|
|
|
|
backclipped
Oct 6, 2005, 11:25 AM
Post #26 of 82
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 8
|
who? what! ass talking?
:wink:
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 6, 2005, 10:07 PM
Post #46 of 82
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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
(11483 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
