sep 16, 2003, 11:57 PM
Post #1 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2003
Posts: 2
|
I accidentally just made a post in the sport climbing section that I should have been making here in Alpine and Ice. I was just wondering what people think about Alpinist Magazine. I just became a subscriber and was wondering if other people have checked out the mag. I've just finished reading issue 4 and I think the magazine is incredible. If you've never heard of it, you can check out their site at:
http://www.alpinist.com
What do other folks out there think? I'm just curious how people think it compares to the other climbing publications.
-jon
|
|
|
|
|
brutusofwyde
Sep 17, 2003, 12:04 AM
Post #2 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 3, 2002
Posts: 1473
|
It's the only climbing magazine I subscribe to.
R&I and Climbing are trash, imho. There is less advertising in gear catalogues.
Brutus
|
|
|
|
|
melekzek
Sep 17, 2003, 12:37 AM
Post #3 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2002
Posts: 1456
|
btw why do you have started two threads ?
this and this ?
|
|
|
|
|
neadamthal
Sep 17, 2003, 12:48 AM
Post #4 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2002
Posts: 245
|
work on your grammar guys
brutus excluded
edited to exclude brutusofwyde
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Sep 17, 2003, 12:58 AM
Post #5 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
Copied my reply here from another thread:
I agree entirely. The photography is beyond compare with the other industry rags and the articles are very well written. Out of all the climbing disciplines mountaineering probably interests me the least, but I've found myself drawn into the stories told by nearly all the authors and regardless of the venue.
edited to add: I just followed the link to the current edition and now I absolutely have to pick it up. There is an article on my favorite AZ crag, Cochise Stronghold.
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
epic_ed
Sep 17, 2003, 12:59 AM
Post #6 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 4724
|
In reply to: work on your grammar guys brutus excluded edited to exclude brutusofwyde
?? We're not writing articles here, dude. You're lucky to see intelligible sentances.
|
|
|
|
|
phreakdigital
Sep 17, 2003, 2:19 AM
Post #7 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2002
Posts: 228
|
The Alpinist is a great magazine...it is so much more than rock and ice and climbing mag.
|
|
|
|
|
mainline
Sep 18, 2003, 12:35 AM
Post #8 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 30, 2002
Posts: 161
|
Alpinist magazine is incredible. I'm going to let my Climbing subscription expire. I only wish Alpinist had more issues per year.
|
|
|
|
|
vertx
Sep 18, 2003, 12:43 AM
Post #9 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2003
Posts: 53
|
Great magazine ... latest copy sitting in the "throne room" waiting to be re-read.
|
|
|
|
|
adamtd
Sep 21, 2003, 5:56 AM
Post #10 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 187
|
The literary quality of Alpinist is spectacular. I was disappointed by the price though. I don't know how many climbers can afford a subscription that high. I'm a climber not a lawyer...
|
|
|
|
|
brutusofwyde
Sep 21, 2003, 4:40 PM
Post #11 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 3, 2002
Posts: 1473
|
my only complaint with alpinist magazine is that the printing is almost as small as the description of side effects on a bottle of over-the-counter medication... i have to put on my glasses to read anything in the magazine.
Brutus
|
|
|
|
|
beckerw
Sep 21, 2003, 5:59 PM
Post #12 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2002
Posts: 171
|
hey, i just hope someone from climbing and/or r&i read this post. AND wake up! those rags have deteriorated into absolute drivel....the photos in R&I lately must be in a dig format, becuase the colors are distorted and look like shite. boring aritcles edited to nothing and complete spraydowns.
the alpinist is pricy but worth it. doesn't bother me if they only publish 4 times a year because everything will be great. amazing photography and articles that actually pertain to the spirit of climbing that will endure. way to go christian. i guess i will have to live with the fact that teh latest extension on the sport route du jour is not in the mag.
|
|
|
|
|
don_pablo
Sep 21, 2003, 8:42 PM
Post #13 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 15, 2003
Posts: 32
|
I Agree with most of you guys, Alpinist is certainly a cut above the rest. There should be more mags like this, concerned with Alpinism, and not ads and BS stories. Alpinist has my seal of approval for sure.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Sep 22, 2003, 5:10 AM
Post #14 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: It's the only climbing magazine I subscribe to. R&I and Climbing are trash, imho. There is less advertising in gear catalogues. Brutus
Ditto.
It's the only readily purchased rag for those who prefer to lead on gear and off the beaten path. According the RI and Climbing there are only a handful of great climbers around the world. This might be partially true but the list is quite a bit longer then the former two would have us believe and I love reading about all the new routes being put up, not just the handful RI ect. feel are important.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Sep 22, 2003, 5:52 AM
Post #15 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: Alpinist magazine is incredible. I'm going to let my Climbing subscription expire. I only wish Alpinist had more issues per year.
In reply to: The literary quality of Alpinist is spectacular. I was disappointed by the price though. I don't know how many climbers can afford a subscription that high. I'm a climber not a lawyer...
Compare your $12 issue of Alpinist to 3-4 issues of either climbing or R&I.
I bet you in one issue of alpinist there are more quality articles, more full page hi quality photos then 4 issues of the other mags. Consider 4 issues of the other mags is $20 on the newstand or about $25 for the year. So you actually buy one $12 issue of alpinist for every 4 $5 issues of the other crappy advertising filled rags.
Alpinist is $50 for the year on the newstand or $40 by subscription. Alpinist can lower the price by turning into the other mags but then it would just be another piece of trash that you can read cover to cover on a 30 minute lunch break.
It does hurt to drop almost $13 on a single magazine but Alpinist is more like a mini book then a throw away magazine and I actually get my $12 out of it.
|
|
|
|
|
seawolf
Sep 24, 2003, 1:58 AM
Post #16 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2003
Posts: 1
|
Outstanding magazine; well-written, and the photography is absolutely superb. Well-worth the subscription price, and understandable for a new venture. I subscribed right from the start and have not been disappointed with an issue yet.
Seawolf
|
|
|
|
|
stickclipper
Sep 24, 2003, 2:22 AM
Post #17 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 95
|
The Alpinist is unbelievable. And the article ("By Fair Means," issue 3) on the history of big wall free climbing was perhaps THE GREATEST ARTICLE IN THE HISTORY OF CIVILIZATION! From Preuss free soloing 5.9's in the early 1900s to Skinner's questionable ethics and exploits to the latest "freeing aid lines" craze, the article was outstanding. (A step up from an article written by John Middendorf for Ascent called "The Mechanical Advantage," though it did seem to draw from that)
Not to mention the opening photo of Croft onsighting The Shadow; years ago Climbing ran a cover pic of him doing the route, but it was taken from above and wasn't even in the same ballpark as the one in the Alpinist (i.e. didn't capture the smooth, featureless, overhanging 13b dihedral - or Croft actually sewing it up with gear for a change! And if ol' Pete Croft is sewing it up... well, we know it is extremely difficult)
|
|
|
|
|
stabla
Sep 18, 2005, 7:15 AM
Post #18 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 29, 2005
Posts: 139
|
ALPINIST is the best mag. in the industry, awesome and inspiring photos, cheers to all who assist in the production of this incredible read
|
|
|
|
|
paulraphael
Oct 4, 2005, 9:11 PM
Post #19 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2004
Posts: 670
|
Just to put complaints about the price in context, Alpinist is not making any money. In fact they bleed money. Publishing a magazine at that quality level costs a fortune, and the cover price, subscriptions and (limited) advertising don't begin to cover it.
