http://www.classicpopmag....s-madonna/

[Edited 2/12/17 14:59pm]

MotownSubdivision said:

There's a Classic Pop Magazine?

yup--its actually pretty good. Its like Q Magazine kind of.

Thanks I will def be on the lookout for this.

Nice, good bite size pieces of info and good photos make these essential reading. Their Michael Jackson number was excellent and I am still looking for the Prince one.

Iamtheorg said:

MotownSubdivision said:

Iamtheorg said:

yup--its actually pretty good. Its like Q Magazine kind of.

Cool. Is it available in print or just online?

Both in print and online. Only thing is all of the stores around me where I live discontinued carrying the magazine so the only way I can order it is online at the mag's official store.

Anyone have any stores around them that carry the mag? If so, which ones? Just am curious to know...

George Michael graces the cover of the outlet's Feb/Mar issue. I always see Classic Pop on the shelves at my local newsstands, and sometimes it can be found at the supermarket.

Iamtheorg said:

MotownSubdivision said:

There's a Classic Pop Magazine?

yup--its actually pretty good. Its like Q Magazine kind of.

That's a matter of opinion. I find Classic Pop Magazine pretty poor. Q Magazine is a million times better. They are nothing alike except they both are British and cover music. Classic Pop centers on mostly 80's music, primarily synth pop and is quite limited in its focus. Q Magazine covers a much wider range of music from all eras.

Classic Pop cuts and pastes a lot from other sources, and has only a few original interviews. Q Magazine has many more new exclusive interviews with artists.

Classic Pop magazine has lots of mistakes and errors and its reviews are usually very short and poorly written.

Classic Pop tends to focus over and over on the same artists in a limited genre. I like Depeche Mode and Duran Duran too, but how many articles can you have about them?

Maybe it's good if you are an 80's nostalgia person, but that's too limited for me. I like a wide range of music from all eras.

Classic Pop on their twitter page was debating whether they should do a feature on Bruce Springsteen, and they decided he wasn't worthy of being covered! That's all you need to know about the quality of their journalism. Instead they focus on one hit wonders.

Q Magazine did a special on Madonna a few years ago, which was much better than Classic Pop. It compiled original interviews they had done with her.

Glindathegood said:

Iamtheorg said:

yup--its actually pretty good. Its like Q Magazine kind of.

That's a matter of opinion. I find Classic Pop Magazine pretty poor. Q Magazine is a million times better. They are nothing alike except they both are British and cover music. Classic Pop centers on mostly 80's music, primarily synth pop and is quite limited in its focus. Q Magazine covers a much wider range of music from all eras.

Classic Pop cuts and pastes a lot from other sources, and has only a few original interviews. Q Magazine has many more new exclusive interviews with artists.

Classic Pop magazine has lots of mistakes and errors and its reviews are usually very short and poorly written.

Classic Pop tends to focus over and over on the same artists in a limited genre. I like Depeche Mode and Duran Duran too, but how many articles can you have about them?

Maybe it's good if you are an 80's nostalgia person, but that's too limited for me. I like a wide range of music from all eras.

Classic Pop on their twitter page was debating whether they should do a feature on Bruce Springsteen, and they decided he wasn't worthy of being covered! That's all you need to know about the quality of their journalism. Instead they focus on one hit wonders.

Q Magazine did a special on Madonna a few years ago, which was much better than Classic Pop. It compiled original interviews they had done with her.

Glinda what do you think of the 2 mags as far as photos go? Just wondering...

hollywood0024 said:

Glindathegood said:

That's a matter of opinion. I find Classic Pop Magazine pretty poor. Q Magazine is a million times better. They are nothing alike except they both are British and cover music. Classic Pop centers on mostly 80's music, primarily synth pop and is quite limited in its focus. Q Magazine covers a much wider range of music from all eras.

Classic Pop cuts and pastes a lot from other sources, and has only a few original interviews. Q Magazine has many more new exclusive interviews with artists.

Classic Pop magazine has lots of mistakes and errors and its reviews are usually very short and poorly written.

Classic Pop tends to focus over and over on the same artists in a limited genre. I like Depeche Mode and Duran Duran too, but how many articles can you have about them?

Maybe it's good if you are an 80's nostalgia person, but that's too limited for me. I like a wide range of music from all eras.

Classic Pop on their twitter page was debating whether they should do a feature on Bruce Springsteen, and they decided he wasn't worthy of being covered! That's all you need to know about the quality of their journalism. Instead they focus on one hit wonders.

Q Magazine did a special on Madonna a few years ago, which was much better than Classic Pop. It compiled original interviews they had done with her.

Glinda what do you think of the 2 mags as far as photos go? Just wondering...

Again, in Classic Pop, their photos are ones that have been seen before. Q Magazine in their features generally has new photo shoots in their feature articles.

Glindathegood said:

Iamtheorg said:

yup--its actually pretty good. Its like Q Magazine kind of.

That's a matter of opinion. I find Classic Pop Magazine pretty poor. Q Magazine is a million times better. They are nothing alike except they both are British and cover music. Classic Pop centers on mostly 80's music, primarily synth pop and is quite limited in its focus. Q Magazine covers a much wider range of music from all eras.

Classic Pop cuts and pastes a lot from other sources, and has only a few original interviews. Q Magazine has many more new exclusive interviews with artists.

Classic Pop magazine has lots of mistakes and errors and its reviews are usually very short and poorly written.

Classic Pop tends to focus over and over on the same artists in a limited genre. I like Depeche Mode and Duran Duran too, but how many articles can you have about them?

Maybe it's good if you are an 80's nostalgia person, but that's too limited for me. I like a wide range of music from all eras.

Classic Pop on their twitter page was debating whether they should do a feature on Bruce Springsteen, and they decided he wasn't worthy of being covered! That's all you need to know about the quality of their journalism. Instead they focus on one hit wonders.

Q Magazine did a special on Madonna a few years ago, which was much better than Classic Pop. It compiled original interviews they had done with her.

Agreed. Classic Pop is basically a gussied up Teen Beat but its cool to see 80's pop artists get some shine and read about them. I never cared back then.

Iamtheorg said:

Agreed. Classic Pop is basically a gussied up Teen Beat but its cool to see 80's pop artists get some shine and read about them. I never cared back then.

The problem is a lot of the information on these artists is available for free online. So what is the incentive to buy the magazine?

Occasionally, Classic Pop does have a good exclusive interview. I remember they did have a nice interview with Duran Duran when Paper Gods came out.

I wish they had more exclusive interviews. I guess a lot of artists don't take the magazine seriously and don't want to do an interview with them. Or they feel that not many people read it or buy it, so why waste your time doing an interview with them.

I remember Smash Hits back in the day. They did have many more exclusive interviews with the artists which made it more interesting.