I think you’re missing my point – The Guardian, unlike Classic Rock, doesn’t claim to specialise in one genre, but pretends to have a more general coverage. But it emphasises lo-fi hipster-indie, which is every bit as much a minority taste as prog-metal.

In another thread, Hann admits that one reason they’re so narrow is that budget cuts prevent the use of freelance reviewers, so they’re stick with the staff writers, who groupthink terrible.

Tim: “Or is it simply Opeth are further from their comfort zone than hipster-indie?”

I actually agree with the Guardian here. They HAVE to review “artists one would expect to see reviewed in the Guardian”. Otherwise they wouldn’t be artists one expects to see in the Guradian

Any publication has a bias to a certain type of artist — yes, a comfort zone — and will employ reviewers who understand how to review those artists. The punter pays his money for that publication in full knowledge of what that publication’s comfort zone is. If he doesn’t like it, there are alternative publications that will cater to his tastes.

To look at it another way, if you saw a letter in Classic Rock magazine complaining that they aren’t reviewing the latest Dizzy Rascal album, what would be your immediate thought about that letter writer?

Still, I’d rather have him than Tim Jonze. I’ll never forget time time just after I’d written an angry rant of blog post that basically ripped Jonze a new arsehole, when I went to a gig and member of the band came up to me and told me how much he agreed with what I’d written.

I provided the spleen, he replied with the somewhat less than idéal maunderings of a small-minded man.