• Re: Blomstedt discography query

    From Herman@21:1/5 to gggg gggg on Sun Dec 25 01:55:01 2022
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 10:26:09 AM UTC+1, gggg gggg wrote:


    "The legendary conductor Herbert Blomstedt (documentary)"

    "Legendary" primarily means "existing in legend (only)".

    Blomstedt is alive and well, you can go to a Blomstedt concert.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From gggg gggg@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 25 01:26:06 2022
    On Thursday, June 8, 2006 at 6:18:35 AM UTC-7, Handel8 wrote:
    I came across this a couple weks ago and didn't make much of it, but I
    went back to the Decca Classics web site just now to double check
    whether I was halucinating. It looks like Herbert Blomstedt recorded a complete recording of Nielsen's opera Maskarade in 1998.
    See details here: (Maskarade is the first on the list) http://www.deccaclassics.com/artists/blomstedt/index.html#
    (Click on details link and read popup page- may not work in all
    browsers.)
    I have been unable to find even a single trace of this recording on any
    of the usual online sites:
    Amazon(US, DE, UK) or using a Froogle search, etc. I can search some
    more, but it doesn't look good. Does anyone know about this recording
    ? Was it any good ? Can we see a reissue any time soon ? Or was it
    never released at all? This one slipped below my radar completely if
    it was released at all. Anyone have a copy to burn for me ? That would
    be my last resort. I'd much rather get a legit copy.
    Alan Prichard

    (2022 Y. upload):

    "The legendary conductor Herbert Blomstedt (documentary)"

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Berger@21:1/5 to Herman on Sun Dec 25 05:10:45 2022
    On 12/25/2022 4:55 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 10:26:09 AM UTC+1, gggg gggg wrote:


    "The legendary conductor Herbert Blomstedt (documentary)"

    "Legendary" primarily means "existing in legend (only)".

    Blomstedt is alive and well, you can go to a Blomstedt concert.

    You quoted your definition as if you took from some (presumably reputable) source. I suspect you made it up. Legends (and Myths) are, by definition, neither true nor false, real nor imaginary.

    Look it up.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Herman@21:1/5 to Frank Berger on Sun Dec 25 02:19:05 2022
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 11:10:54 AM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 4:55 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 10:26:09 AM UTC+1, gggg gggg wrote:


    "The legendary conductor Herbert Blomstedt (documentary)"

    "Legendary" primarily means "existing in legend (only)".

    Blomstedt is alive and well, you can go to a Blomstedt concert.
    You quoted your definition as if you took from some (presumably reputable) source. I suspect you made it up. Legends (and Myths) are, by definition, neither true nor false, real nor imaginary.

    Look it up.

    Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Fowler and Fowler.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Herman@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 25 02:29:01 2022
    Also it's stunning how your comments seem to address a troupe of straw men marching around in your head.
    I know the word 'legendary' is morphing towards the synonym of "famous" i.e. "much talked about" (IRL Blomstedt is neither), and I do not have the illusion I can do anything to stop it, other than point out that "famous" is way shorter than "legendary".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Berger@21:1/5 to Herman on Sun Dec 25 09:02:03 2022
    On 12/25/2022 5:19 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 11:10:54 AM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 4:55 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 10:26:09 AM UTC+1, gggg gggg wrote:


    "The legendary conductor Herbert Blomstedt (documentary)"

    "Legendary" primarily means "existing in legend (only)".

    Blomstedt is alive and well, you can go to a Blomstedt concert.
    You quoted your definition as if you took from some (presumably reputable) source. I suspect you made it up. Legends (and Myths) are, by definition, neither true nor false, real nor imaginary.

    Look it up.

    Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Fowler and Fowler.

    Google cites Oxford. The first definition is:

    "of, described in, or based on legends"

    It lists opposites as "factual," and historical."

