Re playing audio bits, that is another story. He has permission of only
a few labels (Naxos e.g.) to use their recordings in his videos.
I know some people are very attached to Hurwitz' youtube reviews, and I understand why. Someone whom you see on video a lot becomes a kind of imaginary friend. Some people call him 'Big Dave', I don't know why.what orchestras effortlessly do these days. Used to be orchestras had a hard time performing just one of these pieces.
Recently I chanced upon Hurwitz talking about a new Simon Rattle cd, with the three early Stravinsky ballets, played by the LSO. These cds were recorded live, with Rattle conducting the three ballets in a single concert. That's pretty amazing, but it's
The concert was in 2017 and I recall reviews saying it was a great night and, naturally, with such an hectic program, there were some ups and downs. Same with the reviews of the cd, with one exception, i.e. Hurwitz, who slaughters the cd in the mostbrutal terms.
One feature of this review really bugs me. Hurwitz illustrates his points with musical examples, that is, he sings (for instance) the opening of the Sacre in a funny voice with a "gotta puke" face. Of course we're intended to think this is how therecord sounds, but of course it doesn't. It's a parody. Or maybe I should just say, it's a travesty.
Previously (I seem to recall a Sibelius review) Hurwitz was able to play audio bits while holding up the cd-booklet for the camera, so technically there is no reason why he would not play the Sacre opening for us, so we could hear what it really soundslike, and decide for ourselves. But I guess he thought it was more fun to do it like this.
I think it's unethical.call the Conductor Shuffle. Go and look it up yourself, but it's a totally nonsensical setup that's only constructed in order to make Rattle look bad, because he has recorded with various orchestras, like all conductors have done since the beginning of
I also couldn't help but notice that every single Rattle review on Hurwitz channel is negative. Even a video with 'ten best recordings' by Rattle starts with an extensive prologue on some terrible new development in the recording industry which Hurwitz
So I guess this fine Stravinsky cd was another opportunity to trot out the shoot-rattle-guns.
On Friday, December 2, 2022 at 1:34:42 PM UTC+1, Gerard wrote:
That's funny. The entire Stravinsky CD is on youtube, in Rattle's channel. However, no matter how you slice it, the singing is just no good. Obviously it bears not the slightest resemblance to what's on the CD.
Re playing audio bits, that is another story. He has permission of only
a few labels (Naxos e.g.) to use their recordings in his videos.
I should add that I could not in any way be identified as a Simon Rattle fan. I think he's a good conductor, but not very compelling. I suspect he's very well liked by the orchestra. I have maybe two or three of his CDs. My OP was about bad criticism.
And, yes, I know writing negative reviews creates admiration in some quarters. I seem to recall, for instance, the marcsman upbraiding Mandryka for never being negative, never rejecting music or performers. It was unmanly.
I looked through whatever other reviews of the Rattle disc I could find. A couple were unqualified raves. The others (3 or 4, I think) were qualified, but positive. These all mentioned a certain lack of excitement or blandness, and a lack ofstorytelling. One said the playing was too fast, one too slow. I haven't listened to Hurwitz's review, but I can imagine being incensed by a bland Rite. What would be the point of that?
On Friday, December 2, 2022 at 5:11:32 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
storytelling. One said the playing was too fast, one too slow. I haven't listened to Hurwitz's review, but I can imagine being incensed by a bland Rite. What would be the point of that?I looked through whatever other reviews of the Rattle disc I could find. A couple were unqualified raves. The others (3 or 4, I think) were qualified, but positive. These all mentioned a certain lack of excitement or blandness, and a lack of
From what I've seen I get the impression that there is some dissatisfaction over L'oiseau. Petrushka everybody loves, and in the Sacre Rattle would could as a specialist, or rather, a conductor who's done the Sacre a lot.soloists get a lot of leeway, and rightly so.
Hurwitz' problem with the Sacre is that it doesn't sound the way he's used to. The bassoon solo at the start is too plaintive. I could imagine this is how the bassoon soloist feels about it, and Rattle said okay, have at it. In Europe, woodwind
This is the part Hurwitz sings with a whiney voice.
The thing with Stravinsky is that orchestras / conductors don't perform his music anymore the way Bernstein did in 1960. It's not all raw and rhythm anymore. There is more focus on beauty.
Hurwitz sings occasionally to remind the viewer of the melody he is talking about at the time. The fact that he has no voice does not prevent me from recognizing the melody. If I were to do that, you probably couldn't recognize the melody. That's howbadly I sing. Though the tone of my voice is more pleasant than Hurwitz's. I don't get why you think it's such a big deal.
Hurwitz' problem with the Sacre is that it doesn't sound the way he's
used to. The bassoon solo at the start is too plaintive. I could
imagine this is how the bassoon soloist feels about it, and Rattle
said okay, have at it. In Europe, woodwind soloists get a lot of
leeway, and rightly so.
I'm waiting for Arri to comment, but I'm pretty sure the opening of the Sacre is a big thing for every bassoonist and no one plays this as if they don't care, which is more or less what Hurwitz is suggesting.
Re playing audio bits, that is another story. He
has permission of only a few labels (Naxos e.g.)
to use their recordings in his videos. Nevertheless
he encounters a lot of trouble by Youtube, while he
can prove that he has all required rights to use
fragments from recordings of those labels.
I know some people are very attached to Hurwitz' youtube reviews, and I understand why. Hurwitz, who slaughters the cd in the most brutal terms.record sounds, but of course it doesn't. It's a parody. Or maybe I should just say, it's a travesty.
One feature of this review really bugs me. Hurwitz illustrates his points with musical examples, that is, he sings (for instance) the opening of the Sacre in a funny voice with a "gotta puke" face. Of course we're intended to think this is how the
I think it's unethical.call the Conductor Shuffle. Go and look it up yourself, but it's a totally nonsensical setup that's only constructed in order to make Rattle look bad, because he has recorded with various orchestras, like all conductors have done since the beginning of
I also couldn't help but notice that every single Rattle review on Hurwitz channel is negative. Even a video with 'ten best recordings' by Rattle starts with an extensive prologue on some terrible new development in the recording industry which Hurwitz
I think that as Hurwitz has achieved - rightly - acclaim for his
industry in producing so many valuable videos he has become less
inhibited. Not that I know this from personal experience (!) but after getting constant praise (check out the YT comments) some perspective is
lost - this is fondly called the "Shit Gold" syndrome.
On Saturday, December 3, 2022 at 12:34:23 AM UTC+1, Notsure01 wrote:
Not that I know this from personal experience (!) but afterHave you looked comments under classical music in general? They're always effusively positive. The admiration of youtube junkies is relentless and you can't do anything wrong.
getting constant praise (check out the YT comments) some perspective is
lost - this is fondly called the "Shit Gold" syndrome.
If we were all satisfied with just any good performance -- then
there would be nothing to discuss!!
It's when people want to nitpick among good performances that I
sometimes feel less interested....
