Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
"I think classical music lovers (including myself) often fall into the trap of buying or listening to something just because the "experts" recommend it..."
172 views
Skip to first unread message
aesthete8
Feb 9, 2013, 6:49:29 PM2/9/13
to
Agree/disagree?:
"I think classical music lovers (including myself) often fall into the
trap of buying or listening to something just because the "experts"
recommend it. While there's nothing wrong with consulting informed
opinions on the many choices of classical recordings, in the end they
are only opinions. Try to hear samples or borrow recordings to find
the version that is best for you before buying, or own multiple
versions if you can afford it."
http://www.amazon.com/review/R16EOUXR5MU1M7
"I think classical music lovers (including myself) often fall into the
trap of buying or listening to something just because the "experts"
recommend it. While there's nothing wrong with consulting informed
opinions on the many choices of classical recordings, in the end they
are only opinions. Try to hear samples or borrow recordings to find
the version that is best for you before buying, or own multiple
versions if you can afford it."
http://www.amazon.com/review/R16EOUXR5MU1M7
William Sommerwerck
Feb 9, 2013, 7:06:41 PM2/9/13
to
their recommendations with a high assurance you'll like them.
graham
Feb 9, 2013, 9:01:56 PM2/9/13
to
"aesthete8" <art...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6b51219f-a69f-4b47...@kg11g2000pbb.googlegroups.com...
Matthew B. Tepper
Feb 9, 2013, 9:32:12 PM2/9/13
to
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> appears to have caused
the following letters to be typed in news:kf6o9j$5a8$1...@dont-email.me:
Indeed. And is that any worse than buying something just because it's brand
spankin' new, the PR department sez it's wonderful, and the paid yes-men in
the so-called journalist media are nodding their heads in agreement?
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers.
the following letters to be typed in news:kf6o9j$5a8$1...@dont-email.me:
spankin' new, the PR department sez it's wonderful, and the paid yes-men in
the so-called journalist media are nodding their heads in agreement?
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers.
Matthew Silverstein
Feb 10, 2013, 1:00:01 AM2/10/13
to
Matty
Frank Berger
Feb 10, 2013, 3:34:55 AM2/10/13
to
clothes, whatever. Who cares if there's some truth to it? There is such a
thing as"good" art. Evaluation of what is "good" varies, of course, but
it's not simply a matter of personal preference.
Herman
Feb 10, 2013, 3:35:32 AM2/10/13
to
Well, sorry. For this time I won't comment on you ridiculous habit of posting subject lines that show your inability to analyze and condense into three or four words what you want to talk about.
I'll talk about the subject matter. Are lovers of classical music specifically prone to fall into this trap of buying what is recommended by the media?
I don't think so. Compared to lovers of pop music, not at all. In the rest of the world everybody's still acting like Beyonce is the most unbelievably brilliant singer / performer that ever existed - until the next media blitz comes along.
So if someone decides to get the latest recording of Beethoven's violin cto, just because it's new, he or she has decided to do a distinctly individual thing, i.e. showing an interest in something that the next guy in subway has never heard of.
I'll talk about the subject matter. Are lovers of classical music specifically prone to fall into this trap of buying what is recommended by the media?
I don't think so. Compared to lovers of pop music, not at all. In the rest of the world everybody's still acting like Beyonce is the most unbelievably brilliant singer / performer that ever existed - until the next media blitz comes along.
So if someone decides to get the latest recording of Beethoven's violin cto, just because it's new, he or she has decided to do a distinctly individual thing, i.e. showing an interest in something that the next guy in subway has never heard of.
Gerard
Feb 10, 2013, 4:16:31 AM2/10/13
to
William Sommerwerck
Feb 10, 2013, 9:15:25 AM2/10/13
to
"Frank Berger" wrote in message
news:XIOdnaVgVscyxorM...@supernews.com...
But that was the point of the question -- do you trust someone else's
preferences? "Good" or "bad" has nothing to do with it. (See "Hamlet".)
I find Jerry Dubins highly reliable in predicting what I will like. And as far
as JIm Svejda is concerned (with one or two egregious exceptions), it's as if
we were separated at birth.
news:XIOdnaVgVscyxorM...@supernews.com...
preferences? "Good" or "bad" has nothing to do with it. (See "Hamlet".)
I find Jerry Dubins highly reliable in predicting what I will like. And as far
as JIm Svejda is concerned (with one or two egregious exceptions), it's as if
we were separated at birth.
William Sommerwerck
Feb 10, 2013, 9:18:17 AM2/10/13
to
> For this time I won't comment on you ridiculous habit of posting subject
> lines that show your inability to analyze and condense into three or four
> words what you want to talk about.