    Neither of them means "false" of "untrue." The essence of it is that legends are not documented not that they "exist in legend only)"

    I don't know if the usage is changing. Do you have a source for that? I think people, including you, don't know what the word means.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Dan Koren@21:1/5 to Frank Berger on Sun Dec 25 06:44:56 2022
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 6:02:13 AM UTC-8, Frank Berger wrote:

    I think people, including you, don't
    know what the word means.

    Herman doesn't even know from
    which end to hold the bow!

    dk

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Herman@21:1/5 to Frank Berger on Sun Dec 25 09:06:11 2022
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 3:02:13 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 5:19 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 11:10:54 AM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 4:55 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 10:26:09 AM UTC+1, gggg gggg wrote:


    "The legendary conductor Herbert Blomstedt (documentary)"

    "Legendary" primarily means "existing in legend (only)".

    Blomstedt is alive and well, you can go to a Blomstedt concert.
    You quoted your definition as if you took from some (presumably reputable) source. I suspect you made it up. Legends (and Myths) are, by definition, neither true nor false, real nor imaginary.

    Look it up.

    Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Fowler and Fowler.
    Google cites Oxford. The first definition is:

    "of, described in, or based on legends"

    It lists opposites as "factual," and historical."

    Neither of them means "false" of "untrue." The essence of it is that legends are not documented not that they "exist in legend only)"

    I don't know if the usage is changing. Do you have a source for that? I think people, including you, don't know what the word means.

    I am by U training a linguist (of a couple historical languages). The "existing in legend only" are not my words, but from the Oxford dictionary, and yes, I happen to think that is the original essence. I cannot help but think (and I don't mean this
    unkindly) you are somewhat confused here. I don't know why you bring in "documented". Many legends have been written down and printed in modern times, which would mean they have been documented. And they could still be about long ago things that never
    happened in the documented form, which is why they're called legend.

    And yes, I know what the word "usage" means, and in the case of "legendary" it's clearly changing. In that it increasingly just means "famous" when they say "legendary".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Berger@21:1/5 to Herman on Sun Dec 25 12:35:06 2022
    On 12/25/2022 12:06 PM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 3:02:13 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 5:19 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 11:10:54 AM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 4:55 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 10:26:09 AM UTC+1, gggg gggg wrote: >>>>>>

    "The legendary conductor Herbert Blomstedt (documentary)"

    "Legendary" primarily means "existing in legend (only)".

    Blomstedt is alive and well, you can go to a Blomstedt concert.
    You quoted your definition as if you took from some (presumably reputable) source. I suspect you made it up. Legends (and Myths) are, by definition, neither true nor false, real nor imaginary.

    Look it up.

    Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Fowler and Fowler.
    Google cites Oxford. The first definition is:

    "of, described in, or based on legends"

    It lists opposites as "factual," and historical."

    Neither of them means "false" of "untrue." The essence of it is that legends are not documented not that they "exist in legend only)"

    I don't know if the usage is changing. Do you have a source for that? I think people, including you, don't know what the word means.

    I am by U training a linguist (of a couple historical languages). The "existing in legend only" are not my words, but from the Oxford dictionary, and yes, I happen to think that is the original essence. I cannot help but think (and I don't mean this
    unkindly) you are somewhat confused here. I don't know why you bring in "documented". Many legends have been written down and printed in modern times, which would mean they have been documented. And they could still be about long ago things that never
    happened in the documented form, which is why they're called legend.

    And yes, I know what the word "usage" means, and in the case of "legendary" it's clearly changing. In that it increasingly just means "famous" when they say "legendary".

    You don't even know what "documented" means.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Berger@21:1/5 to Herman on Sun Dec 25 13:40:52 2022
    On 12/25/2022 1:18 PM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 6:35:13 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 12:06 PM, Herman wrote:

    You don't even know what "documented" means.

    well, Frank, hopefully you have a great day today.