On Saturday, December 3, 2022 at 12:34:23 AM UTC+1, Notsure01 wrote:
I think that as Hurwitz has achieved - rightly - acclaim for his
industry in producing so many valuable videos he has become less inhibited. Not that I know this from personal experience (!) but after getting constant praise (check out the YT comments) some perspective is lost - this is fondly called the "Shit Gold" syndrome.
Have you looked comments under classical music in general? They're always effusively positive. The admiration of youtube junkies is relentless and you can't do anything wrong.
I think however that is only fair to be able to criticise, because we are in the game of comparisons for a lot of music that is over-produced, over-played, and over-recorded.
On its own, hearing the notes played perfectly might well be enough. But it isn't. With so much music recorded in good sound over the last 60 years, covering a whole gamut of artists, soloists and ensembles, in many recordings. then I fail to see whythe new kid on the block should necessarily garner enthusiastic reviews, unless it is warranted.
Not that Sir Rattle is a new kid, but he has never really threatened any of my favourites
On Saturday, December 3, 2022 at 12:34:23 AM UTC+1, Notsure01 wrote:
Have you looked comments under classical music in general? They're always effusively positive. The admiration of youtube junkies is relentless and you can't do anything wrong.
I think that as Hurwitz has achieved - rightly - acclaim for his
industry in producing so many valuable videos he has become less
inhibited. Not that I know this from personal experience (!) but after
getting constant praise (check out the YT comments) some perspective is
lost - this is fondly called the "Shit Gold" syndrome.
I know some people are very attached to Hurwitz' youtube reviews, and I understand why. Someone whom you see on video a lot becomes a kind of imaginary friend. Some people call him 'Big Dave', I don't know why.
Recently I chanced upon Hurwitz talking about a new Simon Rattle cd, with the three early Stravinsky ballets, played by the LSO. These cds were recorded live, with Rattle conducting the three ballets in a single concert. That's pretty amazing, but it'swhat orchestras effortlessly do these days. Used to be orchestras had a hard time performing just one of these pieces.
But aside from the gratuitous nastiness, what bothers me about this review is the implicit assumption that there is only one correct way of interpreting the Rite - savage and vehement. Sure, that is what one would want for a reference recording -something like Markevitch or Bernstein NYP. But there should be a case for different approaches also....
I have a problem with audio only versions of ballets I have seen, miss the stage action that was intended to be the reason for the music to exist. At the moment my favorite L'Oiseau is the Blue ray conducted by Gergiev. Yes, I know we are not supposedto like Gergiev, but the production is stunning. It accompanies a Rite. Both use recreations of the original sets, costumes and choreography, guess it is HIP. The Joffrey Rite also uses the original production. think it was the first in a long time, but
On Friday, 2 December 2022 at 23:34:23 UTC, Notsure01 wrote:something like Markevitch or Bernstein NYP. But there should be a case for different approaches also....
But aside from the gratuitous nastiness, what bothers me about this review is the implicit assumption that there is only one correct way of interpreting the Rite - savage and vehement. Sure, that is what one would want for a reference recording -
Absolutely. I'm no fan of Bernstein in Stravinsky and he'd be far from my reference. The conductor I do like in the Sacre is Seiji Ozawa. What he has is marvellous timing and a mastery of syncopation. The last pages are tremendous, and swing like theBasie band. No other recording does this. Mind, this is the Chicago SO and I'm sure a lot of the brass section can play jazz.
On Fri, 2 Dec 2022, Frank Berger wrote:
On 12/2/2022 11:58 AM, Herman wrote:
On Friday, December 2, 2022 at 5:11:32 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
I looked through whatever other reviews of the Rattle disc I could find. >>>> A couple were unqualified raves. The others (3 or 4, I think) wereFrom what I've seen I get the impression that there is some
qualified, but positive. These all mentioned a certain lack of excitement >>>> or blandness, and a lack of storytelling. One said the playing was too >>>> fast, one too slow. I haven't listened to Hurwitz's review, but I can
imagine being incensed by a bland Rite. What would be the point of that? >>>
dissatisfaction over L'oiseau. Petrushka everybody loves, and in the Sacre >>> Rattle would could as a specialist, or rather, a conductor who's done the >>> Sacre a lot.
Hurwitz' problem with the Sacre is that it doesn't sound the way he's used >>> to. The bassoon solo at the start is too plaintive. I could imagine this >>> is how the bassoon soloist feels about it, and Rattle said okay, have at >>> it. In Europe, woodwind soloists get a lot of leeway, and rightly so.
This is the part Hurwitz sings with a whiney voice.
The thing with Stravinsky is that orchestras / conductors don't perform
his music anymore the way Bernstein did in 1960. It's not all raw and
rhythm anymore. There is more focus on beauty.
Hurwitz sings occasionally to remind the viewer of the melody he is talking >> about at the time. The fact that he has no voice does not prevent me from
recognizing the melody. If I were to do that, you probably couldn't
recognize the melody. That's how badly I sing. Though the tone of my voice >> is more pleasant than Hurwitz's. I don't get why you think it's such a big >> deal.
I agree his singing does convey the melody, although it occasionally
drives me up a wall; it's best if relatively brief. He has repeatedly mentioned he once sang in a choir, and he recognizes his voice isn't
what it once was, but still.... It would be great if he could get
permission from more labels to play excerpts, but as Gerard has
noted they have not, I presume they, or their lawyers, do not
want even full youtube videos quoted out of context, especially not
when in conjunction with criticism. That, even though in his specific
case, his illustrations/singing is almost always to illustrate the
music - this Rattle example (I have not heard it) is apparently
an exception.
DH does make clear his views (or prejudices) on certain conductors:
Mackerras (almost always yes), Neeme Jarvi (generally yes), Rattle
(generally no). and so on. Does this matter, so long as any
prejudices are far from hidden? ANd they are not absolute. Atter
recently listening to a recording of "The Bells" I was curious as to
his recommendation: at least as of a year ago, it was overwhelmingly
for Rattle/BPO, which he noted had shocked him.
On 12/2/2022 11:58 AM, Herman wrote:
On Friday, December 2, 2022 at 5:11:32 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
I looked through whatever other reviews of the Rattle disc I could find. A >>> couple were unqualified raves. The others (3 or 4, I think) were
qualified, but positive. These all mentioned a certain lack of excitement >>> or blandness, and a lack of storytelling. One said the playing was too
fast, one too slow. I haven't listened to Hurwitz's review, but I can
imagine being incensed by a bland Rite. What would be the point of that?
From what I've seen I get the impression that there is some
dissatisfaction over L'oiseau. Petrushka everybody loves, and in the Sacre >> Rattle would could as a specialist, or rather, a conductor who's done the
Sacre a lot.
Hurwitz' problem with the Sacre is that it doesn't sound the way he's used >> to. The bassoon solo at the start is too plaintive. I could imagine this is >> how the bassoon soloist feels about it, and Rattle said okay, have at it.
In Europe, woodwind soloists get a lot of leeway, and rightly so.
This is the part Hurwitz sings with a whiney voice.
