1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. REC.MUSIC.CLASSICAL.RECOR

  • Musicweb's recordings of the year

    From Chris J.@21:1/5 to All on Wed Dec 14 10:42:11 2022
    (q)This is the twentieth year that Musicweb International has asked its reviewing team to nominate their recordings of the year.(/q)

    http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/ROTY/ROTY-2022-1.htm
    (Still no https web address!)

    Of the recordings listed on that page, I have only heard Berlioz's Requiem
    by the RCO and Antonio Pappano on RCO Live. And it's very good imho.

    Chris

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dan Koren@21:1/5 to Chris J. on Wed Dec 14 05:37:44 2022
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:42:15 AM UTC-8, Chris J. wrote:

    (q)This is the twentieth year that Musicweb International has asked its reviewing team to nominate their recordings of the year.(/q)

    http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/ROTY/ROTY-2022-1.htm (Still no https web address!)

    Why don't they ask real listeners instead?

    dk

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Graham@21:1/5 to Dan Koren on Wed Dec 14 09:19:33 2022
    On 2022-12-14 6:37 a.m., Dan Koren wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:42:15 AM UTC-8, Chris J. wrote:

    (q)This is the twentieth year that Musicweb International has asked its
    reviewing team to nominate their recordings of the year.(/q)

    http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/ROTY/ROTY-2022-1.htm
    (Still no https web address!)

    Why don't they ask real listeners instead?

    dk
    After reading that list, I agree!

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Andrew Clarke@21:1/5 to Graham on Wed Dec 14 14:29:39 2022
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:19:39 AM UTC+11, Graham wrote:
    On 2022-12-14 6:37 a.m., Dan Koren wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:42:15 AM UTC-8, Chris J. wrote:

    (q)This is the twentieth year that Musicweb International has asked its
    reviewing team to nominate their recordings of the year.(/q)

    http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/ROTY/ROTY-2022-1.htm >> (Still no https web address!)

    Why don't they ask real listeners instead?

    dk
    After reading that list, I agree!

    And who are the 'real listeners'?

    Andrew Clarke
    Canberra

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dan Koren@21:1/5 to andrewc...@gmail.com on Wed Dec 14 14:36:08 2022
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:29:42 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:19:39 AM UTC+11, Graham wrote:
    On 2022-12-14 6:37 a.m., Dan Koren wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:42:15 AM UTC-8, Chris J. wrote:

    (q)This is the twentieth year that Musicweb International has asked its >> reviewing team to nominate their recordings of the year.(/q)

    http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/ROTY/ROTY-2022-1.htm >> (Still no https web address!)

    Why don't they ask real listeners instead?

    After reading that list, I agree!

    And who are the 'real listeners'?

    Anyone not on their staff!

    dk

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From gggg gggg@21:1/5 to dan....@gmail.com on Wed Dec 14 15:48:41 2022
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:36:11 PM UTC-8, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:29:42 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:19:39 AM UTC+11, Graham wrote:
    On 2022-12-14 6:37 a.m., Dan Koren wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:42:15 AM UTC-8, Chris J. wrote:

    (q)This is the twentieth year that Musicweb International has asked its
    reviewing team to nominate their recordings of the year.(/q)

    http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/ROTY/ROTY-2022-1.htm
    (Still no https web address!)

    Why don't they ask real listeners instead?

    After reading that list, I agree!

    And who are the 'real listeners'?
    Anyone not on their staff!

    dk

    It seems that in the world of movies, critics and audiences are disagreeing more and more as to what is to be considered praiseworthy.

    Could that also be happening in the classical music world?:

    (Y. upload):

    "My Issue With Film Critics Today"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Andrew Clarke@21:1/5 to dan....@gmail.com on Wed Dec 14 23:33:00 2022
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 9:36:11 AM UTC+11, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:29:42 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:19:39 AM UTC+11, Graham wrote:
    On 2022-12-14 6:37 a.m., Dan Koren wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:42:15 AM UTC-8, Chris J. wrote:

    (q)This is the twentieth year that Musicweb International has asked its
    reviewing team to nominate their recordings of the year.(/q)

    http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/ROTY/ROTY-2022-1.htm
    (Still no https web address!)

    Why don't they ask real listeners instead?

    After reading that list, I agree!

    And who are the 'real listeners'?
    Anyone not on their staff!

    dk

    Does the same prohibition apply to Fanfare, Diapaison d'Or, etc.? Or, indeed, Classics Today?

    Andrew Clarke
    Canberra

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dan Koren@21:1/5 to andrewc...@gmail.com on Wed Dec 14 23:50:07 2022
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 11:33:03 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 9:36:11 AM UTC+11, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:29:42 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:19:39 AM UTC+11, Graham wrote:
    On 2022-12-14 6:37 a.m., Dan Koren wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:42:15 AM UTC-8, Chris J. wrote:

    (q)This is the twentieth year that Musicweb International has asked its
    reviewing team to nominate their recordings of the year.(/q)

    http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/ROTY/ROTY-2022-1.htm
    (Still no https web address!)