    Same to you, Herman.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Herman@21:1/5 to Frank Berger on Sun Dec 25 10:18:14 2022
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 6:35:13 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 12:06 PM, Herman wrote:

    You don't even know what "documented" means.

    well, Frank, hopefully you have a great day today.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From raymond.hallbear1@gmail.com@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 25 15:23:10 2022
    On Monday, 26 December 2022 at 04:06:13 UTC+11, Herman wrote:

    To my mind the word "legendary" means someone who was super-famous, and is either dead, or towards the end of an illustrious career. The word "famous" generally means someone extant (might also be deceased) who is well known, among other well known
    people. An example might be Frank Sinatra (legendary), Cab Calloway (well known). The word legendary is a whole different ball game to the word famous.

    Ray Hall, Taree

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Berger@21:1/5 to raymond....@gmail.com on Sun Dec 25 19:20:00 2022
    On 12/25/2022 6:23 PM, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
    On Monday, 26 December 2022 at 04:06:13 UTC+11, Herman wrote:

    To my mind the word "legendary" means someone who was super-famous, and is either dead, or towards the end of an illustrious career. The word "famous" generally means someone extant (might also be deceased) who is well known, among other well known
    people. An example might be Frank Sinatra (legendary), Cab Calloway (well known). The word legendary is a whole different ball game to the word famous.

    Ray Hall, Taree

    I don't think anyone would disagree with this usage. Though whether someone is legendary in this sense could be a matter of opinion. I wouldn't call Blomstedt legendary, but can see someone else doing so.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Nils=2DG=C3=B6ran_Olve?=@21:1/5 to Frank on Sun Dec 25 22:10:28 2022
    Frank wrote
    I don't think anyone would disagree with this usage. Though whether someone is legendary in this sense could be a matter of opinion. I wouldn't call Blomstedt legendary, but can see someone else doing so.

    The context may explain it: the documentary is about Blomstedt's return visit in 2021 with the Oslo Philharmonic, whose chief conductor he was in the 1960s. At one point in it, he jokingly asks the musicians "Do you remember...? Although he makes a point
    of coming back to "his" orchestras now and then, he is "legendary" for current members as an international star whom they heard stories about from their "musical grandparents" who played in the same orchestra long ago. Oslo was his first foreign position,
    a smaller and much less important orchestra than now.

    A linguistic point: in the film Blomstedt rehearses in Swedish with an occasional Norwegian word where there are differences between the two languages, except when he by mistake once starts to talk German. This surprised me as Scandinavian orchestras now
    have many recent immigrants who don't know the local languages well. I expected him to use English, but like many Scandinavians he may want to encourage us to trust that Swedish-Danish-Norwegian can be understood across our borders.

    Half a year after his visit to Oslo, Blomstedt had a nasty fall (at least for a 95-year old) but made a comeback after several months. He now needs assistance to walk and conducts sitting. From the waist up he seemed totally his old self when I attended
    one of his concerts in Stockholm this autumn. Rather cleverly, the orchestra did not come on stage until it was time to begin, and he could walk up to the podium half-hidden among them and supported by one musician.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From raymond.hallbear1@gmail.com@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 25 22:37:18 2022
    On Monday, 26 December 2022 at 17:10:31 UTC+11, Nils-Göran Olve wrote:
    Frank wrote
    I don't think anyone would disagree with this usage. Though whether someone is legendary in this sense could be a matter of opinion. I wouldn't call Blomstedt legendary, but can see someone else doing so.
    The context may explain it: the documentary is about Blomstedt's return visit in 2021 with the Oslo Philharmonic, whose chief conductor he was in the 1960s. At one point in it, he jokingly asks the musicians "Do you remember...? Although he makes a
    point of coming back to "his" orchestras now and then, he is "legendary" for current members as an international star whom they heard stories about from their "musical grandparents" who played in the same orchestra long ago. Oslo was his first foreign
    position, a smaller and much less important orchestra than now.