The thing with Stravinsky is that orchestras / conductors don't perform his >> music anymore the way Bernstein did in 1960. It's not all raw and rhythm
anymore. There is more focus on beauty.
Hurwitz sings occasionally to remind the viewer of the melody he is talking about at the time. The fact that he has no voice does not prevent me from recognizing the melody. If I were to do that, you probably couldn't recognize the melody. That's how badly I sing. Though the tone of my voice is more pleasant than Hurwitz's. I don't get why you think it's such a big deal.
If we can have a performance of Parsifal set among Orangutans in a forest in Borneo, why can't we have a Rite performance that lets us appreciate the details of scoring?
On Fri, 2 Dec 2022, Notsure01 wrote:
If we can have a performance of Parsifal set among Orangutans in a
forest in Borneo, why can't we have a Rite performance that lets us
appreciate the details of scoring?
Are you concerned that with that remark you have managed to demolish
your own case?
DH does make clear his views (or prejudices) on certain conductors:
Mackerras (almost always yes), Neeme Jarvi (generally yes), Rattle
(generally no). and so on. Does this matter, so long as any
prejudices are far from hidden?
I'm watching, we can enjoy Osbert Lancaster's wonderful set designs.
Mind you, video of some ballets can be fairly uninspiring in my opinion unless you're a fan of endless jetees, arabesques, entre chats etc. The first act of Coppelia seems to go on forever without all that much happening. At least in the production
My point is that the nasty reaction of Hurwitz is not called for -
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 5:09:42 AM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
ROTTEN IDIOT !!!
The reality of this locale is that absolutely no one is allowed to speak his mind or voice an opinion but you.
Absolutely no one. Voicing an opinion here other than "Dick is so right" means you're going to get blasted, shouted at and vituperated.
ROTTEN IDIOT !!!
I get it that sometimes being outrageous makes things
interesting, but although I can see - and mostly agree
with - the points he is making, he is too negative here.
The opening can show the relative
merits of French and German bassoons.
I know some people are very attached to Hurwitz' youtube reviews,
.....
So I guess this fine Stravinsky cd was another
opportunity to trot out the shoot-rattle-guns.
On Saturday, December 3, 2022 at 12:34:23 AM UTC+1, Notsure01 wrote:
I think that as Hurwitz has achieved - rightly - acclaim for his
industry in producing so many valuable videos he has become less
inhibited. Not that I know this from personal experience (!) but after getting constant praise (check out the YT comments) some perspective is lost - this is fondly called the "Shit Gold" syndrome.
Have you looked comments under classical music in general?
They're always effusively positive. The admiration of youtube
junkies is relentless and you can't do anything wrong.
Not that Sir Rattle is a new kid, but he has
never really threatened any of my favourites
Are you sure? Have you read my comments on YouTube?
On Friday, December 2, 2022 at 3:59:15 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:
I know some people are very attached to Hurwitz' youtube reviews,
.....
So I guess this fine Stravinsky cd was another
opportunity to trot out the shoot-rattle-guns.
You just wasted a lot of words
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 5:42:55 AM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
Are you sure? Have you read my comments on YouTube?
OMG your narcissicism is really too big for this world.
On Saturday, December 3, 2022 at 6:01:21 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
My point is that the nasty reaction of Hurwitz is not called for -
Are you suggesting people should hold their opinions privately
and never publish them unless and until they are "called for"?
DH has the same rights as everyone else to speak about what
he likes, or dislikes, or agrees with, or doesn't agree with, as any
other person on this planet (and the rest of the galaxy as well).
And he does this honestly, openly and fairly, unlike trolls who
hide like you behind catchy pseudonyms. Agree or disagree
with what people say, but refrain from claiming anyone's
opinions are "uncalled for". This is the very essence of
cultural, social and political censorship.
ROTTEN IDIOT !!!
dk
On Saturday, December 3, 2022 at 8:50:05 PM UTC-8, Herman wrote:
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 5:42:55 AM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
Are you sure? Have you read my comments on YouTube?
OMG your narcissicism is really too big for this world.Ignoring context and hanging topic as usual.
As you already admiited, you are a dishonest,
brainfucked imbecile woke.
dk
On Saturday, December 3, 2022 at 6:01:21 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
My point is that the nasty reaction of Hurwitz is not called for -
Are you suggesting people should hold their opinions privately
and never publish them unless and until they are "called for"?
DH has the same rights as everyone else to speak about what
he likes, or dislikes, or agrees with, or doesn't agree with, as any
other person on this planet (and the rest of the galaxy as well).
And he does this honestly, openly and fairly, unlike trolls who
hide like you behind catchy pseudonyms. Agree or disagree
with what people say, but refrain from claiming anyone's
opinions are "uncalled for". This is the very essence of
cultural, social and political censorship.
ROTTEN IDIOT !!!
dk
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 5:42:55 AM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
Are you sure? Have you read my comments on YouTube?
OMG your narcissicism is really too big for this world.
On 12/3/22 11:09 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
On Saturday, December 3, 2022 at 6:01:21 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
My point is that the nasty reaction of Hurwitz is not called for -
Are you suggesting people should hold their opinions privately
and never publish them unless and until they are "called for"?
DH has the same rights as everyone else to speak about what
he likes, or dislikes, or agrees with, or doesn't agree with, as any
other person on this planet (and the rest of the galaxy as well).
And he does this honestly, openly and fairly, unlike trolls who
hide like you behind catchy pseudonyms. Agree or disagree
with what people say, but refrain from claiming anyone's
opinions are "uncalled for". This is the very essence of
cultural, social and political censorship.
ROTTEN IDIOT !!!
At last - now I finally really feel part of this group! I've been
insulted!! And if I stay here long enough -- do I get to "brainfuck"? (NotSure what this means but might want try it once...)
And - by the way - and I have this right from a source I really respect
-- *NotSure* has the same rights as everyone else to speak about what he likes, or dislikes, or agrees with, or doesn't agree with, as any other person on this planet (and the rest of the galaxy as well).
IMHO the case is pretty much closed. The debate is
clearly free open speech versus hypocritical politically
correct pretense promoted by a self appointed, "moral
majority" with hidden agendas and fuzzy, unspoken
criteria.
Most people come here to escape the MAGA vs woke brain rot, ....
Sounds nice, I guess, maybe. But to be clear, this is definitely
the stupidest stream to which I presently subject myself. It's no
escape -- more the opposite.
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 8:04:49 AM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
IMHO the case is pretty much closed. The debate is
clearly free open speech versus hypocritical politically
correct pretense promoted by a self appointed, "moral
majority" with hidden agendas and fuzzy, unspoken
criteria.
No it's not.
You are not the moderator or boss of this ng.
Also this is not a political group.
Most people come here to escape
the MAGA vs woke brain rot, while
you're desperate to import it here.