When I met Christian Beckwith last year, the first words out of his mouth were "Hi, do you have a million dollars?" And he was serious. Their ONE major investor had temporarily pulled out and they were about to go belly up.
My subscription has lapsed because I'm dirt poor at the moment ... so I hope I don't sound like a Hypocrite when I encourage everyone to subscribe. The only way they'll ever be able to break even and have a chance at a long life is if they sell many, many more subscriptions (which will drive th advertising prices up, and the per-copy printing costs down).
And if you have any gripes, write to them! They need to know, and are a small enough outfit that they might actually listen.
|
|
|
|
|
iceisnice
Oct 6, 2005, 2:46 AM
Post #20 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2004
Posts: 874
|
they started out ok, then they go and have an entire section of BOULDERING in france??!! Alpinist??!! i'm confused.....
|
|
|
|
|
grk10vq
Oct 6, 2005, 3:38 AM
Post #21 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 7, 2004
Posts: 527
|
im an alpinist fan atw.
great photos. quality writing. tasteful editing and it is somewhat "uncensored".
i let my R&I run out. it just plain sucks. i read it when i cant fall asleep.
its an over the counter ambien.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 6, 2005, 4:39 AM
Post #22 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
I really want to know. What makes R&I and Climbing trash and Alpinist hand-inked on snippets of the Shroud of Turin? Can anybody give a real answer to this, or are y'all third-string Monday Quarterbacks? I have checked out Alpinist and I am duly impressed, but... I am an intelligent, educated person, just not an alpinist or wall climber or some grizzled hybrid thereof. And because of that, I am not particularly grabbed by the mag, even though it is a solid, handsome product. I am a cragger, and R&I and Climbing at least generally reflect my interests.
In my "humble" opinion, a lot of people just say they like Alpinist, or think they like Alpinist, because it's the kewl thing to do, when they relate to the contents about as much as I do.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Oct 6, 2005, 5:38 AM
Post #23 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: I really want to know. What makes R&I and Climbing trash and Alpinist hand-inked on snippets of the Shroud of Turin? Can anybody give a real answer to this, or are y'all third-string Monday Quarterbacks?
My opinion only:
R&I and C have repeats of the same thing, time and time again. A story abou a local crag, a story about a national climber, a story about someone's long trip, and a gear review (shoes, harnesses, draws/biners, cams, helmets, belay devices. Repeat every year.)
Also, I prefer a dearth of full page ads. While my realist side understands that advertisements are how one pays the bills in a written publication, I don't care to have my visual sense overwhelmed by ad after ad after ad. Personally, I'm happier paying the $15 sticker price for Alpinist and not having to flip past 33% of the pages, than I am paying $5 and dealing with it.
Again... this is only my opinion, and probably not worth the monitor space it occupies.
|
|
|
|
|
slablizard
Oct 6, 2005, 5:57 AM
Post #24 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2003
Posts: 5558
|
DO not agree.
Alpinist is great, but I sit on the throne at least twice a day, so I need R+I and Climb too.
Difference is Rocky and Climby are in a pile in the garage, Alpinist is in the living room's bookshelf with the climbing books.
And sometimes the mags are great too, come on.
|
|
|
|
|
slhappy
Oct 6, 2005, 7:48 AM
Post #25 of 82
(14251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2002
Posts: 207
|
In reply to: brutus excluded edited to exclude brutusofwyde
Always the Queens Way...brutus excluded
|
|
|
|
|
backclipped
Oct 6, 2005, 11:25 AM
Post #26 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2005
Posts: 137
|
Everyone's the critic, eh? What, you're honestly telling me that you don't read R&I and Climbing? I call bullshit. Come on, you participate in a nich sport and you know damn well you read everything you can get your cracked and bloodied mits on...including Urban Climber (which truly sucks, but I read it anyway). Sure, Alpinist is a cut above the others--a nice glossy piece of coffee table eye candy with a filling that is mostly sweet. The sour: Beth Rodden article (sick of reading about Tommy's perfectly chistled body yet?), The weed article, the last two cover shots.
Magazines have adds so deal. If they didn't they wouldn't be worth putting out and you'de be critiqueing some homegrown black and white leaflet that some dirtbag stuck under your windshield wiper while you were out sending your prog.
Coffee is doing its thing so it's time to re-read some random back issue of the first rag in sight.
oh, and about that Fontainblau (spelling?)...Put it in context. It has relevancy. Extra, Extra read all about it "Bad Ass Alpinists may have actually trained on boulders..."
|
|
|
|
|
climbingbetty22
Oct 6, 2005, 11:32 AM
Post #27 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 29, 2002
Posts: 1538
|
In reply to: I really want to know. What makes R&I and Climbing trash and Alpinist hand-inked on snippets of the Shroud of Turin? Can anybody give a real answer to this, or are y'all third-string Monday Quarterbacks? I have checked out Alpinist and I am duly impressed, but... I am an intelligent, educated person, just not an alpinist or wall climber or some grizzled hybrid thereof. And because of that, I am not particularly grabbed by the mag, even though it is a solid, handsome product. I am a cragger, and R&I and Climbing at least generally reflect my interests. In my "humble" opinion, a lot of people just say they like Alpinist, or think they like Alpinist, because it's the kewl thing to do, when they relate to the contents about as much as I do.
Hill- you are so right. "aplinist is so kewl r&I and climbing r lame." A little juvenile if you ask me. Yes, Alpinist is a superior quality mag, but imo, you can't really compare the it to the others because they are different categories. Its about as fair as making the team featherweight wrestle the team heavyweight. They each of their audience they are trying to appeal to. And I don't see what's so bad about the pictures in R&I and Climbing. Personally, I'm so busy looking at the climber and the setting their in, I'm really not noticing things like the color contrast or whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
troutboy
Oct 6, 2005, 12:30 PM
Post #28 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2003
Posts: 903
|
In reply to: Magazines have adds so deal. If they didn't they wouldn't be worth putting out and you'de be critiqueing some homegrown black and white leaflet that some dirtbag stuck under your windshield wiper while you were out sending your prog. "
Not going to agree or disagree about R&I/Climbing versus Alpinist, but Taunton Press puts out several quality magazines that are devoid of ads.
