|
|
| I would vote for Musky Hunter. I think the information is about the same quality. Esox Angler is too expensive. I usually get both but lately have only been buying Esox angler if there is something I haven't read about.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1916
Location: Greenfield, WI | I have gotten and will get both for a long time to come. I know the people from both organizations. Both companies, overall, are filled with great people. There is no plausible reason to have one over the other. Both cater to our base interests, show us alot of nice fish, neat locations, and techniques that may or may not be new depending if you are previously familiar with them. If you aren't then, I guess that they are new!
Like Mr. Worrall said, it is unreasonable to expect "new" information in every issue.
Both are class acts. I vote for both! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 24
| For me, the preference is EA. Strictly for personal reasons, which are...
With my fishing lodge, I need to be multi-species, so the pike and walleye info is more in line with what I offer. My customers more often than not are multi species oriented also. Next, I don't have any musky in any of the nearby lakes. So the single pursuit of musky is not there for me. Does not mean I won't take that pursuit up sometime in the future... my son Mike is pretty addicted, so him and I will have to get out there one of these days, to see if the piker can keep up with a musky nut.
I will read Musky Hunter from time to time... there are some nice tactics that equate from musky to pike. But for the most part, I really spend more time with EA.
I do think there is a place for both mags.
All the best, |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1767
Location: Lake Country, Wisconsin | I get both....although I must admit, while I think both were successful in teaching me new things in the beginning the last year or so has been somewhat of a bore reading them. I understand how writing can be difficult though, so I will not criticize anyone. I will just say the initial excitement I used to have running to the mailbox no longer exists |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1168
| There's a place for both. I like reading about more than just muskies and have picked up a ton of insight on non esox articles in other publications as well. Heck, just reading up on trolling spoons for salmon tipped me off on what turned out to be some real, real good color patterns for muskie baits.
It's interesting watching the type of angler who buys 100% into what is written on those pages. It's as if some are brainwashed by MHM theories and that's all they can do. Hammer wind blown rocks and points...sure, a solid tactic but the resourceful individual will take what is written there and push it to another level beyond what they read. That's just one example. Or when a "new" tactic is unveiled in an article you don't even have to buy the magazines to know what it was on because you'll notice (at least I have) distinct changes in the way that people are targeting them...or if you do read the articles yourself you can predict what areas people will be pounding and what they'll be doing on those locations.
With so many more taking up this sport I can understand why articles seem regurgitated. There is a demographic of muskie anglers just getting into it who are looking for some "basics" and those to magazines are the first place they'll go. It was the first place I went, but once you get bitten by the bug and end up reading, re-reading, and re-reading every available muskie discussion, internet article, or book on the subject there are alot of things that will seem recycled. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 171
| Both. I fish for walleyes on Lake Erie, so EA is fun, but MH is all muskies. I'll keep getting both.
(My wife thinks EA is written better. She has a Journalism degree, and reads both.)
Erieboy75 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2024
| I'll agree with the statement that EA's QUALITY of written articles is far superior to MHM. I subscribe to MHM, but when I do pick up an EA, the content is much better. I'm getting tired of half the article talking about a big fish caught. Is it necessary to write a page, even three paragraphs on ONE fish??? Then there are those who don't even talk about a fish in their article. They get right down to the point which is what journalism is INTENDED to do: clear, concise, and coherent. Superfluous babble is boring in my opinion and serves no purpose. Makes the author look like he's trying to fill his "quota" of words and needed something extra to get himself there.
Just my .02 cents. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32926
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin |
My opinion, for what it's worth:
Both are excellent publications
Both try very hard to print a high quality publication
Both have similar stats, and that's reflected by the poll here
I think Big O is talented, and so is Steve Heiting
Both have been less than friendly with MuskieFIRST in the past, and perhaps recently both are beginning to understand we are NOT competition, they are what they are, and we are what we are...apples/oranges
I get both
I like both |
|
| |
|
| I've been subscribing to MHM for ~10 years and have enjoyed it - but starting to get burned out> I've purchaed EA a few times and generally been disappointed - the full cover price is very expensive and I didn't feel like it had much unique to offer. But on the other hand if I'd subscribed to EA for 10 yrs I'd probably have similar feelings about MHM.
|
|
| |