    Why don't they ask real listeners instead?

    After reading that list, I agree!

    And who are the 'real listeners'?

    Anyone not on their staff!

    Does the same prohibition apply to Fanfare,
    Diapaison d'Or, etc.? Or, indeed, Classics Today?

    Obviously, in my view. However, no
    one is prevented from reading
    anything they like, penned by
    anyone they like.

    In case you did not notice, music
    review magazines have become
    largely unnecessary since most
    recordings can now be sampled
    electronically. One does not need
    anyone else's opinions to figure
    out what they like or don't like.

    dk

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From gggg gggg@21:1/5 to dan....@gmail.com on Thu Dec 15 00:01:59 2022
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 11:50:10 PM UTC-8, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 11:33:03 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 9:36:11 AM UTC+11, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:29:42 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:19:39 AM UTC+11, Graham wrote:
    On 2022-12-14 6:37 a.m., Dan Koren wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:42:15 AM UTC-8, Chris J. wrote:

    (q)This is the twentieth year that Musicweb International has asked its
    reviewing team to nominate their recordings of the year.(/q)

    http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/ROTY/ROTY-2022-1.htm
    (Still no https web address!)

    Why don't they ask real listeners instead?

    After reading that list, I agree!

    And who are the 'real listeners'?

    Anyone not on their staff!

    Does the same prohibition apply to Fanfare,
    Diapaison d'Or, etc.? Or, indeed, Classics Today?
    Obviously, in my view. However, no
    one is prevented from reading
    anything they like, penned by
    anyone they like.

    In case you did not notice, music
    review magazines have become
    largely unnecessary since most
    recordings can now be sampled
    electronically. One does not need
    anyone else's opinions to figure
    out what they like or don't like.

    dk

    Are you saying that critics are becoming irrelevant?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dan Koren@21:1/5 to gggg gggg on Thu Dec 15 00:14:58 2022
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 12:02:02 AM UTC-8, gggg gggg wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 11:50:10 PM UTC-8, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 11:33:03 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 9:36:11 AM UTC+11, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:29:42 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:19:39 AM UTC+11, Graham wrote:
    On 2022-12-14 6:37 a.m., Dan Koren wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:42:15 AM UTC-8, Chris J. wrote:

    (q)This is the twentieth year that Musicweb International has asked its
    reviewing team to nominate their recordings of the year.(/q)

    http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/ROTY/ROTY-2022-1.htm
    (Still no https web address!)

    Why don't they ask real listeners instead?

    After reading that list, I agree!

    And who are the 'real listeners'?

    Anyone not on their staff!

    Does the same prohibition apply to Fanfare,
    Diapaison d'Or, etc.? Or, indeed, Classics Today?
    Obviously, in my view. However, no
    one is prevented from reading
    anything they like, penned by
    anyone they like.

    In case you did not notice, music
    review magazines have become
    largely unnecessary since most
    recordings can now be sampled
    electronically. One does not need
    anyone else's opinions to figure
    out what they like or don't like.

    Are you saying that critics
    are becoming irrelevant?

    Not "becoming". They never
    were in the first place.

    One understands however
    how this is a concern for
    quote bots -- their feed
    would run out.

    dk

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From gggg gggg@21:1/5 to gggg gggg on Thu Dec 15 00:15:04 2022
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 12:02:02 AM UTC-8, gggg gggg wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 11:50:10 PM UTC-8, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 11:33:03 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 9:36:11 AM UTC+11, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:29:42 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:19:39 AM UTC+11, Graham wrote:
    On 2022-12-14 6:37 a.m., Dan Koren wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:42:15 AM UTC-8, Chris J. wrote:

    (q)This is the twentieth year that Musicweb International has asked its
    reviewing team to nominate their recordings of the year.(/q)

    http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/ROTY/ROTY-2022-1.htm
    (Still no https web address!)

    Why don't they ask real listeners instead?

    After reading that list, I agree!

    And who are the 'real listeners'?

    Anyone not on their staff!

    Does the same prohibition apply to Fanfare,
    Diapaison d'Or, etc.? Or, indeed, Classics Today?
    Obviously, in my view. However, no
    one is prevented from reading
    anything they like, penned by
    anyone they like.

    In case you did not notice, music
    review magazines have become
    largely unnecessary since most
    recordings can now be sampled
    electronically. One does not need
    anyone else's opinions to figure
    out what they like or don't like.

    dk
    Are you saying that critics are becoming irrelevant?