In this case, it should have been "Who do you trust?" or (if you insist on
> lines that show your inability to analyze and condense into three or four
> words what you want to talk about.
grammatical precision) "Whom do you trust?".
The elderly among us might remember a game show from a half-century ago,
hosted by Johnny Carson, titled "Who Do You Trust?"
Herman
Feb 10, 2013, 9:45:46 AM2/10/13
to
Op zondag 10 februari 2013 15:18:17 UTC+1 schreef William Sommerwerck het volgende:
>
yes
> > For this time I won't comment on you ridiculous habit of posting subject
>
> > lines that show your inability to analyze and condense into three or four
>
> > words what you want to talk about.
>
>
>
> In this case, it should have been "Who do you trust?" .
>
> > lines that show your inability to analyze and condense into three or four
>
> > words what you want to talk about.
>
>
>
>
yes
John Wiser
Feb 10, 2013, 10:11:35 AM2/10/13
to
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:
[great big snip]
jdw
[great big snip]
> And as far as JIm Svejda is concerned (with one or two egregious exceptions), it's as if
> we were separated at birth.
>
Not a moment too soon.
> we were separated at birth.
>
jdw
Frank Berger
Feb 10, 2013, 10:59:43 AM2/10/13
to
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:kf8a0s$g6p$1...@dont-email.me...
to them. But I disagree on the question of good vs. bad. I will often
listen to recommended recordings of works I don't particularly like in order
to learn to like them. It works.
>
Gerard
Feb 10, 2013, 11:13:50 AM2/10/13
to
jrsnfld
Feb 10, 2013, 2:08:56 PM2/10/13
to
On Feb 10, 6:18 am, "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net>
wrote:
What you're saying is that everybody has a different idea of who the
experts are. If that's so, then it's really difficult to agree with
the statement, because once you've identified who the "experts" are
(in your opinion, then you've found people whose opinions you trust
enough to follow. That doesn't mean you have to agree with them once
you've heard the recording, but, when deciding what to buy next, you'd
be a fool not to consider to the opinions of people you respect.
The caveat--about preferring to listen to samples or borrow a
recording first--is useless. Except for a couple of obvious,
unimportant criteria, you can't tell anything from excerpts. For
instance--the pianist has bad technique, or the clarinetists has
crappy tone, or the tempo is ridiculously fast or slow: some good
quality excerpts can tell you these things, but such clear-cut
situations are rare, and if they aren't clear cut, you're just as
likely to make a mistake by dismissing something as by buying it. The
other option, borrowing, is usually not easy enough to make it
worthwhile.
Some classical music lovers fall into the trap of blindly following
expert opinion without considering whether they really agree with that
expert. But such people probably are better off listening to expert
opinions than relying on their own unconsidered judgement. So the real
trap, and the only trap, is to ignore your own feelings and
perceptions of the music. I don't see why classical music lovers are
more prone to such boorishness than anyone else.
--Jeff
wrote:
experts are. If that's so, then it's really difficult to agree with
the statement, because once you've identified who the "experts" are
(in your opinion, then you've found people whose opinions you trust
enough to follow. That doesn't mean you have to agree with them once
you've heard the recording, but, when deciding what to buy next, you'd
be a fool not to consider to the opinions of people you respect.
The caveat--about preferring to listen to samples or borrow a
recording first--is useless. Except for a couple of obvious,
unimportant criteria, you can't tell anything from excerpts. For
instance--the pianist has bad technique, or the clarinetists has
crappy tone, or the tempo is ridiculously fast or slow: some good
quality excerpts can tell you these things, but such clear-cut
situations are rare, and if they aren't clear cut, you're just as
likely to make a mistake by dismissing something as by buying it. The
other option, borrowing, is usually not easy enough to make it
worthwhile.
Some classical music lovers fall into the trap of blindly following
expert opinion without considering whether they really agree with that
expert. But such people probably are better off listening to expert
opinions than relying on their own unconsidered judgement. So the real
trap, and the only trap, is to ignore your own feelings and
perceptions of the music. I don't see why classical music lovers are
more prone to such boorishness than anyone else.
--Jeff
Herman
Feb 10, 2013, 2:12:00 PM2/10/13
to
Op zondag 10 februari 2013 17:13:50 UTC+1 schreef Gerard het volgende:
>
> > The elderly among us might remember a game show from a half-century
>
> > ago, hosted by Johnny Carson, titled "Who Do You Trust?"
>
>
>
> No, I don't.
Gerard, just to be fair, you can't expect Americans to figure out that there are places on earth other than America - places where they weren't watching Johnny Carson light years ago.
>
> > The elderly among us might remember a game show from a half-century
>
> > ago, hosted by Johnny Carson, titled "Who Do You Trust?"
>
>
>
> No, I don't.