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 12:45:10 AM UTC+1, Al Eisner wrote:
DH does make clear his views (or prejudices) on certain conductors: Mackerras (almost always yes), Neeme Jarvi (generally yes), Rattle (generally no). and so on. Does this matter, so long as anyOf course it matters, especially if the carping on the British or those funny Europeans is intended to win over the viewers, 'I'm the honest guy here.'
prejudices are far from hidden?
DH is totally in Chandos' pocket as showed again by picking the Scottish National as one of the world's top orchestras - an orchestra he's never come close of hearing live and whose sound (as DH knows it) is 100% a Chandos creation.
On Friday, December 2, 2022 at 11:47:32 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:
The opening can show the relative
merits of French and German bassoons.
Racist! ;-)
Aren''t all bassoons created equal? ;-)
dk
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 3:37:35 PM UTC+11, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, December 2, 2022 at 11:47:32 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:
The opening can show the relative
merits of French and German bassoons.
Racist! ;-)
Aren''t all bassoons created equal? ;-)
dkThe only French bassoons you are likely to hear these days are either the ones used by Couperin, Lully and Lalande, or the ones used by Les Siecles for Berlioz and Ravel.
On 12/3/22 11:09 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
On Saturday, December 3, 2022 at 6:01:21 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
My point is that the nasty reaction of Hurwitz is not called for -
Are you suggesting people should hold their opinions privately
and never publish them unless and until they are "called for"?
DH has the same rights as everyone else to speak about what
he likes, or dislikes, or agrees with, or doesn't agree with, as any
other person on this planet (and the rest of the galaxy as well).
And he does this honestly, openly and fairly, unlike trolls who
hide like you behind catchy pseudonyms. Agree or disagree
with what people say, but refrain from claiming anyone's
opinions are "uncalled for". This is the very essence of
cultural, social and political censorship.
ROTTEN IDIOT !!!
dk
(Sorry - with my elation from the insult my post got garbled)
At last - now I finally really feel part of this group! I've been
insulted!! And if I stay here long enough -- do I get to "brainfuck"? (NotSure what this means but might want to try it once...)
And - by the way - and I have this directly from a source I really
respect -- *NotSure* has the same rights as everyone else to speak about
what he likes, or dislikes, or agrees with, or doesn't agree with, as
any other person on this planet (and the rest of the galaxy as well).
I think Big D allows himself to praise the RSNO because while it is British, it has the advantage of not being English
What worries me is the reasoning
(or lack of it) behind the prejudices.
DH on Rattle is increasingly
as irrational as Goebbels on
Mendelssohn.
What worries me is the reasoning (or lack of it) behind the prejudices. DH on Rattle is increasingly as irrational as Goebbels on Mendelssohn.
DH is entitled to his taste and
his opinions. He does not have
to justify his taste or opinions.
The same also applies to you
and everyone else.
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 4:40:21 PM UTC+11, Notsure01 wrote:courtesy one might expect in a discussion of this topic.
On 12/3/22 11:09 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
On Saturday, December 3, 2022 at 6:01:21 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:At last - now I finally really feel part of this group! I've been
Agree or disagree
My point is that the nasty reaction of Hurwitz is not called for -
with what people say, but refrain from claiming anyone's
opinions are "uncalled for". This is the very essence of
cultural, social and political censorship.
ROTTEN IDIOT !!!
dk
insulted!!
Well, Not, you are very welcome to join the small group of posters here who are actually trying to discuss recordings - including programmes on streaming services - of classical music, with minimal reference to ideological baggage and the degree of
Andrew Clarke
On 12/4/22 4:08 AM, Andrew Clarke wrote:
courtesy one might expect in a discussion of this topic.Well, Not, you are very welcome to join the small group of posters here who are actually trying to discuss recordings - including programmes on streaming services - of classical music, with minimal reference to ideological baggage and the degree of
Some squabbling is inevitable, but I'm truly puzzled by how heated the argument gets here. Certainly it is an Internet-wide phenomenon, but it
just seems more logical that people would get exercised about religion,
or politics, or even sports than about the kind of artistic choices that fascinate us here.
The 'squabbling' is not about music. It's about ego.
The squabbling is not about "ego". It is about the blatant attempt
by a small group of EUs (which according to you amount to an
"ethnicity") to control the manner of discourse in this ng by
accusing others of "racism". You really need to have that mirror
repaired.
In article <677f2afe-1ed6-4782...@googlegroups.com>,
Dan Koren <dan....@gmail.com> wrote:
The squabbling is not about "ego". It is about the
blatant attempt by a small group of EUs (which
according to you amount to an "ethnicity") to
control the manner of discourse in this ng by
accusing others of "racism". You really need
to have that mirror repaired.
I've had enough. You're a total egomaniac,
and I will not be reading any more of your
posts.
On 12/4/22 5:34 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:14:02 PM UTC-8, Todd M. McComb wrote:
In article <677f2afe-1ed6-4782...@googlegroups.com>,
Dan Koren <dan....@gmail.com> wrote:
The squabbling is not about "ego". It is about the
blatant attempt by a small group of EUs (which
according to you amount to an "ethnicity") to
control the manner of discourse in this ng by
accusing others of "racism". You really need
to have that mirror repaired.
I've had enough. You're a total egomaniac,
and I will not be reading any more of your
posts.
As stated so many times already, this group
is an open discussion forum. Anyone can
post (or not) and anyone can read (or not)
anyone else's posts.
If you or anyone else woul like to moderate
this ng, let's draft a proposal and vote on it.
Otherwise, put up or shut up. You get what
you pay for.
As one may recall, I proposed more than
once to have the group moderated, and
no one was interested.
It's just not practical to moderate this group -
So please take the pledge - avoid personal
insults - when insulted certainly defend
yourself - but then let the matter drop!
It's just not practical to moderate
this group - what about those great
textbook bargains - but we could
certainly moderate our own behavior!
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 2:14:02 PM UTC-8, Todd M. McComb wrote:
In article <677f2afe-1ed6-4782...@googlegroups.com>,
Dan Koren <dan....@gmail.com> wrote:
The squabbling is not about "ego". It is about the
blatant attempt by a small group of EUs (which
according to you amount to an "ethnicity") to
control the manner of discourse in this ng by
accusing others of "racism". You really need
to have that mirror repaired.
I've had enough. You're a total egomaniac,
and I will not be reading any more of your
posts.
As stated so many times already, this group
is an open discussion forum. Anyone can
post (or not) and anyone can read (or not)
anyone else's posts.
If you or anyone else woul like to moderate
this ng, let's draft a proposal and vote on it.
Otherwise, put up or shut up. You get what
you pay for.
As one may recall, I proposed more than
once to have the group moderated, and
no one was interested.
dk
“But I don’t want to go among mad people," Alice remarked.
"Oh, you can’t help that," said the Cat: "we’re all mad here. I’m mad. You’re mad."
"How do you know I’m mad?" said Alice.
"You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn’t have come here.”
― Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland
I know that I'm certainly - how does that expression go? -
a few BWVs short of a complete set of Bach Cantatas -
but I still realize that what we do here is not "normal"!
