| K3GWB |
Rating:  |
2010-12-30 | |
| Give me old issues |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
I agree with those who think it's declined. I go all the way back to when it was the size National Geographic still is. I enjoy old, back-issues more.
First of all, so much of what is in QST could as easily be relegated to the ARRL web site only. Contest results, section news, calendars of events, etc. could go online to make room for construction articles, introductions to new technologies, etc.
To me, QEX was a "take away;" half of its content ought to be in QST, but there isn't room what with all the need for SCM's et. al. to see their callsigns in print. To say nothing of the preaching to the public service choir.
The publishers and editors of QST don't want to hear it. To their minds, they've made great decisions, and those of us who don't like the publication, "should" like what they've done to it...the problem is the readership, not the editorial staff. It reminds me of the old "Wagner's music is better than it sounds" quote.
One wonders what would become of QST if it could be de-coupled from ARRL membership, or what would become of ARRL membership if there were an "online only" membership. Or even a choice to have QEX instead of QST, rather than in addition?
Now they have upped the ante where to see all of the online archives, you have to tack on a "Diamond Club" membership to the tune of $75 to $250 extra.
Like it or not, since they've coupled QST to ARRL membership, a lot of people will make or break the ARRL membership decision based on the monthly rag. And just now and in recent years, QST (and the associated archives) just aren't pulling their weight in the value proposition.
|
|
| W4ABW |
Rating: |
2010-12-30 | |
| QST Magazine |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
| What can I say, as a Life Member its really free since I have been a lifer since the 70s. Lots of ads are like reading the newspaper ads.Tech stuff is usually over my head. Operating stuff and DX column are my favorites. |
|
| N0YXB |
Rating: |
2010-12-29 | |
| Very good publication. |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
| I really like QST. The January 2011 DIY issue is fantastic. QST does a good job of including articles that represent a broad spectrum of interests, including homebrewing, contesting, DXpeditions, news, and many other facets of amateur radio. I agree with N1KDO, write an article if you're not happy with the magazine. I know many of you have experiences and knowledge that would be of interest to the rest of us. I look forward to the arrival of each month's new issue. |
|
| N1KDO |
Rating: |
2010-12-29 | |
| Write for QST |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
I like QST. Always have. However, I don't join ARRL to subscribe to the magazine, I am a member because they they promote and support my beloved hobby. Getting the magazine is just a bonus.
I believe the league has a large problem with QST (and to some degree QEX...) Most of the articles are submitted by hams, and they are not paying a lot for those articles. I've written for QST, and I can tell you, you are not going to get rich doing that.
With that said, if you don't like the content in QST, **write an article** or more. Give them some good stuff to publish! That will help everybody. Have you created something special for your shack or your mobile setup? Write an article! Did you do something interesting for Field Day? Write an article! They will pay you for your article, and mail you a nice certificate, and you might even win the monthly plaque.
I also am a RSGB member, and I will admit, this is mostly to get their magazine "RadCom". There are some excellent technical articles in RadCom, there is a lot of stuff for beginners, and then there is some stuff that is interesting, but mostly useless to a US-based ham.
But back to my point: most of the content in QST is NOT created in Newington, it is articles written by hams such as yourselves. You can help to improve the magazine by writing for it.
I hope you do.
|
|
| W2UIS |
Rating: |
2010-12-29 | |
| Good Publication |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
| The editors of QST do a remarkable job publishing a magazine to satisfy members with a variety of amateur radio interests. If you read all the articles you will learn so much more about amateur radio. |
|
| K6BSO |
Rating: |
2010-12-29 | |
| Good, Could Be Better |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
| I've only been a subscriber for a little over a year now but my impression of the magazine is this: Way too many pages devoted to contest results (they have NCJ for that) and emcomm (how much attention does that really need? Emcomm is emcomm), not enough on homebrew and other projects. QEX is interesting but often the projects profiled are too involved and expensive for most hams to accomplish. QST should be the magazine for the average ham, with more how-to articles that those of us with limited time and funds can make use of. |
|
| N4VNV |
Rating: |
2010-12-29 | |
| VERY POOR |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
I was a member of ARRL since 1980 and I've seen the organization go from responsive to all members and a very good QST, to the condition now which is to pander to the money people and the rest of us can go suck an egg. The magazine has newer members who didn't see the backward slide it has gone through. Also many years ago there was a mail-in survey in every issue, with questions to answer and room for "other" comments. Now if you EVEN GET A RESPONSE from the ARRL, it's just so much smoke and mirrors with no substance to it. Finally, with heavy heart I let my membership expire. I have no reason to believe there will be any improvement in the group or the QST.
----------------------
Earlier 1-star review posted by N4VNV on 2008-10-10
Not sure but think I started my subscription in 1979. My interests have changed over the years, and now I care very little for the magazine. HOWEVER, that being said I have been maintaining my membership anyway until NOW. The last couple years letters and articles have been published about "fat people". I have complained to the ARRL reps (in writing) and they refuse to respond. Ham radio IS a sedentary hobby. If you didn't have fat people you would lose over half your membership. ARRL has NO BUSINESS getting into this at all. Most overweight people have physical problems, inherited traits, AND old age that contribute to their condition. To be fair, you should now write articles about the dangers of smoking, drinking alchohol, drugs, etc. And don't even get me started on the "talking on the radio while driving" thing. What's next, people with blue eyes refusing to talk to people with brown eyes? ANYWAY, the QST nor the ARRL will disappoint me any longer. My membership runs out next month, and I'm going to let it. |
|
| KE2IV |
Rating: |
2010-12-28 | |
| Inceasingly disappointing |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
I've been a life member of the League for many years and find that QST has very much declined from what it once was. To some extent the magazine reflects the state of ham radio -- and perhaps that's the larger problem that QST's decline represents.
Nonetheless, certainly the magazine seems much "dumbed down" from the past when it had elements of being a serious technical journal. Nowadays, there are few technical articles and those are mainly superficial. Perhaps most of the "meat" has now migrated to QEX? If so, that's unfair to the members who should get a good general journal for their membership dollars.
And I concur with one commentator here that the product reviews, particularly of MFJ products, fail to tell the whole story (i.e. mediocre construction). The dependence on MFJ advertising definitely seems to have co-opted the concept of impartial and objective product reviews. All too often now, product reviews read more like industry press releases.
It's really too bad -- QST was once a great special interest magazine. Now, its but a shadow of its former self. |
|
| KG4RUL |
Rating: |
2010-12-28 | |
| A good, general interest, Amateur Radio publication |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
| QST fits the niche of a general interest magazine for Amateur Radio operators. To those who feel it lacks technical content, do as I have done and get a subscription to QEX. |
|
| KD8MJR |
Rating: |
2010-12-28 | |
| Boring |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
They need to talk more about equipment and technical issues and less about what some Operator in kansas is doing.
|
|
