Sky at night reviews...

[FLO]

... are getting better.

They seem to be more objective and revealing of late - IMHO.

Nice one chaps

PS: Patrick Moores piano music...... ?

[GazOC]

The binos ones Steve? They were good wern't they? The CCD that Pete L did was a good one as well, the rest were very poor IMHO. The mags on thin ice with me TBH. I find I'm paying money for a CD I don't use and a mag that gives 'iffy' reviews.

I agree on the piano music (and the art from last month).....

[Naz]

Don't think I will bother again, and will not take out a subscription, not at the cost for Europe, certainly not as good as the first issues. The last cd, I didn't bother looking at!

naz

[Albireo380]

I know what you mean. Guys. The reviews seems to be getting more superficial and less critical. I had bought a few issues last Winter, and quite liked them. I had also enjoyed the CD. But I looked at the last 2 issues, bought the first - regretted it - a lot of cash to see Mrs Moore's paintings. Didn't even buy the July copy.

Got my subscription to "Practical Astronomer" instead - loved the first two issues.

Tom

[Ambermile]

Got my subscription to "Practical Astronomer" instead - loved the first two issues.

Tom

Yup - me too now. Tried S@N for the year but just got disllusioned. The "Arts" were the final straw for me. Gone back the SandT and Practical Astronomer because PA is full of what I want to read and SandT is just full of what I want

Arthur