On 12/3/22 6:52 PM, Al Eisner wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2022, Notsure01 wrote:
If we can have a performance of Parsifal set among Orangutans in a forest >>> in Borneo, why can't we have a Rite performance that lets us appreciate >>> the details of scoring?
Are you concerned that with that remark you have managed to demolish
your own case?
Am I concerned - no - and I don't know why anyone would get particularly excited about any of the goings-ons at RMCR!
But I guess I was unclear - it wouldn't be the first time - or just being equivocal - that's why I'm NotSure - but I guess you are seeing a contradiction between my criticisms of Rattle's performance and my remark supporting different approaches in interpretation?
My point is that the nasty reaction of Hurwitz is not called for - and I can say the same about his review of Rene Jacobs Schubert that I opined about a month ago. For well known works for which we have umpteen excellent performances already, we should be encouraging the trying of different approaches.
Personally, I don't care for Norrington's Berlioz or Glenn Gould's Mozart sonatas, but why don't have to buy them and the record companies are the ones
that then would suffer.
I did suffer through the early, abrasive HIP recordings, but now that performers have matured I'm glad we had those pioneers who tried different approaches.
As I said in the Jacobs thread:"And shouldn’t the vitriol be reserved for those routine performances
that are so common? Those that are perfectly played - but lifeless, have phrasing without inflection, lack dynamic contrasts, and have all the
notes - but no personality".
I know that Rattle doesn't seem like much of an original thinker or visionary, and it would have been fine to give him a tepid review - not the scolding that was delivered.
As stated so many times already, this group
is an open discussion forum. Anyone can
post (or not) and anyone can read (or not)
anyone else's posts.
If you or anyone else woul like to moderate
this ng, let's draft a proposal and vote on it.
Otherwise, put up or shut up. You get what
you pay for.
As one may recall, I proposed more than
once to have the group moderated, and
no one was interested.
It's just not practical to moderate this group -
Is is no more and no less practical than
moderating any ng. It can definitely be
done, and it does not take much time.
It seems to me you are simply looking
for pretexts to avoid moderation. Can
you elaborate on why it isn't practical?
So please take the pledge - avoid personal
insults - when insulted certainly defend
yourself - but then let the matter drop!
Sorry, no unilateral concessions. If you
or anyone else wants to have an agreed
framework for discourse, we can draft
it and vote it. Anything else would be
dishonest and deceitful -- just as the
presence of anonymous posters.
Or as another example, if multiple members of the group would vote that
we should avoid personal insults and endless back-and-forth squabbles,
if we all complied wouldn't that achieve our goal of making RMCR a
pleasant and welcoming environment - but without all the fuss of formal moderation?
(I'm also puzzled by the repeated characterization of "anonymous
posters" (like me and most people here) as "dishonest and deceitful"?
If there is indeed a willingness to vote on rules and then to abide by
them, wouldn't it be easier just to manage this informally? Thus, for example, if many people here were to say "Mr Notsure, your periodic
attempts at humour are not amusing, but just irritating", then I could (hypothetically) moderate myself and stop inflicting lame jokes on this group.
Or as another example, if multiple members of the group would vote that
we should avoid personal insults and endless back-and-forth squabbles,
if we all complied wouldn't that achieve our goal of making RMCR a
pleasant and welcoming environment - but without all the fuss of formal moderation?
(I'm also puzzled by the repeated characterization of "anonymous
posters" (like me and most people here) as "dishonest and deceitful"?
After all, wasn't this anonymity good enough for Voltaire and Stendhal?
But, more seriously, after my recent retirement from a distinguished
career, do you think I want my former coworkers, or my friends and
family to see the inane twaddle I spew out in my posts here? Or imagine
the humiliation if folks knew that I own 23 versions of Scheherazade)?
It is considered common courtesy to show one's face and to introduce
oneself when one joins a party
There are one or two of these on every internet group.
Just people without the maturity to
restrain themselves and behave well.
What you describe amounts to unwritten rules, which
more often than not tend to be in one's mind than in anyone else's.
It just doesn't work.
Apparently you don't see a contradiction between your
free speech absolutism, your need to insult as many
people as possible, and your call for this ng to be
moderated.
I take it it's just another sample of your standard
hypocrisy, since this group will never change to
moderation, so why not pretend?
is a well documented string of racist andYeah, we know.
misogynist posts you penned that refutes
all your claims to "good behavior".
dk
I would be curious to
understand why you never objected to Oscar's
openly political (and polarizing) worship of the
two biggest crooks to have dishonored POTUS.
Yet another fabrication. You do not speak for the
group (and neither does anyone else), so how do
you know how the group would or might vote on
a framework proposal?
Or as another example, if multiple members of the group would vote that
we should avoid personal insults and endless back-and-forth squabbles,
if we all complied wouldn't that achieve our goal of making RMCR a
pleasant and welcoming environment - but without all the fuss of formal moderation?
(I'm also puzzled by the repeated characterization of "anonymous
posters" (like me and most people here) as "dishonest and deceitful"?
After all, wasn't this anonymity good enough for Voltaire and Stendhal?
But, more seriously, after my recent retirement from a distinguished
career, do you think I want my former coworkers, or my friends and
family to see the inane twaddle I spew out in my posts here? Or imagine
the humiliation if folks knew that I own 23 versions of Scheherazade)?
On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 5:06:45 AM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
Yet another fabrication. You do not speak for the
group (and neither does anyone else), so how do
you know how the group would or might vote on
a framework proposal?
Most grownup persons can, to use that awful
expression, read the room.
Of course you immediately see this as a
power issue. It's just what grownup people do.
Why don't you just go and stuff yourself
with some more icecream?
This used to be a topic about Stravinsky,
rather than about your various obsessions.,
And I encourage you to see the review for yourself to see what set off
Herman and me...
On Sat, 3 Dec 2022, Notsure01 wrote:
If we can have a performance of Parsifal set among Orangutans in a
forest in Borneo, why can't we have a Rite performance that lets us
appreciate the details of scoring?
Are you concerned that with that remark you have managed to demolish
your own case?
Am I concerned - no - and I don't know why anyone would get
particularly excited about any of the goings-ons at RMCR!
But I guess I was unclear - it wouldn't be the first time - or just
being equivocal - that's why I'm NotSure - but I guess you are seeing
a contradiction between my criticisms of Rattle's performance and my
remark supporting different approaches in interpretation?
No, you misunderstood. It is your "If ... [then] why can't we" logic that is the problem. An absurd premise cannot be used to justify a conclusion. (And we assuredly cannot "have" that premise, even if it were something
real,
which I would not put beyind the realm of possibility.) You are in effect creating an analoogy between your position on the Rattle Sacre and that absurdity. That seems to imply that your position on the Sacre is also
an absurdity. I doubt if that is what you intended. And, yes, I am Sure.
My point is that the nasty reaction of Hurwitz is not called for - and
I can say the same about his review of Rene Jacobs Schubert that I
opined about a month ago. For well known works for which we have
umpteen excellent performances already, we should be encouraging the
trying of different approaches.