    A linguistic point: in the film Blomstedt rehearses in Swedish with an occasional Norwegian word where there are differences between the two languages, except when he by mistake once starts to talk German. This surprised me as Scandinavian orchestras
    now have many recent immigrants who don't know the local languages well. I expected him to use English, but like many Scandinavians he may want to encourage us to trust that Swedish-Danish-Norwegian can be understood across our borders.

    Half a year after his visit to Oslo, Blomstedt had a nasty fall (at least for a 95-year old) but made a comeback after several months. He now needs assistance to walk and conducts sitting. From the waist up he seemed totally his old self when I
    attended one of his concerts in Stockholm this autumn. Rather cleverly, >the orchestra did not come on stage until it was time to begin, and he could walk up to the podium half->hidden among them and supported by one musician.

    My last Sibelius cycle was Blomstedt's with the SFSO, and along with Berglund's efforts, perhaps even finer, it is now my favourite. Along with his Dresden LvB cycle (big band) but still wonderful, a very good Nielsen with SFSO, and some fine Hindemith
    with them, he is virtually legendary in the conducting world. Whichever way one wants to spin it.

    Ray Hall, Taree

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Herman@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 25 23:59:25 2022
    On Monday, December 26, 2022 at 7:10:31 AM UTC+1, Nils-Göran Olve wrote:
    Frank wrote
    I don't think anyone would disagree with this usage. Though whether someone is legendary in this sense could be a matter of opinion. I wouldn't call Blomstedt legendary, but can see someone else doing so.
    The context may explain it: the documentary is about Blomstedt's return visit in 2021 with the Oslo Philharmonic, whose chief conductor he was in the 1960s. At one point in it, he jokingly asks the musicians "Do you remember...? Although he makes a
    point of coming back to "his" orchestras now and then, he is "legendary" for current members as an international star whom they heard stories about from their "musical grandparents" who played in the same orchestra long ago. Oslo was his first foreign
    position, a smaller and much less important orchestra than now.

    Thank you for this. Well, this is exactly the kind of "legendary" I was talking about: someone they had heard stories about from the previous generations.

    Sorry to hear about his injury at this ripe old age...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alex Brown@21:1/5 to Herman on Mon Dec 26 08:30:17 2022
    On 2022-12-25 17:06, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 3:02:13 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 5:19 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 11:10:54 AM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 4:55 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 10:26:09 AM UTC+1, gggg gggg wrote: >>>>>>

    "The legendary conductor Herbert Blomstedt (documentary)"

    "Legendary" primarily means "existing in legend (only)".

    Blomstedt is alive and well, you can go to a Blomstedt concert.
    You quoted your definition as if you took from some (presumably reputable) source. I suspect you made it up. Legends (and Myths) are, by definition, neither true nor false, real nor imaginary.

    Look it up.

    Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Fowler and Fowler.
    Google cites Oxford. The first definition is:

    "of, described in, or based on legends"

    It lists opposites as "factual," and historical."

    Neither of them means "false" of "untrue." The essence of it is that legends are not documented not that they "exist in legend only)"

    I don't know if the usage is changing. Do you have a source for that? I think people, including you, don't know what the word means.

    I am by U training a linguist (of a couple historical languages). The "existing in legend only" are not my words, but from the Oxford dictionary, and yes, I happen to think that is the original essence. I cannot help but think (and I don't mean this
    unkindly) you are somewhat confused here. I don't know why you bring in "documented". Many legends have been written down and printed in modern times, which would mean they have been documented. And they could still be about long ago things that never
    happened in the documented form, which is why they're called legend.

    And yes, I know what the word "usage" means, and in the case of "legendary" it's clearly changing. In that it increasingly just means "famous" when they say "legendary".

    It's idiom.