FYI
TS
|
|
|
|
|
crotch
Oct 6, 2005, 1:48 PM
Post #29 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
In reply to: I really want to know. What makes R&I and Climbing trash
More ads than content. Gear reviews which are nothing more than ads written by staff. People Magazine style coverage of the comp/sport 'personalities'. Few pictures.
In reply to: Alpinist hand-inked on snippets of the Shroud of Turin? Can anybody give a real answer to this, or are y'all third-string Monday Quarterbacks
Few ads. No gear reviews. Great pics. Places you actually want to go to. Great writing in "The Climbing Life". Inspiring mountain profiles which are the stuff of endless daydreams. Quality binding.
|
|
|
|
|
backclipped
Oct 6, 2005, 2:34 PM
Post #30 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2005
Posts: 137
|
Mr. Troutboy,
Hook me up with the names so I can read em...please... and thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
sidepull
Oct 6, 2005, 3:23 PM
Post #31 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335
|
I find it funny that this post about Alpinist is so "this is the best ever" while the Urban Climber thread featured a lot of obviously trad climbers bashing that mag for its exclusive focus on pebble wrestling. It seems the trad community can find the time to bash the bouldering rag but boulderers don't seem to care to crash this love fest. The irony is that tradsters seem to represent themselves as the more tolerant, embracing type. Go fig.
|
|
|
|
|
roy_hinkley_jr
Oct 6, 2005, 3:35 PM
Post #32 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 652
|
In reply to: Everyone's the critic, eh? What, you're honestly telling me that you don't read R&I and Climbing? I call s---.
Your Noobness is showing. Only folks that are fairly new to the sport read everything in sight. After about 5 years, the repetitiveness of the rags starts getting old and you start skipping most of the articles. After 10 years, the poor writing and editing makes you start skipping entire issues and cancelling subscriptions. After 20 years, you turn into a curmudgeon and complain about how the mags used to be so much better and the real historical articles (not the watered down pithy stuff) take on greater appeal.
Climbing and R&I have been stuck in ruts for years now. They give lip service to changing and occassional reshuffle content or change a logo but their still stuck with the same old formulas, cronyism, and "reviews" that read like a press release. Alpinist is at least a breath of fresh air -- enjoy it while it lasts.
|
|
|
|
|
stickclipper
Oct 6, 2005, 4:09 PM
Post #33 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 95
|
In reply to: I really want to know. What makes R&I and Climbing trash and Alpinist hand-inked on snippets of the Shroud of Turin? Can anybody give a real answer to this, or are y'all third-string Monday Quarterbacks? I have checked out Alpinist and I am duly impressed, but... I am an intelligent, educated person, just not an alpinist or wall climber or some grizzled hybrid thereof. And because of that, I am not particularly grabbed by the mag, even though it is a solid, handsome product. I am a cragger, and R&I and Climbing at least generally reflect my interests. In my "humble" opinion, a lot of people just say they like Alpinist, or think they like Alpinist, because it's the kewl thing to do, when they relate to the contents about as much as I do.
Alpinist has more depth. The "Mountain Profile" is a brilliant idea. I love reading about the FA's of various lines, accompanied by pictures and a well-penned article.
Climbing or R&I (I think R&I, but am not sure) ran a one-page, interview/profile piece on Jim Donini. One page. Donini is one of the most interesting and colorful climbers out there (and still cranking on into Social Security). Alpinist gave Donini the pen, and he wrote a thoughtful, interesting, multi-page article. Advantage Alpinist.
The Alpinist has run several excellent articles on climbing in Russia. Climbing finally ran one (written by Mark Synnott - what took so long?), and it, too, was excellent. I always wonder how a "free-spirited" sport like climbing operates within a dictatorial regime. It's nice to read something that gets at that; well done, Climbing (even if Synnott's "we all love to climb" conclusion was a bit of a copout). As good as it was, Synnott's did not have the character development and depth of story that the Alpinist's did.
I do get the vague sense that Climbing / R&I have put out more articles of this type in the last year... perhaps trying to take back readers from Alpinist?
But it depends upon what is important to you. For me, the most important aspect of climbing is adventure ("movement" is all well and good, but...).
Alpinist emphasizes adventure. I like that. It is refreshing. I read it and am refreshed. Ahh.
|
|
|
|
|
islandclimber
Oct 6, 2005, 4:19 PM
Post #34 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 2, 2004
Posts: 94
|
Although I agree the alpinist is GREAT magazine, and is by far the best climbing mag out there... I have noticed more and more being done about bouldering in the magazine.. I mean its called the Alpinist... in my mind bouldering does not belong, it should focus on high adventure climbing only... just my humble opinion, and really I just don't care if so and so sent another V9 or whatever
|
|
|
|
|
lizzyscully
Oct 6, 2005, 4:58 PM
Post #35 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
Do y'all realize that the same photographers and writers publish their stuff in all these rags? The Alpinist is excellent, but there are quality articles and photos in all the mags. To make blanket statements that R&I and Climbing mag are trash is somewhat silly and narrow minded. Are Pete Takeda's articles suddenly bad just because they appear in R&I? Do Topher Donahue's photos all of a sudden lose their beauty & clarity just because he publishes them in Climbing?
|
|
|
|
|
montaniero
Oct 6, 2005, 5:00 PM
Post #36 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2004
Posts: 238
|
In reply to: I mean its called the Alpinist... in my mind bouldering does not belong
No, actually it is called ALPINIST, not THE Alpinist. And you need to understand the focus of the article is not bouldering but Fountainbleu, where French alpinists (French Alps being the birthplace of Alpine Climbing) practiced their rock climbing skills long long before somone thought about the word BOULDERING.
|
|
|
|
|
agrauch
Oct 6, 2005, 5:08 PM
Post #37 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 20, 2001
Posts: 217
|
In reply to: And you need to understand the focus of the article is not bouldering but Fountainbleu, where French alpinists (French Alps being the birthplace of Alpine Climbing) practiced their rock climbing skills long long before somone thought about the word BOULDERING.
Thank you, I'm glad some one pointed this out. And last time I checked the only spray in Alpinist was about who climb which M-hard route on such and such a peak, not who climb which V-stupid boulder problem in Alabama.
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Oct 6, 2005, 5:13 PM
Post #38 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
I do not have time to read everything I can get my hands on.
Climbing and R&I
I stopped reading most any short gear review – they just serve as notices of availability. I do occasionally read a comprehensive great review and try to read between the lines. Both used to better magazines than they are today, but they still have an occasional good article I let my subscriptions to these mags lapse, but Climbing shows up in magazine drives for which my kid “must” sell a certain amount. So, my wife sometimes subscribes “for me”.