Kip Williams
Feb 10, 2013, 4:36:04 PM2/10/13
to
Herman wrote, On 2/10/13 2:12 PM:
He did say "might." It's not exactly a categorical imperative.
Kip W
Kip W
Frank Berger
Feb 10, 2013, 4:52:14 PM2/10/13
to
Americans?" He wasn' even assuming Americans would remember the show/. He
would hardly expect "foreigners" to do so. Go pick on your wife.
John Wiser
Feb 10, 2013, 4:59:17 PM2/10/13
to
"Frank Berger" <frankd...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:h-6dnRR0yscSi4XM...@supernews.com...
We're here becuz she's pickin' on us.
Surprising you need to be told this.
jdw
news:h-6dnRR0yscSi4XM...@supernews.com...
Surprising you need to be told this.
jdw
Bob Harper
Feb 10, 2013, 7:07:16 PM2/10/13
to
Bob Harper
John Thomas
Feb 10, 2013, 8:40:27 PM2/10/13
to
aesthete8
Feb 11, 2013, 3:15:38 AM2/11/13
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
But then is there no such thing as a wrong opinion?
Gerard
Feb 11, 2013, 5:32:25 AM2/11/13
to
Gerard
Feb 11, 2013, 5:33:38 AM2/11/13
to
Frank Berger <frankd...@gmail.com> typed:
> Herman wrote:
> > Op zondag 10 februari 2013 17:13:50 UTC+1 schreef Gerard het
> > volgende:
> >
> > >
> > > > The elderly among us might remember a game show from a
> > > > half-century
> > >
> > > > ago, hosted by Johnny Carson, titled "Who Do You Trust?"
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > No, I don't.
> >
> > Gerard, just to be fair, you can't expect Americans to figure out
> > that there are places on earth other than America - places where
> > they weren't watching Johnny Carson light years ago.
>
> You really think it was necessary for William to add "and those who
> are Americans?" He wasn' even assuming Americans would remember the
> show/.
Wrong. He wrote "us". That should have been "US".
> > Op zondag 10 februari 2013 17:13:50 UTC+1 schreef Gerard het
> > volgende:
> >
> > >
> > > > The elderly among us might remember a game show from a
> > > > half-century
> > >
> > > > ago, hosted by Johnny Carson, titled "Who Do You Trust?"
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > No, I don't.
> >
> > Gerard, just to be fair, you can't expect Americans to figure out
> > that there are places on earth other than America - places where
> > they weren't watching Johnny Carson light years ago.
>
> You really think it was necessary for William to add "and those who
> are Americans?" He wasn' even assuming Americans would remember the
> show/.
Christopher Webber
Feb 11, 2013, 5:39:50 AM2/11/13
to
On 11/02/2013 01:40, John Thomas wrote:
> but everyone in the arts who claims to be an expert is just someone with a personal opinion about something they're familiar with.
That is entirely untrue.
> but everyone in the arts who claims to be an expert is just someone with a personal opinion about something they're familiar with.
In the arts (even cinema) much depends on an individual's ability to
write, their ability to express themselves, and the quality of their
analysis. That is why some opinions are certainly more "expert" than others.
You've been had by logical empiricism, which is largely irrelevant when
it comes to aesthetics. I'd turn your question the other way: opinions
can't be "right" or "wrong" in a quasi-scientific way, but they can
certainly be "informed" or "ignorant", and "well" or "badly" written or
expressed. That is a more sensible way of evaluating them.
And also the reason why X is worth reading, whilst Y is not.
John Wiser
Feb 11, 2013, 9:34:28 AM2/11/13
to
"John Wiser" <cee...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:LMORs.31394$Hq1....@newsfe23.iad...
Silly & mildly salacious:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/GLUCK-IFIGENIA-IN-TAURIDE-BY-CALLAS-MARIA-CD-/350601805794?pt=Music_CDs&hash=item51a17effe2
jdw
http://www.ebay.com/itm/GLUCK-IFIGENIA-IN-TAURIDE-BY-CALLAS-MARIA-CD-/350601805794?pt=Music_CDs&hash=item51a17effe2
jdw
William Sommerwerck
Feb 11, 2013, 9:55:36 AM2/11/13
to
>> It's true you can find "experts" whose taste agrees with yours, but
>> that doesn't mean they're necessarily "right" about anything. How
>> can any opinion about something like an art work be "right"?
>> that doesn't mean they're necessarily "right" about anything. How
>> can any opinion about something like an art work be "right"?
> But then is there no such thing as a wrong opinion?
It's not a question of right/wrong. It is a question of informed/uninformed,
justifiable/unjustifiable.