    See also "legend in his lifetime"

    https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/legend+in+his+own+lifetime

    --
    - Alex Brown

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gerard@21:1/5 to All on Mon Dec 26 12:37:14 2022
    Op 2022-12-25 om 11:29 schreef Herman:
    Also it's stunning how your comments seem to address a troupe of straw men marching around in your head.
    I know the word 'legendary' is morphing towards the synonym of "famous" i.e. "much talked about" (IRL Blomstedt is neither), and I do not have the illusion I can do anything to stop it, other than point out that "famous" is way shorter than "legendary".

    BTW is "fabulous" the same as "legendary"?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Herman@21:1/5 to Gerard on Mon Dec 26 03:54:36 2022
    On Monday, December 26, 2022 at 12:37:18 PM UTC+1, Gerard wrote:
    Op 2022-12-25 om 11:29 schreef Herman:
    Also it's stunning how your comments seem to address a troupe of straw men marching around in your head.
    I know the word 'legendary' is morphing towards the synonym of "famous" i.e. "much talked about" (IRL Blomstedt is neither), and I do not have the illusion I can do anything to stop it, other than point out that "famous" is way shorter than "
    legendary".
    BTW is "fabulous" the same as "legendary"?

    I'm expecting something will be said about the use of dictionaries in the upcoming Dec Stats, Satire.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Owen Hartnett@21:1/5 to Alex Brown on Mon Dec 26 11:14:59 2022
    On 2022-12-26 08:30:17 +0000, Alex Brown said:

    On 2022-12-25 17:06, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 3:02:13 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 5:19 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 11:10:54 AM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote: >>>>> On 12/25/2022 4:55 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 10:26:09 AM UTC+1, gggg gggg wrote: >>>>>>>

    "The legendary conductor Herbert Blomstedt (documentary)"

    "Legendary" primarily means "existing in legend (only)".

    Blomstedt is alive and well, you can go to a Blomstedt concert.
    You quoted your definition as if you took from some (presumably
    reputable) source. I suspect you made it up. Legends (and Myths) are, >>>>> by definition, neither true nor false, real nor imaginary.

    Look it up.

    Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Fowler and Fowler.
    Google cites Oxford. The first definition is:

    "of, described in, or based on legends"

    It lists opposites as "factual," and historical."

    Neither of them means "false" of "untrue." The essence of it is that
    legends are not documented not that they "exist in legend only)"

    I don't know if the usage is changing. Do you have a source for that? I
    think people, including you, don't know what the word means.

    I am by U training a linguist (of a couple historical languages). The
    "existing in legend only" are not my words, but from the Oxford
    dictionary, and yes, I happen to think that is the original essence. I
    cannot help but think (and I don't mean this unkindly) you are somewhat
    confused here. I don't know why you bring in "documented". Many legends
    have been written down and printed in modern times, which would mean
    they have been documented. And they could still be about long ago
    things that never happened in the documented form, which is why they're
    called legend.

    And yes, I know what the word "usage" means, and in the case of
    "legendary" it's clearly changing. In that it increasingly just means
    "famous" when they say "legendary".

    It's idiom.

    See also "legend in his lifetime"

    https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/legend+in+his+own+lifetime

    "He's a legend in his own mind"
    -Clint Eastwood/ Dirty Harry

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Herman@21:1/5 to Gerard on Mon Dec 26 10:00:22 2022
    On Monday, December 26, 2022 at 6:50:06 PM UTC+1, Gerard wrote:

    I was wondering if the Ultimate Classical Music Guide is legendary, or fabulous, or just famous.

    It's absolutely ultimate.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gerard@21:1/5 to All on Mon Dec 26 18:50:01 2022
    Op 2022-12-26 om 12:54 schreef Herman:
    On Monday, December 26, 2022 at 12:37:18 PM UTC+1, Gerard wrote:
    Op 2022-12-25 om 11:29 schreef Herman:
    Also it's stunning how your comments seem to address a troupe of straw men marching around in your head.
    I know the word 'legendary' is morphing towards the synonym of "famous" i.e. "much talked about" (IRL Blomstedt is neither), and I do not have the illusion I can do anything to stop it, other than point out that "famous" is way shorter than "
    legendary".
    BTW is "fabulous" the same as "legendary"?