I originally stopped reading Climbing when a decided that they could let the net do their writing for them. For a while a large part of what they printed was taken directly from threads that I had read and sometimes even posted in on the net – only they were months late.
Alpinist: Good to great articles which are sometime stories in themselves. Great pictures too. They have made a few Faux Pas though. The pot article was one. That was the last straw for a doctor friend of mine. She had to remove it from her office because of complaints! I agree that the Alpinist title would have me think no other material – but as long as the other material good I will support it. Beside it does give the mag more variety ad might make better reading over the long term. In fact my on of my favorite pieces was one on/in/about Cochise Stronghold. Simply made me want to be there - with someone. It wasn’t really alpine oriented, and I guess it wasn’t just about climbing either. That’s what made it so good. Too may good pieces here to write about.
They are definitely struggling – for money and articles. Give them the benefit of the doubt. Support them; they are far better tan anything out there right now. I will, and as roy_hinkley_jr wrote I will enjoy it while it lasts.
|
|
|
|
|
stickclipper
Oct 6, 2005, 8:13 PM
Post #39 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 95
|
In reply to: Do y'all realize that the same photographers and writers publish their stuff in all these rags?
As I said before... Alpinist simply has more depth; odds are you will know far more about a mountain (or a person) featured there than in Climbing or R&I.
Photographers and writers?
Same for the most part, yes.
But I've seen many more articles by climbers outside of the U.S. in Alpinist. (Voytek, Ian Parnell, Pavel Shabalin). Voytek is nowhere near the writer that he is the alpinist, but his article "Obsession" was fascinating.
Croft, obviously, has published in the other rags... but the article on his young, developmental days in Squamish added (for me) some depth and color to one of the all-time greats.
The mountain profiles give snippets of stories from men you rarely hear from. Like the Japanese soloist on Trango who attempted to hang-glide off the top... but wrecked into the face in the swirling wind... and then somehow survived perched on a ledge thousands of feet above the glacier (his friends climbed up the british route and rescued him)
The Italian who wrote the article on Renato Cassarotto did a fine job. I don't recall Climbing having a feature on Cassarotto anytime in the past 10 years. How can that be?
And, for the record, Greg Crouch - even when he's writing for the "other rags" (!) - always does a fine job.
finally: A tip of the cap to Ms. Scully for her big FAs, her founding of She Sends, and her nice recent article on Josune (and nice follow-up letter, as well!)
|
|
|
|
|
troutboy
Oct 6, 2005, 8:28 PM
Post #40 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2003
Posts: 903
|
In reply to: Mr. Troutboy, Hook me up with the names so I can read em...please... and thank you.
Perhaps you misunderstand. I did not say they publish Climbing magazines without ads...
But in case you really want to know (you could just go to their website):
Fine Gardening
Threads
Fine Homebuilding
Fine Cooking
Fine Woodworking
Inspired House
And in case any of you smart alecks get the wrong idea, no I do not read Threads (not that there is anything wrong with that), but I will occasionally peruse the wife's copy of Fine Gardening or Fine Cooking.
Manly, men, men, men...
T(somewhat secure in my manliness)S
|
|
|
|
|
troutboy
Oct 6, 2005, 8:35 PM
Post #41 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2003
Posts: 903
|
In reply to: In reply to: Do y'all realize that the same photographers and writers publish their stuff in all these rags? As I said before... Alpinist simply has more depth; odds are you will know far more about a mountain (or a person) featured there than in Climbing or R&I.
Hit the nail on the head there. I get very annoyed at the climbing rags catering to America's 15 second attention span with "spray", "quick notes" and the like. Give me some insight.
Also, the editing at R&I and Climbing is abysmal. Those guys could not edit their way out of a wet paper bag. And that's just grammar and syntax, God forbid they should actually try content and style.
Finally, those odd fonts R&I insists on using are awful.
But, I confess, I still read them both :oops:
TS
|
|
|
|
|
lizzyscully
Oct 6, 2005, 9:36 PM
Post #42 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
Re: your statement "the editing is abysmal." Are you an editor? I suggest you give it a try sometime.
Making blanket statements about "the editing" is again a bit narrowminded and silly. Like all humans, people have their brilliant moments and their screwups. Sometimes articles are, in fact, poorly edited, and sometimes they are well edited. Both R&I and the Alpinist have won Maggie awards from the publishing powers that be--although Alpinist won for design and R&I won for content.
I would argue that R&I editors Jeff Jackson, Alison Osius, and (former editor) Matt Samet, and Climbing editor Jeff Achey are, in fact, superb editors/writers who have had decades of experience between them. They've all got dozens of articles under their belts and a few of them have written books. But I guess it is just a matter of opinion, really.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 6, 2005, 9:42 PM
Post #43 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
I think the "better photos" line is pretty weak. Sorry. The only thing that really makes Alpinist's photos better is that they're bigger and on nicer paper. Like Lizzy said, many photogs work for both. Topher Donahue, Jimmy Chin, Harrison Shull, Ian Parnell, on and on.
Similarly, as Lizzy points out, you also see writer overlap. And I have read mediocre writing in Alpinist. It's not immune.
"Places you want to go" is a matter of taste. I don't want to go to Patagonia or the French Alps. I want to go to Smith or Wild Iris or the Gunks or Rumney, or Ton Sai or the Grampians or Rodellar.
And that brings me back around. "Alpinist" is for alpinists, and all cute jokes aside, they're not superior beings pursuing a superior type of climbing. The mag just represents a different genre of climbing and climbers. No need to set up this affected dichotomy.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 6, 2005, 9:45 PM
Post #44 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: But I guess it is just a matter of opinion, really.
GOD FORBID that voice of experience come in here ;)
|
|
|
|
|
lizzyscully
Oct 6, 2005, 9:51 PM
Post #45 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
who? what! ass talking?
:wink:
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 6, 2005, 10:07 PM
Post #46 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: who? what! ass talking? :wink:
Climbers are veritable street entertainers. You go to the gym and see Marcel Marcel du Prana pantomiming the blue route, soft shoe dancers in well-worn Moccasyms, slackliners on their "tightrope" between streetlight poles, costumed poseurs juggling bowling pins labeled "aid," "trad" and "spurt" and hey! is that John Bachar playing the sexyphone with an open case full of change?
But it's the rectal chatter I like the best, especially when a fart escapes.
|
|
|
|
|
lizzyscully
Oct 6, 2005, 10:13 PM
Post #47 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
hehe.
what can I say to that?!
