I've never thought that "In the Groove" meant anything specific about our hobby, and is not a good way to recruit members. For instance, use Google to search for "The Antique Phonograph", and you get our website on the 1st page of results. If you do a Google search on "In the Groove", you don't get a hit until the 9th PAGE of results (long after most people would give up).
Jim Nichol On Jul 11, 2013, at 3:58 PM, Paul Christenzen <[email protected]> wrote: > Disagree!!! Nothing wrong with a good cliche (IF it even is one), > historically significant, recognized world-wide and makes a good acronym. > > Paul Christenzen, simple-minded collector > > > Bruce wrote: >> OK, I'll step up to be the first person to disagree with Steve. >> >> When the improvements were being made to the former CAPS publication, "The >> Sound Box", concurrent with the name change to the organization, we wanted a >> name for the publication that would speak to the stature of its quality. >> Names like "The Sound Box" seemed too much like a cliché that fell far short >> of the quality of the product. "In the Groove" as a publication name, >> regardless of its age, falls short as well. >> >> Bruce Peterson - former CAPS/APS president >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >> Behalf Of Melissa Ricci >> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 10:26 AM >> To: Antique Phonograph List >> Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and >> successorpublication name >> >> Well said, Steve! I agree 100% >> >> Melissa >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 9:37 AM >> Subject: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successor publication >> name >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> I am posting this to both Phonolist and Phono-L -- the two listserves I >> subscribe to. >> Those of you who belong to the Antique Phonograph Sovciety (formerly known >> as the Calif. APS) should have received a letter in the mail this week (or >> will shortly -- mine came yesterday) detailing the proposed merger of the >> APS with MAPS effective January 1, 2014, (I'm guessing MAPS members will >> get >> something soon.). I was told that there was a preliminary meeting of >> members held at the Union show lat month, though no mention was made in any >> >> reports of the show on either of these lists. So the mailing from CAPS was >> the >> first formal document I saw. >> As outlined in the letter, the two organizations are often serving the >> same group with 160 members (of MAPS' 607 and APS's 400 members belonging >> to >> both. Economically it makes sense because postage to mail each society's >> magazine/journal is the biggest cost. By combining memberships, there would >> >> be one dues and this might attract more members. (Side note here: Every >> person on these newsgroups should belong to at least one of these >> organizations to support the hobby.). >> The plan is to take the best of both magazines and combine into one. >> Currently APS's magazine focuses on pre-electric phonographs and and some >> recordings -- mostly pre-1910 -- while ITG (MAPs' magazine) covers recording >> artists as well as reissues of pre-Lp era recordings. (As most of you know, >> I >> have contributed a monthly -- now bi-monthly -- column, "Anything >> Phonographic" >> to ITG for over 20 years , not missing one issue yet!). >> I definitely support the merger if it will mean continuing the great >> volunteer work done by the Boards and contributors of both organizations. >> But -- >> as I wrote in a letter to both boards yesterday -- I feel that the proposal >> to make the name of the new society's publication -- which would be >> published quarterly with more yearly pages than either has now -- "The >> Antique >> Phonograph" is not a good move. Personally I do not feel that it reflects >> the >> contents if, in fact, the content will be similar to that in the current >> ITG. "In The Groove" was named 30 years ago by John Whitacre and I have >> worked with all four of its Editors during that time. It was chosen because >> it >> reflected phonographs (I don't call them "antique phonographs" because RCA >> 45 players from the 1950s are now considered "antiques") and records. It >> was a "brand" that no one was using and has a history. The name "The >> Antique Phonograph" would imply that the publication was only for "machine >> collectors". I know some of you -- and many who write me about my column -- >> may >> only have one or two windups but love old records and play them >> electrically or buy reissues on CDs. >> The reason for this (rather lengthy post) is to say that I plan to vote >> for the merger (the ballots are due by August 7th and I'll be on vacation >> for >> a short time before then ) but I am planning to note that, as a member, I >> feel the surviving magazine should be named "In The Groove" , maintaining >> its 30 year history. (BTW, RCA has an consumer newsletter covering their >> phonographs and records in the 1940s with the same name!). I encourage you >> to >> cast your vote to support the boards, but, if you feel as strongly about >> the change of the magazine's name as I do, I urge you to contact the >> combined Board Members of both organizations and let them know your >> preferences, >> WHATEVER they may be. >> Steve Ramm >> (Member of MAPS, APS and ARSC) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Phono-L mailing list >> http://phono-l.org >> _______________________________________________ >> Phono-L mailing list >> http://phono-l.org >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Phono-L mailing list >> http://phono-l.org >> > > _______________________________________________ > Phono-L mailing list > http://phono-l.org _______________________________________________ Phono-L mailing list http://phono-l.org