    I'm expecting something will be said about the use of dictionaries in the upcoming Dec Stats, Satire.

    I was wondering if the Ultimate Classical Music Guide is legendary, or fabulous, or just famous.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Berger@21:1/5 to Herman on Mon Dec 26 13:42:11 2022
    On 12/26/2022 1:00 PM, Herman wrote:
    On Monday, December 26, 2022 at 6:50:06 PM UTC+1, Gerard wrote:

    I was wondering if the Ultimate Classical Music Guide is legendary, or
    fabulous, or just famous.

    It's absolutely ultimate.

    We are all ultimately legendary.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From number_six@21:1/5 to Frank Berger on Mon Dec 26 17:02:43 2022
    On Monday, December 26, 2022 at 10:42:22 AM UTC-8, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/26/2022 1:00 PM, Herman wrote:
    On Monday, December 26, 2022 at 6:50:06 PM UTC+1, Gerard wrote:

    I was wondering if the Ultimate Classical Music Guide is legendary, or
    fabulous, or just famous.

    It's absolutely ultimate.
    We are all ultimately legendary.
    I'll read that as a humorous riff on an oft-cited remark by Keynes...

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Berger@21:1/5 to All on Mon Dec 26 20:44:04 2022
    On 12/26/2022 8:02 PM, number_six wrote:
    On Monday, December 26, 2022 at 10:42:22 AM UTC-8, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/26/2022 1:00 PM, Herman wrote:
    On Monday, December 26, 2022 at 6:50:06 PM UTC+1, Gerard wrote:

    I was wondering if the Ultimate Classical Music Guide is legendary, or >>>> fabulous, or just famous.

    It's absolutely ultimate.
    We are all ultimately legendary.
    I'll read that as a humorous riff on an oft-cited remark by Keynes...

    Well done.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Harper@21:1/5 to raymond....@gmail.com on Tue Dec 27 10:14:53 2022
    On 12/25/22 10:37 PM, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:


    My last Sibelius cycle was Blomstedt's with the SFSO, and along with Berglund's efforts, perhaps even finer, it is now my favourite. Along with his Dresden LvB cycle (big band) but still wonderful, a very good Nielsen with SFSO, and some fine Hindemith
    with them, he is virtually legendary in the conducting world. Whichever way one wants to spin it.

    Ray Hall, Taree

    Excellent choices every one. We may disagree about politics, but in more important matters....:).

    Bob Harper

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Harper@21:1/5 to Owen Hartnett on Tue Dec 27 10:17:17 2022
    On 12/26/22 8:14 AM, Owen Hartnett wrote:
    On 2022-12-26 08:30:17 +0000, Alex Brown said:

    On 2022-12-25 17:06, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 3:02:13 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 5:19 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 11:10:54 AM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote: >>>>>> On 12/25/2022 4:55 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 10:26:09 AM UTC+1, gggg gggg wrote: >>>>>>>>

    "The legendary conductor Herbert Blomstedt (documentary)"

    "Legendary" primarily means "existing in legend (only)".

    Blomstedt is alive and well, you can go to a Blomstedt concert.
    You quoted your definition as if you took from some (presumably
    reputable) source. I suspect you made it up. Legends (and Myths)
    are, by definition, neither true nor false, real nor imaginary.

    Look it up.

    Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Fowler and Fowler.
    Google cites Oxford. The first definition is:

    "of, described in, or based on legends"

    It lists opposites as "factual," and historical."

    Neither of them means "false" of "untrue." The essence of it is that
    legends are not documented not that they "exist in legend only)"

    I don't know if the usage is changing. Do you have a source for
    that? I think people, including you, don't know what the word means.