    Or have ALREADY become irrelevant?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Andrew Clarke@21:1/5 to gggg gggg on Thu Dec 15 19:21:02 2022
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 7:02:02 PM UTC+11, gggg gggg wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 11:50:10 PM UTC-8, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 11:33:03 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 9:36:11 AM UTC+11, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:29:42 PM UTC-8, andrewc...@gmail.com wrote:
    On Thursday, December 15, 2022 at 3:19:39 AM UTC+11, Graham wrote:
    On 2022-12-14 6:37 a.m., Dan Koren wrote:
    On Wednesday, December 14, 2022 at 2:42:15 AM UTC-8, Chris J. wrote:

    (q)This is the twentieth year that Musicweb International has asked its
    reviewing team to nominate their recordings of the year.(/q)

    http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2022/ROTY/ROTY-2022-1.htm
    (Still no https web address!)

    Why don't they ask real listeners instead?

    After reading that list, I agree!

    And who are the 'real listeners'?

    Anyone not on their staff!

    Does the same prohibition apply to Fanfare,
    Diapaison d'Or, etc.? Or, indeed, Classics Today?
    Obviously, in my view. However, no
    one is prevented from reading
    anything they like, penned by
    anyone they like.

    In case you did not notice, music
    review magazines have become
    largely unnecessary since most
    recordings can now be sampled
    electronically. One does not need
    anyone else's opinions to figure
    out what they like or don't like.

    dk
    Are you saying that critics are becoming irrelevant?

    This raises the question of what reviews of classical music recordings are/were intended to achieve. They are of course useful as publicity - we thereby know that a new recording exists, although the people at Linn and Hyperion are very good at doing
    this, and regular visits to Presto Music are very informative too, as they usually have a survey of new releases on their home page. A review can give us an overall picture of the recording - tempi, HIP or square, any particular feature when it comes to
    interpretation, use of orchestral colour etc. Evaluation is much, much more difficult. I've learnt mistrust utterly damning reviews, or indeed to regard them as recommendations and buy the recording as soon as possible. I tend to assume that reviewers
    who universally damn the recordings of particular conductors, ensembles or soloists are motivated by extra-musical considerations ...

    Andrew Clarke
    Canberra

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From simonelvladtepes@21:1/5 to All on Fri Dec 16 17:00:35 2022
    I've learnt mistrust utterly damning reviews, > Andrew Clarke > Canberra

    As opposed to the usual flood of glowing reviews? Even well reasoned negative reviews are met with distrust, and even anger. OTOH there are many benefits to praising something. It's partly a cultural issue - French and German reviewers are less prone to
    giving glowing reviews the way Americans do (in any context, actually).

    I am not familiar with half of the works on MusicWeb's list, the choice of works smacks of posturing. I am familiar with Verdi's Falstaff from Sir John Eliot Gardiner on Dynamic, which is on the list, and found Gardiner's sluggish tempi unbearable. When
    the score indicates ♩= 80 he conducts ♩ = 60 - I believe it's the slowest Falstaff recorded.

    Simonel

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Andrew Clarke@21:1/5 to simonelvladtepes on Sat Dec 17 01:00:03 2022
    On Saturday, December 17, 2022 at 12:00:37 PM UTC+11, simonelvladtepes wrote:
    I've learnt mistrust utterly damning reviews, > Andrew Clarke > Canberra

    As opposed to the usual flood of glowing reviews? Even well reasoned negative reviews are met with distrust, and even anger. OTOH there are many benefits to praising something. It's partly a cultural issue - French and German reviewers are less prone
    to giving glowing reviews the way Americans do (in any context, actually).

    I am not familiar with half of the works on MusicWeb's list, the choice of works smacks of posturing. I am familiar with Verdi's Falstaff from Sir John Eliot Gardiner on Dynamic, which is on the list, and found Gardiner's sluggish tempi unbearable.
    When the score indicates ♩= 80 he conducts ♩ = 60 - I believe it's the slowest Falstaff recorded.

    Simonel
    I admit the choice of British piano concertos is a bit eccentric, as generally speaking, the only British classical music of any kind that British audiences will listen to is Elgar, Vaughan Williams, Holst and Britten. People who composed between, say,
    1940 and 1970, the Baxes, Berkeleys, Rawsthornes, Rubbras, etc., never seem to get played. I suppose the reviewer wanted to drum up some interest: I have a lot of this music as recorded by Naxos, and, really, only Rubbra continues to hold my attention.

    As for rave reviews, I never seem to hear of any ... I suppose I'd be a bit suspicious of rave reviews too, as one extreme is really no better than the other. What I'd prefer is something that sounds reasonably balanced (rather than hystrical) which
    gives me some idea of why this particular recording might be worth a listen.

    Andrew Clarke
    Canberra

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)