Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name
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: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] 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: srsel...@aol.com srsel...@aol.com To: Phono-l@oldcrank.org 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, (Im 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 APSs 400 members belonging to both. Economically it makes sense because postage to mail each societys 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 APSs 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 societys 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 dont 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 Ill 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 magazines 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
Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name
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: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] 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: srsel...@aol.com srsel...@aol.com To: Phono-l@oldcrank.org 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
Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name
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 pic...@gmail.com 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: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] 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: srsel...@aol.com srsel...@aol.com To: Phono-l@oldcrank.org 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
Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name
If it's to be considered a new organization, I'd imagine it makes sense to give it a new name, let's say something like the American Antique Phonograph Society, just for talking purposes. Then it's a no-brainer to name the periodical The AAPS Journal. As others have said, keeping things simple is usually a good strategy. And you're not pointing the emphasis towards machines or records, if that matters - although the record people have their own clubs and journals, right? I guess the two phono clubs are mostly hardware related, but also naturally with coverage of the media we play on that hardware - but still coming from the machine standpoint overall. In The Groove was always sort of non-descriptive and hackneyed in my (likely insignificant) opinion, although I can see how it would have sentimental value for some. I used to belong to MAPS in order to receive it, but dropped out when its quality declined a few years back. Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Jul 11, 2013, at 12:58 PM, Paul Christenzen pic...@gmail.com 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: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] 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: srsel...@aol.com srsel...@aol.com To: Phono-l@oldcrank.org 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
Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name
I also disagree with the merger. Each organization is unique in it's own way. Both publications are great. ITG focuses on all phonographs, even ones from the 1950's, and The Sound Box covers the earlier ones. I know Steve already said that. I like ITG because it has different writers than the Sound Box. I like the free want adds, chapter news, how to articles, foreign machines by Anthony Sinclair. and the many other different articles. Both publications do not overlap. I also like the 6 issues as opposed to 4 issues of Sound Box. Even though I'm opposed to the 2 clubs merging, I know that they will judging from the consensus. If they merge, I hope the new publication will have the features of ITG. What ever is best for the hobby. Harvey Kravitz From: Jim Nichol jnic...@fuse.net To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 1:11 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name 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 pic...@gmail.com 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: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] 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: srsel...@aol.com srsel...@aol.com To: Phono-l@oldcrank.org 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
Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name
Just my humble opinion, but I have always liked the name In the Groove and will be sorry to see it go if it is voted down. I also really like the current format and design of the publication. I hope that will not change. Melissa From: Peter Fraser pjfra...@mac.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Cc: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:04 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name If it's to be considered a new organization, I'd imagine it makes sense to give it a new name, let's say something like the American Antique Phonograph Society, just for talking purposes. Then it's a no-brainer to name the periodical The AAPS Journal. As others have said, keeping things simple is usually a good strategy. And you're not pointing the emphasis towards machines or records, if that matters - although the record people have their own clubs and journals, right? I guess the two phono clubs are mostly hardware related, but also naturally with coverage of the media we play on that hardware - but still coming from the machine standpoint overall. In The Groove was always sort of non-descriptive and hackneyed in my (likely insignificant) opinion, although I can see how it would have sentimental value for some. I used to belong to MAPS in order to receive it, but dropped out when its quality declined a few years back. Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Jul 11, 2013, at 12:58 PM, Paul Christenzen pic...@gmail.com 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: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] 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: srsel...@aol.com srsel...@aol.com To: Phono-l@oldcrank.org 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
Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name
I agree, 'In The Groove' always seemed like a upbeat and positive name. It's not stuffy or too academic and conveys that it's about records, music and phonographs. Bill Sent from my iPad On Jul 11, 2013, at 4:24 PM, Melissa Ricci riccib...@yahoo.com wrote: Just my humble opinion, but I have always liked the name In the Groove and will be sorry to see it go if it is voted down. I also really like the current format and design of the publication. I hope that will not change. Melissa From: Peter Fraser pjfra...@mac.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Cc: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:04 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name If it's to be considered a new organization, I'd imagine it makes sense to give it a new name, let's say something like the American Antique Phonograph Society, just for talking purposes. Then it's a no-brainer to name the periodical The AAPS Journal. As others have said, keeping things simple is usually a good strategy. And you're not pointing the emphasis towards machines or records, if that matters - although the record people have their own clubs and journals, right? I guess the two phono clubs are mostly hardware related, but also naturally with coverage of the media we play on that hardware - but still coming from the machine standpoint overall. In The Groove was always sort of non-descriptive and hackneyed in my (likely insignificant) opinion, although I can see how it would have sentimental value for some. I used to belong to MAPS in order to receive it, but dropped out when its quality declined a few years back. Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Jul 11, 2013, at 12:58 PM, Paul Christenzen pic...@gmail.com 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: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] 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: srsel...@aol.com srsel...@aol.com To: Phono-l@oldcrank.org 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
Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name
Any name probably beats Pumpkin Center Quarterly... ☺ From: b...@taney.com Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 17:06:47 -0500 To: phono-l@oldcrank.org Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name I agree, 'In The Groove' always seemed like a upbeat and positive name. It's not stuffy or too academic and conveys that it's about records, music and phonographs. Bill Sent from my iPad On Jul 11, 2013, at 4:24 PM, Melissa Ricci riccib...@yahoo.com wrote: Just my humble opinion, but I have always liked the name In the Groove and will be sorry to see it go if it is voted down. I also really like the current format and design of the publication. I hope that will not change. Melissa From: Peter Fraser pjfra...@mac.com To: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Cc: Antique Phonograph List phono-l@oldcrank.org Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:04 PM Subject: Re: [Phono-L] Proposed Merger of MAPS and APS and successorpublication name If it's to be considered a new organization, I'd imagine it makes sense to give it a new name, let's say something like the American Antique Phonograph Society, just for talking purposes. Then it's a no-brainer to name the periodical The AAPS Journal. As others have said, keeping things simple is usually a good strategy. And you're not pointing the emphasis towards machines or records, if that matters - although the record people have their own clubs and journals, right? I guess the two phono clubs are mostly hardware related, but also naturally with coverage of the media we play on that hardware - but still coming from the machine standpoint overall. In The Groove was always sort of non-descriptive and hackneyed in my (likely insignificant) opinion, although I can see how it would have sentimental value for some. I used to belong to MAPS in order to receive it, but dropped out when its quality declined a few years back. Sent from my iPhone -- Peter pjfra...@mac.com On Jul 11, 2013, at 12:58 PM, Paul Christenzen pic...@gmail.com 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: phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org [mailto:phono-l-boun...@oldcrank.org] 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: srsel...@aol.com srsel...@aol.com To: Phono-l@oldcrank.org 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