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 6, 2005, 10:19 PM
Post #48 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
*Hillary extends upside down hat* Alms for the poor, miss? 8-)
|
|
|
|
|
elvislegs
Oct 6, 2005, 10:20 PM
Post #49 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2002
Posts: 3148
|
In reply to: hehe. what can I say to that?!
nothing. in a perfect world she would have just ended the thread. THIS world is imperfect though, so i came up in here to dumb things down a little.
|
|
|
|
|
neurostar
Oct 6, 2005, 10:27 PM
Post #50 of 82
(11482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 7, 2004
Posts: 153
|
I like alpinist much more than other mags.. because i'm actually interested in the articles. Every issue of R&I or Climbing that I've ever had.. has only had one or two articles that interested me.. I don't care for the gear reviews... or the reviews of the bouldering spot in ______ (insert name).. So, for me, those mags are mostly filler.
With Alpinist, on the other hand, I find I read all the articles.. and find them interesting. I don't skip over stuff in there.
Admittedly, the bouldering article was somewhat tedious... but you can't win everytime...
Alpinist usually succeds in providing articles that interest me.
|
|
|
|
|
crotch
Oct 6, 2005, 10:38 PM
Post #51 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
In reply to: I think the "better photos" line is pretty weak. Sorry. The only thing that really makes Alpinist's photos better is that they're bigger and on nicer paper.
All other things being equal, better paper & bigger format generally = better photos to me. I'm not talking about the quality of the composition or the exposure, I'm talking about the viewing experience as a reader. Thus, better photos. +1 to Alpinist.
In reply to: And that brings me back around. "Alpinist" is for alpinists, and all cute jokes aside, they're not superior beings pursuing a superior type of climbing. The mag just represents a different genre of climbing and climbers. No need to set up this affected dichotomy.
Nice job ignoring the fact that R&I and Climbing are absolutely cluttered with ads, and that the gear reviews are dressed up ads. It may cost Alpinist the ship, but from an aesthetic viewpoint fewer ads are nice. Fewer ads. +1 to Alpinist.
These points have nothing to do with the subject of the substantive content (articles & photos), rather they are format issues, so no crusty old alpinist vs. young beanie-wearing boulderer issues here.
|
|
|
|
|
lizzyscully
Oct 6, 2005, 10:52 PM
Post #52 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
Too many ads definitely suck, but R&I & Climbing need to pay their staffs, which are significantly larger than Alpinist's staff. (R&I & Climbing also pay their contributors more).
I wouldn't know for sure, but I suspect Alpinist is still a ways away from actually being profitable, whereas those other two mags are surviving, have survived, and will likely continue to survive and provide a number of climbers with jobs well into the future.
The Alpinist is nice to look at & read. One can only hope that more people subscribe so it also continues to exist.
|
|
|
|
|
roy_hinkley_jr
Oct 6, 2005, 11:31 PM
Post #53 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 652
|
In reply to: (R&I & Climbing also pay their contributors more).
Last I heard they were both paying 35¢/word and Alpinist was paying 40¢/word. Photo rates were comparable, all on the low end of the scale. Sure they have larger staffs but they're putting out twice as many issues (each with three times the ad content) and have around six times the circulation. I'd guess in 2 years Alpinist, Urban Climber, and SheSends will be gone and in 5 years one of the other two will be history.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 6, 2005, 11:38 PM
Post #54 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: Nice job ignoring the fact that R&I and Climbing are absolutely cluttered with ads, and that the gear reviews are dressed up ads. It may cost Alpinist the ship, but from an aesthetic viewpoint fewer ads are nice. Fewer ads. +1 to Alpinist.
Climbing/R&I -v- Alpinist. Like Starbucks -v- Neighborhood Coffee Shack. God help you when you discover a model that will make your business profitable and sustainable.
|
|
|
|
|
crotch
Oct 7, 2005, 12:51 AM
Post #55 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
In reply to: Absolutely cluttered with ads, or good business sense?
Ads may make good business sense, but they detract from the quality of the product which, after all, is what we were discussing.
Remember, you asked:
In reply to: I really want to know. What makes R&I and Climbing trash and Alpinist hand-inked on snippets of the Shroud of Turin?
If you wish to believe that Alpinist has a cult following solely because of its subject matter, then by all means continue.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 7, 2005, 12:54 AM
Post #56 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
If you wish to think that I can't tell the difference, go on witcher bad self.
I'll buy YOUR assertion that you like the low ad content. I am still hardly convinced that that holds for everybody.
|
|
|
|
|
crotch
Oct 7, 2005, 12:57 AM
Post #57 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
In reply to: Too many ads definitely suck, but R&I & Climbing need to pay their staffs, which are significantly larger than Alpinist's staff. (R&I & Climbing also pay their contributors more). I wouldn't know for sure, but I suspect Alpinist is still a ways away from actually being profitable, whereas those other two mags are surviving, have survived, and will likely continue to survive and provide a number of climbers with jobs well into the future. The Alpinist is nice to look at & read. One can only hope that more people subscribe so it also continues to exist.
Yup.
|
|
|
|
|
crotch
Oct 7, 2005, 1:00 AM
Post #58 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 16, 2003
Posts: 1277
|
In reply to: I'll buy YOUR assertion that you like the low ad content. I am still hardly convinced that that holds for everybody.
A show of hands from the people who, all things being equal, prefer a magazine with more ads would put the issue to rest.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 7, 2005, 1:06 AM
Post #59 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
In reply to: In reply to: I'll buy YOUR assertion that you like the low ad content. I am still hardly convinced that that holds for everybody. A show of hands from the people who, all things being equal, prefer a magazine with more ads would put the issue to rest.
Ads don't bother me significantly, so all things being equal... well, all things are then equal.
|
|
|
|
|
backclipped
Oct 7, 2005, 1:54 AM
Post #60 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2005
Posts: 137
|
In reply to: Your Noobness is showing. Only folks that are fairly new to the sport read everything in sight.
Yeah, you pegged me right. I've only been climbing for a couple of years. Here, collect your cookie...but I've been skiing since I could walk and I still read Powder, Skiing, Freeskier, etc. I like to stay abreast the pass times that I'm into. Even the watered down pop culture mediums. Is there something inherently wrong with reading everything? Any how, it must suck being of the deflated old guard. Buck up little buddy, you might come across something funny or slightly interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Oct 7, 2005, 3:36 AM
Post #61 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
In reply to: If you wish to think that I can't tell the difference, go on witcher bad self. I'll buy YOUR assertion that you like the low ad content. I am still hardly convinced that that holds for everybody.
I'd agree.
I think a lot of people out there like to read about people with bigger balls doing crazier riskier stuff. I know I do.
The photos are spectacular, the articals to have a lot of devolepment, which is really nice to read, and the lack of adds is nice. I don't mind the sexier full page DMM, Charlet adds, it's those damn half page Shoreline Mtn, Sierra Trading post, Pika MTN, ect that piss me off.
If I had the money, I'd subscribe to Alpinist...but I don't. I'll pick up an issue when I see a story I'm really intersted in, same with R&I or Climbing.
