Keep the same zine title? Or use differant ones? Which do you prefer?

[Craven Rock]

I've always thought that it was a good idea to keep the same zine title to establish familiarity. Zine people are usually less known for their names than their zine titles. Even when some of the big guns, like Al Burian when he put out stuff under a title other than his regular one, Burn Collector (was it Fabulous Disasters or something like that?) it seemed to get a lot less attention.

I always try to talk my friends into keeping a regular zine title for that reason. I'm sure there's some zines by people that I like to read that have went under the radar because I didn't know it was their writing. Hell, I've probably read plenty of reviews of these zines and not even known.

I must note, though, that right now, my zine is getting kind of awkward, though. Because I've started a sub-series, and I've started tagging it with my old title like this: "Eaves of Ass Presents: Promise & Theft" (Eaves is my old title). But I still think it's a good idea to associate it with my old zine. There's also a comforting personal familiarity there.

[Tom Hendricks]

Keeping the same zine title also makes it easier for past readers to re connect.

My Dallas zine Musea (leading the art and media revolution including post-bands music)  has had that name almost since its start in 1992 (18 years). It actually started as Muse News, but a piano teachers newsletter from Houston said they had that name, and I had to change - so I went to Musea and have stuck with it since.