talkmagic.co.uk

Do any of you subscribe to MAGIC Magazine?

If so, you must have noticed that the new reviewers in the Marketplace have been giving most of the effects every month VERY negative reviews. This would not be such a bad thing if they hadn't gone too far with it!

I am tired of them telling us not to buy anything out there on the market. To them, a trick is'nt just "bad" it's "Unbelievable awful" or "Something that shouldn't have even been marketed"... Please keep in mind I am not quoting them but this is the gist of it.

And this month they crossed the line. They gave the rave-reviewed effect Prohibition a terrible review, and within the review basically explained how the effect is done! Honestly, I don't even own Prohibition and I could go out and do it right now, because they basically taught the exact workings. Just because an effect is bad it doesn't mean it can be exposed by people not permitted to do so! Ridiculous, and downright awful. I bet Prohibition lost at least another 100 sales just based on that.

Your thoughts?

Prohibition has a lot of controversy for me... a guy from Blacks Magic who had a bit of money pointed his way produces Street Magic mag, and basically he also sells/markets Prohibition.

He thinks Prohibition is the best thing since sliced bread, wheras anyone with an ounce of a braincell can tell exactly what is going on, and it's just a mixmash of other ideas which are claiming to be original.

Anyhoooooo... perhaps MAGIC magazine is having a pop at Street Magic?

The only place you may have found info would be the TragicCafe, but that place is so censored, and Blacks' is an advertiser, ergo—anything negative about an advertiser/affilliate gets removed.

So would you prefer that they did an Ellusionist and hype up all of the poor effects?

Prohibition has been around in various forms for some time now, like many other effects and it's likely to be no more than an updated presentation. If you could understand how to perform it as a lay person then perhaps there wuld be an issue but how many lay people buy magic magazine? Answer is probably none, or very very few at least. I also doubt that you could still go out and perform it as intended.

Here, in it's entirety, is my response on TragicCafe.

Because they're bound to remove it, as they hate me sooooo much. Seriously.

On 2007-08-01 19:07, Payne wrote:
I'd much rather see a reviewer call them as he sees them instead of your typical glad handing reviews.
It's the reviewers job to tell us if a trick is not well made, poorly thought out or not honestly advertised.
Maybe if more reviewers were brutally honest it would put the kibosh on these wonder of the week vendors who prey unmercifully on the gullible newbies ever anxious for that next bargain basement trick that will elevate them to stardom.

Amen.

It all depends who's side the reviewers are on. Frankly, if you've been in magic a while, you'd probably have to agree that most of the rubbish we are now seeing is only escalating to greatness through viral marketing hype, and newbie magicians with too much disposable income.

There's very little creativity in a lot of todays 'new' magic. But the fact that a single effect can generate hype via clever marketing or advertising WILL make it appealing—whether it is utter rubbish, or a viable purchase.

It is also apparent that a lot of the newer 'street magic' stuff isn't aimed at MAGICIANS at all, it's aimed at eager kids who want to be able to pull of cool playground stunts, and therefore can you actually see a working pro paying for it to make his living?

I say KUDOS to Magic Mag. Finally, some real-world, dirt-tinted-spectacles reviews of what's hot, and what is most definately not. Honesty is always the best policy.

And Mike... why did you expect Prohibition to be such a great review? Most magicians (note: I said MAGICIANS) would have worked it out for themselves after seeing the demo video. It was't really anything groundbreaking. And the method had been discussed openly around forums before Prohibition was released.

It makes a good point there Seige, BUT I am confused as to why they knock a product around and spew negative freedback on it, then conclude by saying "Recommended!" Of course this is only in some cases.

By the way, I replied to your Cafe comment... and I discovered your first name which is NOTHING like I thought it would be.