Cheers,
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Oct 7, 2005, 5:53 AM
Post #62 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
In reply to: Do y'all realize that the same photographers and writers publish their stuff in all these rags?
Sure we realize this.
In reply to: I would argue that R&I editors Jeff Jackson, Alison Osius, and (former editor) Matt Samet, and Climbing editor Jeff Achey are, in fact, superb editors/writers who have had decades of experience between them. They've all got dozens of articles under their belts and a few of them have written books. But I guess it is just a matter of opinion, really
I won’t argue with you experience claim, but I think you might be making our point. The first quote might lead us to believe that it isn’t the writers! In truth though I do see writers I have not heard of before in Alpinist, and it is the average that I gives me an overall impression. Perhaps the writers you mention are not the ones I think so highly of? Not true either. Has Pete’s writing been in print recently? I remember enjoying his writing years ago.
So is it the editors! I am not sure, but if it is, you are making our point again because Alpinist is head and shoulders above the other two.
I’ll bet Alpinists standards are just higher. I think this is simply a corporate decision. It doesn't necessarily say much about the editors who might just be doing their jobs. Trying to attain and maintain those high standards is probably a labor of love – something those involved don’t mind putting extra effort into. Writers and editor(s)? are simply encouraged, allowed, and expected to produce better quality material – even when if they are the same people. You know, I bet I’ve got this right – it is Alpinists corporate culture that allows a superior product.
Whatever the reason it’s definitely not just the lack of ads that makes Alpinist a better magazine. For me it is the writing. The quality and pics are good but the writing is why I support it. The content is the best climbing stuff I have read since Ascent.
|
|
|
|
|
lizzyscully
Oct 7, 2005, 3:11 PM
Post #63 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
Alpinist pays less now. $.30 per word. Something about cutting costs. They let go of an editor, too.
To mheyman: All good points. Re: the writers. You missed my point. I have read excellent articles in both magazines by the same authors. It's true that one has to wade through more ads to get to the good content, but many R&I/Climbing articles are superb and thought-provoking. I think the audiences are different for Alpinist and for the other mags. Some people want the short clips and profiles, while others want lengthy features. I think it is more a matter of style preference, rather than quality of editing/writing.
To the person who suggested Alpinist, She Sends & Urban Climber would all be gone in two years. I sure hope not! I doubt either R&I or Climbing will be gone either. They are both going strong & have huge followings.
|
|
|
|
|
mack_north
Oct 7, 2005, 3:25 PM
Post #64 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2005
Posts: 74
|
I enjoy Alpinist because I am a dilletante with lots of disposable income. My night companion Amy and I get in bed (1000 thread count sheets), moisturize each other with designer olive oils, and luxuriate in the exploits of crazy Russians on the flanks of granite spires. Mmmmhhhhh!
|
|
|
|
|
troutboy
Oct 7, 2005, 4:11 PM
Post #65 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2003
Posts: 903
|
In reply to: Re: your statement "the editing is abysmal." Are you an editor? I suggest you give it a try sometime.
And I agree, it is an extremely difficult job; however, the folks at R&I and Climbing repeatedly make the same silly mistakes (and they have for 20 years) and always add a few typos, bad page references, and other gaffs in each issue.
As I said, though. I read and ENJOY each. I read them cover to cover. In general (IMHO), Alpinist does a much better job of editing than R&I and Climbing. Just because I think the editing could use some improvement does not mean I do not appreciate what they are trying to do.
And just so y'all know I'm not Mr. Negative, I admire anyone willing to try to produce a quality small-interest magazine in today's economy. For a comparison to the climbing mags, I suggest checking out some of the other "sports" magazines, such as those relating to mountain biking or skiing. That ought to make some people appreciate Climbing and R&I a little more. They are so much better (yes, even with the editing).
T
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Oct 7, 2005, 5:02 PM
Post #66 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
In reply to: Alpinist pays less now. $.30 per word. Something about cutting costs. They let go of an editor, too.
And it’s a shame because they’re quality is already slipping. Once it is gone people like me will only pay for trying hard for so long.
In reply to: To mheyman: All good points. Re: the writers. You missed my point. I have read excellent articles in both magazines by the same authors. It's true that one has to wade through more ads to get to the good content,
I tried to make it clear that ads are not my primary beef with the normal rags.
In reply to: but many R&I/Climbing articles are superb and thought-provoking.
Guess I’m a little less lenient than you. I’ll agree that a few R&I/Climbing articles are very good.
In reply to: I think the audiences are different for Alpinist and for the other mags. Some people want the short clips and profiles, while others want lengthy features. I think it is more a matter of style preference, rather than quality of editing/writing.
Here we agree and then disagree. You bet Alpinist and the other mags are for different audiences! I do not think the public is as interested in quality as it is in ease of reading. What do you think the average reading level in the US is? You can’t use grade level anymore, cause just like currency and climbing, there’s been a lot of inflation in the last 25 years. That does not make the magazines equal. It means there are many readers who will not appreciate Alpinist. The public at large certainly will not appreciate how much better Alpinist is. As others have written Alpinist provides much more depth, and it helps to have to have some attention span to read it too. This paragraph may well have me labeled an elitist, and garner support here for your point view. So be it. It will change nothing.
In reply to: I doubt either R&I or Climbing will be gone either. They are both going strong & have huge followings.
You are probably right. But the funny thing about their business model if that while I still have a subscription to them, I spend very little time reading them. I carry them to places I will wait for something, say a doctors office and leaf trough it reading an article I it interests me. I really have little, time to read paper at home – and alpinist stays at home. I have 12 issues, but I have only read half of them. Why? Cause I am not one to remember titles, and I often forget exactly which articles I have read. So, I start reading one, and when I realize I have already read it, I am hooked – it is good enough that I do not care and want to read it again! I’ve read a few pieces several times. They were that good! Guess that really makes them good enough to pay for too!
|
|
|
|
|
stickclipper
Oct 7, 2005, 8:19 PM
Post #67 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 95
|
Hm.
It is true that it is a matter of preference, a matter of opinion, it's relative, etc, etc, etcetera.
My two closest climbing friends only read 1 out of 5 articles in any of the mags. They are drawn first (and primarily) to the pictures. And if the article is lonnggg.... well, they're even less likely to read it.
Perhaps the folks at R&I and Climbing realize this and cater to it. Perhaps not. (this would explain the 1 pg given to Donini - more people will probably read that than a 2,000 word feature)
People love to see pictures of routes they've done... or places that they have been (or might go) - i.e. popular crags/bouldering areas. Not many readers are likely to go to Thalay Sagar (a mountain featured in an Alpinist). And most climbers don't care that much about the relatively obscure history of a mountain they've never seen or heard of.