Yes, but that does not require a critic to like the results. Hurwitz has
a notion of how the Rite should go - he has said elsewhere (I think also quoting Stravinsky - that the work doesn't leave a great deal of room
for interpretation - but he does seem open to a range of choices. If he finds Rattle unacceptable why shouldn't he say so? It's not as if SIr
Simon is an up-and-comer trying to break into the scene; Rattle is very
well established, he can take it (should he by some chance be watching).
Personally, I don't care for Norrington's Berlioz or Glenn Gould's
Mozart sonatas, but why don't have to buy them and the record
companies are the ones that then would suffer.
I did suffer through the early, abrasive HIP recordings, but now that
performers have matured I'm glad we had those pioneers who tried
different approaches.
As I said in the Jacobs thread:"And shouldn’t the vitriol be reserved
for those routine performances
that are so common? Those that are perfectly played - but lifeless, have
phrasing without inflection, lack dynamic contrasts, and have all the
notes - but no personality".
I don't think so. such performances (always meaning in the opinion of
a particular listener or critic) are perhaos more worthy of dismissal than
of vitriol.
I know that Rattle doesn't seem like much of an original thinker or
visionary, and it would have been fine to give him a tepid review -
not the scolding that was delivered.
Maybe - I have to admit I have not yet listened to this review, probably
I should.
Despite one reaction in rmcr, please keep expressing your views. In
this context, vitriol against a participant for opinions on an
on-topic issue is not appropriate.
Of course, Dave has the right to express his opinion of Rattle, or anyone else, in this fashion, but it does sound increasingly puerile. The tragedy is that the man is capable of much, much better things, without resorting to schoolyard stuff.
.
Btw, I would not call it a tragedy, but just a farce.
On 12/4/22 9:41 PM, Al Eisner wrote:
On Sat, 3 Dec 2022, Notsure01 wrote:
In fact, I fully support the right of people to express ideas, even
those that are inflammatory or obnoxious. What I was trying to say about
the Rattle review is simply that - in my opinion - the tone was unduly nasty, and that - in my opinion - Hurwitz should be more tolerant of alternative interpretative approaches.
As one may recall, I proposed more than
once to have the group moderated, and
no one was interested.
dk
OK, I hereby nominate Herman for our first moderator.
-Owen
On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 4:41:19 PM UTC+1, Owen Hartnett wrote:
That would be kind of odd.OK, I hereby nominate Herman for our first moderator.
-Owen
1 I'm for self-moderation and against a moderator (you would need three persons, btw)
2 small detail: technically this ng can't be moderated
On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 4:41:19 PM UTC+1, Owen Hartnett wrote:
OK, I hereby nominate Herman for our first moderator.
-Owen
That would be kind of odd.
1 I'm for self-moderation and against a moderator (you would need three persons, btw)
2 small detail: technically this ng can't be moderated
In article <d9922335-a11c-464e...@googlegroups.com>,
Herman <her...@yahoo.com> wrote:
1 I'm for self-moderation and against a moderator (you would needAs long as you're criticizing DK, please refrain from one of DK's
three persons, btw)
most annoying habits, i.e. posting the same thing (perhaps in
slightly different versions) multiple times.
1 I'm for self-moderation and against a moderator (you would need
three persons, btw)
On 12/4/22 9:41 PM, Al Eisner wrote:
On Sat, 3 Dec 2022, Notsure01 wrote:
If we can have a performance of Parsifal set among Orangutans in a
forest in Borneo, why can't we have a Rite performance that lets us >>>>> appreciate the details of scoring?
Are you concerned that with that remark you have managed to demolish
your own case?
Am I concerned - no - and I don't know why anyone would get particularly >>> excited about any of the goings-ons at RMCR!
But I guess I was unclear - it wouldn't be the first time - or just being >>> equivocal - that's why I'm NotSure - but I guess you are seeing a
contradiction between my criticisms of Rattle's performance and my remark >>> supporting different approaches in interpretation?
No, you misunderstood. It is your "If ... [then] why can't we" logic that >> is the problem. An absurd premise cannot be used to justify a conclusion. >> (And we assuredly cannot "have" that premise, even if it were something
real,
which I would not put beyind the realm of possibility.) You are in effect >> creating an analoogy between your position on the Rattle Sacre and that
absurdity. That seems to imply that your position on the Sacre is also
an absurdity. I doubt if that is what you intended. And, yes, I am Sure. >>
My point is that the nasty reaction of Hurwitz is not called for - and I >>> can say the same about his review of Rene Jacobs Schubert that I opined >>> about a month ago. For well known works for which we have umpteen
excellent performances already, we should be encouraging the trying of
different approaches.
Yes, but that does not require a critic to like the results. Hurwitz has >> a notion of how the Rite should go - he has said elsewhere (I think also
quoting Stravinsky - that the work doesn't leave a great deal of room
for interpretation - but he does seem open to a range of choices. If he
finds Rattle unacceptable why shouldn't he say so? It's not as if SIr
Simon is an up-and-comer trying to break into the scene; Rattle is very
well established, he can take it (should he by some chance be watching).
Personally, I don't care for Norrington's Berlioz or Glenn Gould's Mozart >>> sonatas, but why don't have to buy them and the record companies are the >>> ones that then would suffer.
I did suffer through the early, abrasive HIP recordings, but now that
performers have matured I'm glad we had those pioneers who tried different >>> approaches.
As I said in the Jacobs thread:"And shouldn’t the vitriol be reserved for
those routine performances
that are so common? Those that are perfectly played - but lifeless, have >>> phrasing without inflection, lack dynamic contrasts, and have all the
notes - but no personality".
I don't think so. such performances (always meaning in the opinion of
a particular listener or critic) are perhaos more worthy of dismissal than >> of vitriol.
I know that Rattle doesn't seem like much of an original thinker or
visionary, and it would have been fine to give him a tepid review - not >>> the scolding that was delivered.
Maybe - I have to admit I have not yet listened to this review, probably
I should.
Despite one reaction in rmcr, please keep expressing your views. In
this context, vitriol against a participant for opinions on an
on-topic issue is not appropriate.
Thanks, Al, for pointing out my logical fallacy - it wouldn't be the first time I've been illogical! Parsifal was on my mind since a few months ago I was listening to it obsessively, and trying to find a decent video production. There was one video that began with the monks wearing business suits on desk chairs while others reclined on astroturf - and the flower maidens were wading in a pool of blood in Kingsor's castle. I think that actually the Orangutan angle could make more sense!
But more to the point, I've been reflecting upon this matter and you - and Dan - are right. It was unfortunate choice of words for me to say "the nasty reaction of Hurwitz is not called for". This makes it sound like I was stating that Hurwitz has no right to his opinion, that he is forbidden to express uncomplimentary views, etc.
This interpretation also would imply that I'm a proponent of woke censorship,
as Dan pointed out.