    I am by U training a linguist (of a couple historical languages). The
    "existing in legend only" are not my words, but from the Oxford
    dictionary, and yes, I happen to think that is the original essence.
    I cannot help but think (and I don't mean this unkindly) you are
    somewhat confused here. I don't know why you bring in "documented".
    Many legends have been written down and printed in modern times,
    which would mean they have been documented. And they could still be
    about long ago things that never happened in the documented form,
    which is why they're called legend.

    And yes, I know what the word "usage" means, and in the case of
    "legendary" it's clearly changing. In that it increasingly just means
    "famous" when they say "legendary".

    It's idiom.

    See also "legend in his lifetime"

    https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/legend+in+his+own+lifetime

    "He's a legend in his own mind"
        -Clint Eastwood/ Dirty Harry

    I hadn't remembered where that came from. Thanks.

    Bob Harper

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Harper@21:1/5 to Alex Brown on Tue Dec 27 10:16:22 2022
    On 12/26/22 12:30 AM, Alex Brown wrote:
    On 2022-12-25 17:06, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 3:02:13 PM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
    On 12/25/2022 5:19 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 11:10:54 AM UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote: >>>>> On 12/25/2022 4:55 AM, Herman wrote:
    On Sunday, December 25, 2022 at 10:26:09 AM UTC+1, gggg gggg wrote: >>>>>>>

    "The legendary conductor Herbert Blomstedt (documentary)"

    "Legendary" primarily means "existing in legend (only)".

    Blomstedt is alive and well, you can go to a Blomstedt concert.
    You quoted your definition as if you took from some (presumably
    reputable) source. I suspect you made it up. Legends (and Myths)
    are, by definition, neither true nor false, real nor imaginary.

    Look it up.

    Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Fowler and Fowler.
    Google cites Oxford. The first definition is:

    "of, described in, or based on legends"

    It lists opposites as "factual," and historical."

    Neither of them means "false" of "untrue." The essence of it is that
    legends are not documented not that they "exist in legend only)"

    I don't know if the usage is changing. Do you have a source for that?
    I think people, including you, don't know what the word means.

    I am by U training a linguist (of a couple historical languages). The
    "existing in legend only" are not my words, but from the Oxford
    dictionary, and yes, I happen to think that is the original essence. I
    cannot help but think (and I don't mean this unkindly) you are
    somewhat confused here. I don't know why you bring in "documented".
    Many legends have been written down and printed in modern times, which
    would mean they have been documented. And they could still be about
    long ago things that never happened in the documented form, which is
    why they're called legend.

    And yes, I know what the word "usage" means, and in the case of
    "legendary" it's clearly changing. In that it increasingly just means
    "famous" when they say "legendary".

    It's idiom.

    See also "legend in his lifetime"

    https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/legend+in+his+own+lifetime

    Or, snarkily, 'a legend in his own mind'.

    Bob Harper

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From gggg gggg@21:1/5 to All on Sat Mar 4 18:13:08 2023
    On Thursday, June 8, 2006 at 6:18:35 AM UTC-7, Handel8 wrote:
    I came across this a couple weks ago and didn't make much of it, but I
    went back to the Decca Classics web site just now to double check
    whether I was halucinating. It looks like Herbert Blomstedt recorded a complete recording of Nielsen's opera Maskarade in 1998.
    See details here: (Maskarade is the first on the list) http://www.deccaclassics.com/artists/blomstedt/index.html#
    (Click on details link and read popup page- may not work in all
    browsers.)
    I have been unable to find even a single trace of this recording on any
    of the usual online sites:
    Amazon(US, DE, UK) or using a Froogle search, etc. I can search some
    more, but it doesn't look good. Does anyone know about this recording
    ? Was it any good ? Can we see a reissue any time soon ? Or was it
    never released at all? This one slipped below my radar completely if
    it was released at all. Anyone have a copy to burn for me ? That would
    be my last resort. I'd much rather get a legit copy.
    Alan Prichard

    https://www.inquirer.com/news/herbert-blomstedt-philadelphia-orchestra-kimmel-center-20230304.html

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