And that is what it boils down to, really. As a kid, I always enjoyed the issues of Sports Illustrated that had stories about the past: "Three-finger" Mordecai Brown, Dizzy Dean, Bob Gibson, Jack Dempsey. The history, for me, provided the foundation and the color for the modern game.
Most of my friends, however, were not very interested in whether or not the ref had intentionally screwed up the count when Dempsey knocked down Tunney in 1927. To them, such an article was a waste of space.
Maybe it was.
As John Graves says, you're either made to care about such things... or you're not. I guess I'm made that way.
One of my favorite aspects of climbing is that (like baseball and boxing) it has an extremely colorful history. Knowing about it enriches my own climbing experiences.
So I don't knock R&I or Climbing because of the ads. In fact, I don't knock them at all; I simply state (for it's a fact) that Alpinist delves deeper into climbing history... and covers its subjects in a more intricate manner.
I wish that Climbing and R&I would do more of this. They do, sometimes. The feature a couple years ago on Dale Bard (by Crouch, I think) was excellent. Climbing is full of guys like that: people who's life was filled by climbing, then quit, then came back. Their stories are usually more interesting than those told about the new young hotshot (be he tradster, sport-o, boulderer, whatever).
And, for whoever inquired about Pete Takeda... The last long article in R&I/Climbing that I remember him writing was on Devils Thumb, bout 18 months ago (and he did contribute to the Alpinist that profiled The Titan). I think he's working on those damn-book-things now.
|
|
|
|
|
stickclipper
Oct 7, 2005, 8:23 PM
Post #68 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 95
|
Hm.
It is true that it is a matter of preference, a matter of opinion, it's relative, etc, etc, etcetera.
My two closest climbing friends only read 1 out of 5 articles in any of the mags. They are drawn first (and primarily) to the pictures. And if the article is lonnggg.... well, they're even less likely to read it.
Perhaps the folks at R&I and Climbing realize this and cater to it. Perhaps not. (this would explain the 1 pg given to Donini - more people will probably read that than a 2,000 word feature)
People love to see pictures of routes they've done... or places that they have been (or might go) - i.e. popular crags/bouldering areas. Not many readers are likely to go to Thalay Sagar (a mountain featured in an Alpinist). And most climbers don't care that much about the relatively obscure history of a mountain they've never seen or heard of.
And that is what it boils down to, really. As a kid, I always enjoyed the issues of Sports Illustrated that had stories about the past: "Three-finger" Mordecai Brown, Dizzy Dean, Bob Gibson, Jack Dempsey. The history, for me, provided the foundation and the color for the modern game.
Most of my friends, however, were not very interested in whether or not the ref had intentionally screwed up the count when Dempsey knocked down Tunney in 1927. To them, such an article was a waste of space.
Maybe it was.
As John Graves says, you're either made to care about such things... or you're not. I guess I'm made that way.
One of my favorite aspects of climbing is that (like baseball and boxing) it has an extremely colorful history. Knowing about it enriches my own climbing experiences.
So I don't knock R&I or Climbing because of the ads. In fact, I don't knock them at all; I simply state (for it's a fact) that Alpinist delves deeper into climbing history... and covers its subjects in a more intricate manner.
I wish that Climbing and R&I would do more of this. They do, sometimes. The feature a couple years ago on Dale Bard (by Crouch, I think) was excellent. Climbing is full of guys like that: people who's life was filled by climbing, then quit, then came back. There stories are usually more interesting than those told about the new young hotshot (be he tradster, sport-o, boulderer, whatever).
And, for whoever inquired about Pete Takeda... The last long article in R&I/Climbing that I remember him writing was on Devils Thumb, bout 18 months ago (and he did contribute to the Alpinist that profiled The Titan). I think he's working on those damn-book-things now.
|
|
|
|
|
lizzyscully
Oct 7, 2005, 8:41 PM
Post #69 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
He finished the book. He did write something a few months back on climbing in Yosemite for R&I... maybe about 6 months. I can't remember exactly.
I think you about sum it all up.
|
|
|
|
|
stickclipper
Oct 7, 2005, 8:42 PM
Post #70 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 95
|
Thinking back...
Does anyone remember the Climbing that had an article by Dougald MacDonald about Messner's 1960s Dolomite rock routes?
Dougald pondered whether Messner was obsolete in modern rock climbing... then went and met him and repeated some of his routes. An interesting premise, treated well and even-handedly.
A more recent criticism:
Climbing just ran an article on rock climbing in the San Juans. Ogden did a poor job with it. I lived there briefly and so am familiar with the area.
Antoine Savelli lives at the base of the Ophir Wall and was integral in the development of hard routes there (in the 80s). Ogden doesn't even mention him (I wonder if this has something to do with Savelli's controversial rap-bolting...)
And the history of the Ophir Wall - something that merits a solid page minimum - was relegated to a single paragraph.
The big-wigs at a mag shouldn't let that slide. Craig Luebben's article on Vedauwoo is a better example of how you should write about a place. Good pictures and writing that encompasses both past AND present.
So I guess it is not that "the writing" is soo much better in Alpinist. It is that the writers are given more space... and a wider variety of people are allowed to write.
Let's face it, folks: none of the stories in the mags are going to be nominated for an O. Henry award (best short story) (not that they could, being 'non-fiction,' but you get the point...).
And you're right, Ms. Scully - Takeda wrote an article about the big storm in Yosem, I think. (and also something about going back there for the first time in many years... trying Astroman, etc)
Also- I sent my sister a gift subscription to She Sends a year or two ago. She likes it. :)
|
|
|
|
|
pitonpedro
Oct 7, 2005, 9:40 PM
Post #71 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 20, 2002
Posts: 9
|
after taking the time to read all these posts i figured i needed to put my 5 soles in.
i've been climbing for about 5 years now, and it seemed like both C and R&I went downhill a few years back. i used to love the articles (remember the R&I "Roadtrips" issues and "Superguides"?) so much good beta i continue to use them as resources for planning trips (and read backissues now and again). now they seem to mostly be full of ads, and the content just isn't interesting. so much is devoted to the sport and gym and competition scene, and that just isn't my thing. the aim of R&I and C has morphed from a climbers mag into an athletes mag. so if you like living vicariously through other people's achievements, then great. i just like reading inspiring articles and looking at awesome photography. R&I and C just don't make me want to quit my job and go climbing. occasionally theres a gem, but Alpinist for me always delivers.
and then there is that money issue that everyone seemed to be in a hubbub about. suppose you could say over the years C and R&I have gorwn into something like wal-mart or mcdonalds, where yes they are big and employ lots of people and have huge followings, but i would rather suppport mom and pop shops who give a sh!t about their customers, or dine at the Front Porch at Seneca or The Moat near North Conway or Dornan's in the Tetons. sure, they cost more, but they just taste better.
i mean, hell. everyone who posts here should spent less time talking and more time climbing. doubt i'll respond to further posts, i rarely check this site anymore. hope this stimulates further discussion.