What you also have to understand is that it is one persons opinion, just like any other review. Its good to get to hear an honest review, warts and all. I have bought a couple ofthings in the past, and then a while later seen a negative review in Magic magazine and wished they had done so earlier, as all the other reviews had been unfortunately positive. At the end of the day, if only the best of the best get a decent review, then we are more likely to buy the best stuff.
At the end of the day, there is no disgrace in giving an honest opinion, even if nobody else agrees, as long as they can justify why they have given that opinion.

OK, here's an example...

2 months ago, I was in Staples (the stationers).

On the shelves at discount rate was a mono laser printer—Brother—for the ridiculous price of sub £60.

So, I snapped one up.

Upon getting it home, I notice that there wasn't a USB cable, it didn't set up as easy as they said it would, print quality was iffy, it was flimsy in construction, the Toner was very low capacity, the mains lead wasn't very long, and to really annoy me—I broke the exit catch whilst putting it together.

So, with all those things wrong, would I recommend it?

Hell, yeah! For the price, it's fantastic. Sits silently when not in use, fires up from cold in about 15 seconds, and prints faster than a greased cougar from the planet big spheroids. Replacement toner is cheap, as are fuser rollers.

**** YOU SEE? *****

Because something has faults, doens't mean it's not something that can be recommended.

Plus, as Andy notes above... a good, honest review is worth it's weight in gold. I've seen so many butt-licking reviews on the Cafe, friends helping friends... and I've thought to myself "Are they REALLY reveiwing the same effect?"

It would seem that Magic Mag's honesty and down-the-line approach will get them a much higher readership, as nobody likes parting with their hard-earned moulah.

Also remember that magazine reviews are generally carried out on products which have been GIVEN to them, so in some ways, a new or insecure magazine may be inclined to give glowing reviews of freebie products so as to keep the suppliers happy.

Food for thought.

Michael Kras wrote:By the way, I replied to your Cafe comment... and I discovered your first name which is NOTHING like I thought it would be.

Yes, not many people know about our Candice. he likes to keep that a secret though, so please keep it quiet.

As for the magic reviews. I think it is actually quite refreshing and not at all a bad thing or even damaging to be critical as long as the reviews are consistent.

The main problem with forum reviews is that the majority are super good. The best thing since sliced tt's. The reason for this (as I see it) is varied, but some of the reasons are

a) Why would anyone bother with reviewing something they don't like? If they are going to take time to review anything it makes sense to review the good stuff.

b) It could just be a friend of the inventor trying to boost publicity. Maybe not even a friend, but maybe someone who was sent a freebie in exchange for a glowing review. And before you say it doesn't happen, or I don't do that. It can happen at a more psychological level. Your disposition towards something will be margianally better if you haven't wasted money on it.

c) some of the newere members maybe reluctant to say exactly what they think if it is negative for fear of being jumped on.

d) There is also the "Emperors New Clothes Effect". If everyone else is saying how wonderful it is and you don't think it is, then to say you don't like get it would mean you aren't "a good enough magician". So naturally the temptation is to say it is good regardless. The more this happens the less people will talk out against it.

Magazine reviews on the otherhand are independant and there is no pressure to say good things for the sake of it. The only thing I really ask about a magazine revier is that they are consistent so I can trust their review. It doesn't mean though you have to agree with everything you read, it just means you can intepret what they are saying.

For instance if item x gets a mediochre review, but I actually like itemx, and then item y gets a better review and I don't have item y - I can at least know the reviewer prefered one to the other and I can make my own mind up about it's worth.

Michael Close was a consumate reviewer of Magic Magazine in the past, but I didn't agree with everything he said either. Some of the material he panned I really liked a lot, but what I did do was understand the sort of things Mr. Close liked and didn't like, because he was at the very least consistent in his reviewing.

Just because a reviewer doesn't review something as you would really doesn't eman they are crossing the line and you have to admit that it makes you look at the product in a new light.

just some thoughts.

bananafish wrote:[Magazine reviews on the otherhand are independant and there is no pressure to say good things for the sake of it.

Did i read that right? A magazine is the last place I'd trust a review from. They usually have lots of paying advertisers, so best not say anything too bad about their products.