Journal info (provided by editor)

% accepted last year
n/a
% immediately rejected last year
n/a
Articles published last year
n/a
Manuscripts received last year
n/a
Open access status
n/a
Manuscript handling fee
n/a

Impact factors (provided by editor)

Two-year impact factor
n/a
Five-year impact factor
n/a

Aims and scope

The editor has not yet provided this information.

Duration of manuscript handling phases

Duration first review round
4.0 months
Tot. handling time acc. manuscripts
7.6 months
Decision time immediate rejection
n/a
Average number of review rounds
2.5 rounds
Difficulty of reviewer comments
2.5 / 5.0 (moderate)
Average number of review reports
5.0 reports

Characteristics of peer review process

Quality of review reports
4.5 / 5.0
Overall rating manuscript handling
5.0 / 5.0

Latest review

First review round: 4.0 weeks. Overall rating: 5 (excellent). Outcome: Accepted.

Motivation:
I first approached the CMJ editor in 2010 about a 25-year retrospective of the importance of the Systems Concepts Digital Synthesizer project at Stanford. It turned into two articles plus a review that were all published together in the Fall 2013 issue. One article discussed the architecture of the Synthesizer, one the research project surrounding it, and the review focused on some of the music composed using it. Thus, this was a very big project with lots of technical and historical details to get right, and it took years to complete. The CMJ editorial staff was superb throughout; very supportive, with many valuable suggestions, responsive to my concerns, balanced and light with their editorial pens. A very enjoyable experience. They have my highest respect.