¡mucho suerte a todos de Peru!
|
|
|
|
|
jred
Oct 7, 2005, 9:47 PM
Post #72 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2003
Posts: 750
|
In reply to: In reply to: work on your grammar guys brutus excluded edited to exclude brutusofwyde ?? We're not writing articles here, dude. You're lucky to see intelligible sentances. |
|
|
|
|
lizzyscully
Oct 7, 2005, 9:50 PM
Post #73 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
pitonpedro: I wish I could spend more time climbing, but am stuck in a cubicle now, working to pay off the debt I accrued while running She Sends (and wasting precious company time at the moment).
stickclipper: I don't run SS any longer (haven't for the last two issues). I turned it over to some women who are turning it into a non-profit. That's awesome you bought a subscription for your sister. All I ever wanted was to have more articles about women to read (much like the history buff wants more info about climbing history in the Alpinist and the boulderer wants short clips about elite climbers in R&I). But thanks for supporting the mag. I hope it survives. I love reading it. :)
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Oct 7, 2005, 10:43 PM
Post #74 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
I have used more than my share of space here, but I can sum it up my opinion in a two sentences.
I pick up Climbing or R&I and hope to find something worthwhile to read.
I pick up Alpinist and am disapointed if I do not read a great letter or article.
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Oct 7, 2005, 10:45 PM
Post #75 of 82
(10098 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
Just deleted duplicate post
|
|
|
|
|
stickclipper
Oct 7, 2005, 10:52 PM
Post #76 of 82
(9067 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 95
|
In reply to: stickclipper: I don't run SS any longer (haven't for the last two issues). I turned it over to some women who are turning it into a non-profit. That's awesome you bought a subscription for your sister. All I ever wanted was to have more articles about women to read (much like the history buff wants more info about climbing history in the Alpinist and the boulderer wants short clips about elite climbers in R&I). But thanks for supporting the mag. I hope it survives. I love reading it. :)
Oops. Somehow I thought you were no longer involved...
(I must sheepishly admit that I'm not a regular reader. I guess you could say that I don't have a lot of personal interest in... well, Tiffany Campbell's pregnancy ;)
Ah well.
Oh, and as for the "more time climbing" jargon - wish I could... but I'm sitting at home with two broken legs (7 months ago, 12 surgeries, good times). And I foresee the frightening prospect of a cubicle in my future: medical bills, galore.
|
|
|
|
|
nashequilibrium
Oct 7, 2005, 11:24 PM
Post #77 of 82
(9067 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2002
Posts: 42
|
mheyman wrote
In reply to: I pick up Climbing or R&I and hope to find something worthwhile to read. I pick up Alpinist and am disapointed if I do not read a great letter or article.
This passes my cost-benefit analysis test. The marginal benefits of R&I are lower but the marginal costs are lower; as long as marginal benefits>marginal costs, I subscribe to the mag.
|
|
|
|
|
montaniero
Oct 8, 2005, 7:09 PM
Post #78 of 82
(9067 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2004
Posts: 238
|
In reply to: "Places you want to go" is a matter of taste. I don't want to go to Patagonia or the French Alps.
GREAT!! Less people to deal with while we are climbing over there.
In reply to: "Alpinist" is for alpinists, and all cute jokes aside, they're not superior beings pursuing a superior type of climbing.
What are you talking??? Of course we are!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
alpine_monk
Oct 9, 2005, 6:45 PM
Post #79 of 82
(9067 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 9, 2005
Posts: 268
|
In reply to: "Alpinist" is for alpinists, and all cute jokes aside, they're not superior beings pursuing a superior type of climbing.
In reply to: What are you talking??? Of course we are!!!! |
|
|
|
|
paulraphael
Oct 11, 2005, 6:18 AM
Post #80 of 82
(9067 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2004
Posts: 670
|
A little historical perspective ...
Climbing and R&I used to be much better than they are now. I'm not just being nostalgic; they followed a course that's common in the magazine world. Start small, run by a small group of passionate enthusiasts, grow, get exhausted, and then sell to a big publishing company that cares more about selling ads than putting out a great product.
I have R&I number 7. It's like an art magazine for climbers. Not as lavish and beautiful as Alpinist, but the spirit is the same. I'm not sure when they got commercial.
I don't know climbing's history, but can say without a doubt that it was a more inspiring mag before Michael Kennedy left. Who can blame him for leaving? He's a climber. Editing is tedious, hard, low-paying work.
The moral of the story is, it's up to us to stop Alpinist from going down the same route. We can help them thrive in their current format ... if we don't, they're going to give up sooner or later. I'm sure Christian would much rather be climbing the high peaks than toiling in an office to produce a beautiful mag that no one subscribes to.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Oct 11, 2005, 7:37 AM
Post #81 of 82
(9067 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
In reply to: Climbing and R&I used to be much better than they are now.
Damn right. I got a copy of "30 Years of Climbing Magazine" last year in Ouray, and it was a great read... stories that were, for the most part, well written, and they captivated me. I wonder why I don't see those now?
In reply to: I find it funny that this post about Alpinist is so "this is the best ever" while the Urban Climber thread featured a lot of obviously trad climbers bashing that mag for its exclusive focus on pebble wrestling.
The error in your argument is that you assume "trad climbers" and "alpinists" are the same. While there are aspects of "trad" climbing in alpinism, the two are NOT the same. Not by a long shot.
In reply to: Although I agree the alpinist is GREAT magazine, and is by far the best climbing mag out there... I have noticed more and more being done about bouldering in the magazine.
No, that's not accurate. There are articles about alpine climbers who also happend to climb on boulders. But again, to assume that alpine climbing and bouldering is the same is sheer fallacy.
In reply to: Do y'all realize that the same photographers and writers publish their stuff in all these rags?
Really? Which issue of R&I featured an article on Fitz Roy by Rolando Garibotti? (Alpinist 5.) Which issue of Climbing had the comprehensive history and review of climbing on the Titan written by Steve "Crusher" Bartlett? (Alpinist 8.)
Go ahead and look through your back copies... I'll wait.
In reply to: Any how, it must suck being of the deflated old guard.
How would you know?
edited for HTML tags.
|
|
|
|
|
backclipped
Oct 11, 2005, 12:39 PM
Post #82 of 82
(9067 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2005
Posts: 137
|
I wouldn't know; you called out my newbness, remember? Anyway, I was just taking the defensive dickhead track. My point is that I read just about everything that's put in front of me. I may be a new climber, but I've been skiing for, oh about 25 years now (I'm 29 now). Still reading all the mags (even the shitty gear reviews).
chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
