now I see what ruffians you associate with! how did he dress cuntishly by the by

No solutions built to last
Just your petty scores to settle fast
The enemy (NME) meant nothing to you
And the maker (Melody Maker), well the maker of who
Your walkman generation
In search of sweet sedation
While forests choke under a lever sky
And the Exxon birds that will never fly

100 Years of Solitude - The Levellers

bucket. If I hear one more sad, 35 year-old man declaim 'Oh the NME's not like it used to be, y'know', I shall drop a piano on myself.

It's not the passing of some halcyon magazine age you're mourning, chum, it's your own youth. If you're not a teenager, then why do you feel you have any franchise in whether it is or isn't any good anyway? Shut up your face and get back to dribbling incontinently over Beirut, or Dan Deacon, or Emmy The Great, or somesuch insufferably worthy act.

"Oh, I remember receiving a Jesus and Mary Chain cover-mount flexi-disc in 1985. Its been downhill ever since." Excuse me while I anaesthetise my frontal lobes.

There's a shop in Soho that sells back-issues from the 80s and 90s. Go down there and tell me whether the Tim Booth cover emblazoned "Are James ready for superstardom?" strikes you as eternally relevant.

The point is, its not mean to be. NME's a defiantly pop-music oriented weekly aimed at actual young people, not those who merely fantasise about an idealised youth.

Alternatively, if you want to be all snooty and grown-up, you can read Kev Kharas or Dom Passantino talking down to you and polishing their scenester credentials right here right now. Go do it!

Conor may be a dick, but guys, have you ever actually met Sean Adams? Bit of a dick.

was a dumb reply. but they need to pick better music.

it's not just nostalgia. Pick up an issue from 2000 and compare it to now, it's really fucking depressing.

The 'beating heart of the new independent music scene' is what it should be.

THEY REVIEW 4 GIGS A WEEK.

FOUR. A fucking disgrace. Sponsored by Shockwaves.

i'd cover up the number and make a guess at what score it got. I was nearly always wrong (except for the "big" half page spread reviews which were fairly obvious to guess).

Someone told me a few years a Biffy album (either infinity land or vertigo of bliss) was meant to get a 9 but it got a 7 or something. That was the first time i'd heard about that rule.

but it makes so much sense. I cringe every time I see the column: "I want to dress like".

the ratings can be changed, but that's because they only use 9 and 10 for things which are "year-defining" in their books (so naturally, not what you might want to see get a 9 or 10). The reviews editor is actually a lovely chap, who never changed my work too much. Also, some PR companies say that they don't want the review of their act printed if it's given less than X/10.

But aside from that, I don't like what the NME has become (but then, I no longer like the bands I liked at the time I bought NME regularly, so perhaps it is an age thing?)

It was similar for me to be honest, but then I realised DiS was just as bad. :D

when The Tears album was apprently downgraded from a ten to an eight.Bizzarre but apparently true

how would you target the older age group?

I'd like to see longer more in depth articles on a wider range of acts and I'd like to see more live reviews.

is the downgrading thing an issue at moment? they need to start reviewing decent bands in the first place i think.

i would get rid of the pictures, the columns,the paragraphs, the words, the ink and maybe even the paper. then i would just throw my money down a drain to simulate the feeling of purchasing a copy......i would also call this new way of buying it 'nu-drain'

in the way that people want, it would cease to exist. There's not a big enough market for that kind of weekly paper - if there was Plan B, Artrocker or Stool Pigeon would have stepped up to the mark.

Get used to - it's just nostalgia that keeps everyone bemoaning the state of the NME. I can live without it.