In fact, I fully support the right of people to express ideas, even those that are inflammatory or obnoxious. What I was trying to say about the Rattle
review is simply that - in my opinion - the tone was unduly nasty, and that -
in my opinion - Hurwitz should be more tolerant of alternative interpretative
approaches.
And I encourage you to see the review for yourself to see what set off Herman
and me...
Now, then: after posting my earlier message, I did in fact view
the Hurwitz video. Frankly, I don't find it a big deal. Yes, he was
very critical of Rattle's Stravinsky release, but in an often huorous
fashion (making fun is Dave's occasional wont). Some may find it distasteful, but he didn't attack Rattle's character, I did not detect anything like "idiot" or "brainfucked" (where have I seen those?).
As I remarked earlier, Rattle is an established and establishment
figure; he can take it (should he encounter it). And while Dave too
often (IMO) makes gratuitous remarks, in this case he instead spelled it
out with musical examples (however badly sung). He is more fun than
most reviewers; I'd like to see him deal with your Parsifal examples.
This thread seems like a tempest in a teapot, already largely hijacked
by the exchanges between Dan and Herman. Let them go at it!
On 12/6/22 6:03 PM, Al Eisner wrote:
Now, then: after posting my earlier message, I did in fact view
the Hurwitz video. Frankly, I don't find it a big deal. Yes, he was
very critical of Rattle's Stravinsky release, but in an often huorous
fashion (making fun is Dave's occasional wont). Some may find it
distasteful, but he didn't attack Rattle's character, I did not detect
anything like "idiot" or "brainfucked" (where have I seen those?).
As I remarked earlier, Rattle is an established and establishment
figure; he can take it (should he encounter it). And while Dave too
often (IMO) makes gratuitous remarks, in this case he instead spelled it
out with musical examples (however badly sung). He is more fun than
most reviewers; I'd like to see him deal with your Parsifal examples.
This thread seems like a tempest in a teapot, already largely hijacked
by the exchanges between Dan and Herman. Let them go at it!
Thanks for the feedback! As folks here must realize, although I affect a nonchalant unruffled demeanor, I'm actually just as much of a hothead as some
others here. And I will say quite sincerely that I appreciate both Dan and Herman - and regret being drawn into an acrimonious discussion. One of the benefits of RMCR is the.. uhh...diversity. And after all, without carrots, onions, and potatoes it wouldn't be a stew!
From now on let the only Tempest we discuss be Tchaikovsky's and the Teapot Ravel's!
On Tue, 6 Dec 2022, Notsure01 wrote:
On 12/6/22 6:03 PM, Al Eisner wrote:
Now, then: after posting my earlier message, I did in fact view
the Hurwitz video. Frankly, I don't find it a big deal. Yes, he was
very critical of Rattle's Stravinsky release, but in an often huorous
fashion (making fun is Dave's occasional wont). Some may find it
distasteful, but he didn't attack Rattle's character, I did not detect
anything like "idiot" or "brainfucked" (where have I seen those?).
As I remarked earlier, Rattle is an established and establishment
figure; he can take it (should he encounter it). And while Dave too
often (IMO) makes gratuitous remarks, in this case he instead spelled it >>> out with musical examples (however badly sung). He is more fun than
most reviewers; I'd like to see him deal with your Parsifal examples.
This thread seems like a tempest in a teapot, already largely hijacked
by the exchanges between Dan and Herman. Let them go at it!
Thanks for the feedback! As folks here must realize, although I affect a
nonchalant unruffled demeanor, I'm actually just as much of a hothead as
some others here. And I will say quite sincerely that I appreciate both Dan >> and Herman - and regret being drawn into an acrimonious discussion. One of >> the benefits of RMCR is the.. uhh...diversity. And after all, without
carrots, onions, and potatoes it wouldn't be a stew!
From now on let the only Tempest we discuss be Tchaikovsky's and the Teapot >> Ravel's!
Uh-oh, another conflict: I say Sibelius's is the correct Tempest!
without carrots, onions, and potatoes it wouldn't be a stew!
And don't forget Beethoven.
From now on let the only Tempest we discuss be Tchaikovsky's and the
Teapot Ravel's!
Uh-oh, another conflict: I say Sibelius's is the correct Tempest!
On Tuesday, December 6, 2022 at 4:24:55 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
without carrots, onions, and potatoes it wouldn't be a stew!
You omitted the spice and the curry.
Without spice and curry the stew
would be bland and tasteless.
dk
On 12/6/22 9:02 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
On Tuesday, December 6, 2022 at 4:24:55 PM UTC-8, Notsure01 wrote:
without carrots, onions, and potatoes it wouldn't be a stew!
You omitted the spice and the curry.
Without spice and curry the stew
would be bland and tasteless.
Yes, but one needs to be careful with
that spice lest we make it too hot...
(And speaking of "bland and tasteless"
I'm off now to find reviews of Brendel's
Haydn Sonata discs)
And Vivaldi
Notsure01 a couché sur son écran :
And Vivaldi
And Piotr Illich...
I know some people are very attached to Hurwitz' youtube reviews, and I understand why. Someone whom you see on video a lot becomes a kind of imaginary friend. Some people call him 'Big Dave', I don't know why.what orchestras effortlessly do these days. Used to be orchestras had a hard time performing just one of these pieces.
Recently I chanced upon Hurwitz talking about a new Simon Rattle cd, with the three early Stravinsky ballets, played by the LSO. These cds were recorded live, with Rattle conducting the three ballets in a single concert. That's pretty amazing, but it's
The concert was in 2017 and I recall reviews saying it was a great night and, naturally, with such an hectic program, there were some ups and downs. Same with the reviews of the cd, with one exception, i.e. Hurwitz, who slaughters the cd in the mostbrutal terms.
One feature of this review really bugs me. Hurwitz illustrates his points with musical examples, that is, he sings (for instance) the opening of the Sacre in a funny voice with a "gotta puke" face. Of course we're intended to think this is how therecord sounds, but of course it doesn't. It's a parody. Or maybe I should just say, it's a travesty.
Previously (I seem to recall a Sibelius review) Hurwitz was able to play audio bits while holding up the cd-booklet for the camera, so technically there is no reason why he would not play the Sacre opening for us, so we could hear what it really soundslike, and decide for ourselves. But I guess he thought it was more fun to do it like this.
I think it's unethical.call the Conductor Shuffle. Go and look it up yourself, but it's a totally nonsensical setup that's only constructed in order to make Rattle look bad, because he has recorded with various orchestras, like all conductors have done since the beginning of
I also couldn't help but notice that every single Rattle review on Hurwitz channel is negative. Even a video with 'ten best recordings' by Rattle starts with an extensive prologue on some terrible new development in the recording industry which Hurwitz
So I guess this fine Stravinsky cd was another opportunity to trot out the shoot-rattle-guns.
I gather of his collective review of the worst recordings from
last year, which predictably includes Klaus Makkela, Sir Roger
Norrington, Sir Simon Rattle and F-X Roth and anybody who
records chamber music on period instruments.
On Monday, December 19, 2022 at 4:34:53 AM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
I gather of his collective review of the worst recordings fromSounds interesting. Maybe I should start reading his reviews.
last year, which predictably includes Klaus Makkela, Sir Roger
Norrington, Sir Simon Rattle and F-X Roth and anybody who
records chamber music on period instruments.
I wonder if I should start liking him.
Curiously, your critique of DH sounds like you you believe
his negative views of certain baton holders are the result
of "bias" or "prejudice", rather than an expression of what
DH actually hears and experiences in the music. This is
quite in line with the increasingly widespread attitude of
r.m.c.r. which holds that positive reviews are fine and
result from healthy appreciation of the music, while
negative reviews are sick, evil, and the result of some
deep derangement in the person who states them.
Are you planning to join the Moral Majority Society
set up by Gavin, Gerard, Herman, Melmoth and
NotSure01? Hurry on, or you will miss the 50%
Christmas discount!
dk
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 2:31:45 AM UTC+11, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, December 19, 2022 at 4:34:53 AM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
I gather of his collective review of the worst recordings fromSounds interesting. Maybe I should start reading his reviews.
last year, which predictably includes Klaus Makkela, Sir Roger Norrington, Sir Simon Rattle and F-X Roth and anybody who
records chamber music on period instruments.
I wonder if I should start liking him.
Curiously, your critique of DH sounds like you you believe
his negative views of certain baton holders are the result
of "bias" or "prejudice", rather than an expression of what
DH actually hears and experiences in the music. This is
quite in line with the increasingly widespread attitude of
r.m.c.r. which holds that positive reviews are fine and
result from healthy appreciation of the music, while
negative reviews are sick, evil, and the result of some
deep derangement in the person who states them.
Are you planning to join the Moral Majority Society
set up by Gavin, Gerard, Herman, Melmoth and
NotSure01? Hurry on, or you will miss the 50%
Christmas discount!
I would have thought that the opposite was the case,
and that the majority of posts reviewing new recordings -
if you can find any - are overwhelmingly negative. Meanwhile,
I have just downloaded F-X Roth's recording of Mahler 4 on
Big D's recommendation. It will be worth it for la divine Sabine,
if nothing else.
Speaking of Jewish critics, I accidentally stumbled across a
videorecording of the Chilul Shabos demonstrations that took
place in Jerusalem in 2019. I am so glad that the Charedim have
the same opinion of the Eurovision Song Contest that I do.
On Monday, December 19, 2022 at 8:12:34 AM UTC-8, andrewc...gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 2:31:45 AM UTC+11, dan....gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, December 19, 2022 at 4:34:53 AM UTC-8, andrewc...gmail.com wrote:
I gather of his collective review of the worst recordings fromSounds interesting. Maybe I should start reading his reviews.
last year, which predictably includes Klaus Makkela, Sir Roger Norrington, Sir Simon Rattle and F-X Roth and anybody who
records chamber music on period instruments.
I wonder if I should start liking him.
Curiously, your critique of DH sounds like you you believe
his negative views of certain baton holders are the result
of "bias" or "prejudice", rather than an expression of what
DH actually hears and experiences in the music. This is
quite in line with the increasingly widespread attitude of
r.m.c.r. which holds that positive reviews are fine and
result from healthy appreciation of the music, while
negative reviews are sick, evil, and the result of some
deep derangement in the person who states them.
Are you planning to join the Moral Majority Society
set up by Gavin, Gerard, Herman, Melmoth and
NotSure01? Hurry on, or you will miss the 50%
Christmas discount!
I would have thought that the opposite was the case,I need to revisiti DH's reviews. I do not usually pay attention
and that the majority of posts reviewing new recordings -
if you can find any - are overwhelmingly negative. Meanwhile,
I have just downloaded F-X Roth's recording of Mahler 4 on
Big D's recommendation. It will be worth it for la divine Sabine,
if nothing else.
since it became pretty clear in earlier times that he and I do
not listen to music in the same way, and that our experiences
do not align.
Speaking of Jewish critics, I accidentally stumbled across aFWIW so do the Amish.
videorecording of the Chilul Shabos demonstrations that took
place in Jerusalem in 2019. I am so glad that the Charedim have
the same opinion of the Eurovision Song Contest that I do.
dk
As for the Amish, I was entranced to hear
some of them them singing various hymns,
with lyrics written down but no music. The
results were amazingly attractive. I even
have an Amish hymn book, result of being
fascinated by them at one stage.
On Monday, December 19, 2022 at 3:19:21 PM UTC-8, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
As for the Amish, I was entranced to hear
some of them them singing various hymns,
with lyrics written down but no music. The
results were amazingly attractive. I even
have an Amish hymn book, result of being
fascinated by them at one stage.
Wondering how many have survived COVID.
dk
On Wednesday, 21 December 2022 at 02:05:08 UTC+11, dan....gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, December 19, 2022 at 3:19:21 PM UTC-8, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
Wondering how many have survived COVID.
As for the Amish, I was entranced to hear
some of them them singing various hymns,
with lyrics written down but no music. The
results were amazingly attractive. I even
have an Amish hymn book, result of being
fascinated by them at one stage.
dk
Interesting. As a fairly closed community, maybe they haven't done too badly. Hoping well for them.
Ray Hall, Taree
On 12/20/22 8:59 AM, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, 21 December 2022 at 02:05:08 UTC+11, dan....gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, December 19, 2022 at 3:19:21 PM UTC-8, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
Wondering how many have survived COVID.
As for the Amish, I was entranced to hear
some of them them singing various hymns,
with lyrics written down but no music. The
results were amazingly attractive. I even
have an Amish hymn book, result of being
fascinated by them at one stage.
dk
Interesting. As a fairly closed community, maybe they haven't done too badly. Hoping well for them.
Ray Hall, TareeA bit of googling indicates that they fared neither better nor worse
than other groups.
Here's a paper examining the question:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8195242/
Bob Harper
On Wednesday, December 21, 2022 at 4:21:40 AM UTC+11, Bob Harper wrote:
On 12/20/22 8:59 AM, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, 21 December 2022 at 02:05:08 UTC+11, dan....gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, December 19, 2022 at 3:19:21 PM UTC-8, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
Wondering how many have survived COVID.
As for the Amish, I was entranced to hear
some of them them singing various hymns,
with lyrics written down but no music. The
results were amazingly attractive. I even
have an Amish hymn book, result of being
fascinated by them at one stage.
Interesting. As a fairly closed community, maybe they haven't done too badly. Hoping well for them.
A bit of googling indicates that they fared neither better nor worse
than other groups.
Here's a paper examining the question:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8195242/
I am still trying to work out Dan's comparison of the Hasidic protest
against the Eurovision Song Contest and the Amish. The Hasidim
were protesting against some preparations for the final - held that
year in Tel Aviv - took place on the Shabbat. Why the Amish might
have protested, I do not know.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 438 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 243:02:28 |
| Calls: | 9,145 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 13,432 |
| D/L today: |
1 files (2,685K bytes) |
| Messages: | 6,039,842 |