John Thomas
Feb 11, 2013, 12:57:56 PM2/11/13
to
On Feb 11, 2:39 am, Christopher Webber <zarzu...@zarzuela.invalid.net>
wrote:
Thanks for your opinion.
wrote:
John Thomas
Feb 11, 2013, 12:58:39 PM2/11/13
to
William Sommerwerck
Feb 11, 2013, 2:00:52 PM2/11/13
to
"John Thomas" wrote in message
news:f2a1c8c7-f13e-4f05...@j2g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
I think that's self-explanatory -- but I'll explain it.
If a person knows little about a work or performer, and/or cannot justify
their opinions (perhaps be citing a particular passage), then one is
less-likely to trust their opinion, relative to other reviewers.
news:f2a1c8c7-f13e-4f05...@j2g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
If a person knows little about a work or performer, and/or cannot justify
their opinions (perhaps be citing a particular passage), then one is
less-likely to trust their opinion, relative to other reviewers.
Gerard
Feb 11, 2013, 2:09:08 PM2/11/13
to
William Sommerwerck <grizzle...@comcast.net> typed:
So if someone knows *everything* about Andr� Rieu, you can trust his opinion
without hesitation?
without hesitation?
Frank Berger
Feb 11, 2013, 2:24:50 PM2/11/13
to
studied it. The second is a highly trained, experienced musician. They
both listen to two recordings of the same work. You want to buy one, but
not both, and haven't heard either. Do you value the two opinions equally?
Mark S
Feb 11, 2013, 2:33:19 PM2/11/13
to
On Feb 11, 11:24 am, "Frank Berger" <frankdber...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Imaigine two people, one who has never heard any music before, let alone
> studied it. The second is a highly trained, experienced musician. They
> both listen to two recordings of the same work. You want to buy one, but
> not both, and haven't heard either. Do you value the two opinions equally?
In rmcr land, the answer is "yes." :)
>
>
> Imaigine two people, one who has never heard any music before, let alone
> studied it. The second is a highly trained, experienced musician. They
> both listen to two recordings of the same work. You want to buy one, but
> not both, and haven't heard either. Do you value the two opinions equally?
SPAM- @xs4all.nl HvT
Feb 11, 2013, 3:26:22 PM2/11/13
to
sensible about music. That's the reason why I prefer the recommendations of
RMCRs.
Henk
John Wiser
Feb 11, 2013, 3:43:55 PM2/11/13
to
"HvT" <hvtuijl- SPAM- @xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:51195405$0$6841$e4fe...@news2.news.xs4all.nl...
> That's the reason why I prefer the recommendations of RMCRs.
>
Why stop at a fleabitten newsgrope?
Take it a step further down the scale, Henk,
and start using on-line and print record reviews.
JDW
news:51195405$0$6841$e4fe...@news2.news.xs4all.nl...
> Mark S wrote:
>> On Feb 11, 11:24 am, "Frank Berger" <frankdber...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Imaigine two people, one who has never heard any music before, let
>>> alone studied it. The second is a highly trained, experienced
>>> musician. They both listen to two recordings of the same work. You
>>> want to buy one, but not both, and haven't heard either. Do you
>>> value the two opinions equally?
>>
>> In rmcr land, the answer is "yes." :)
>
> No. Talented professional musicians are seldom capable of saying something sensible about music.
This is patently nonsense.
>> On Feb 11, 11:24 am, "Frank Berger" <frankdber...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Imaigine two people, one who has never heard any music before, let
>>> alone studied it. The second is a highly trained, experienced
>>> musician. They both listen to two recordings of the same work. You
>>> want to buy one, but not both, and haven't heard either. Do you
>>> value the two opinions equally?
>>
>> In rmcr land, the answer is "yes." :)
>
> No. Talented professional musicians are seldom capable of saying something sensible about music.
> That's the reason why I prefer the recommendations of RMCRs.
>
Take it a step further down the scale, Henk,
and start using on-line and print record reviews.
JDW
Gerard
Feb 11, 2013, 4:17:40 PM2/11/13
to
HvT <hvtuijl- SPAM- @xs4all.nl> typed:
So it's a good thing that talented professional musicians don't write here.
John Thomas
Feb 11, 2013, 5:25:29 PM2/11/13
to
Only the under- and unemployed are so desperate for attention that
they need to post here.
John Thomas
Feb 11, 2013, 5:29:07 PM2/11/13
to
On Feb 11, 11:24 am, "Frank Berger" <frankdber...@gmail.com> wrote:
post classical music reviews online or in print.
The situation you posit would never happen in real life.
Frank Berger
Feb 11, 2013, 5:36:40 PM2/11/13
to
reveals whether one values music criticism.
John Thomas
Feb 11, 2013, 5:41:50 PM2/11/13
to
On Feb 11, 11:00 am, "William Sommerwerck"
about works and performers why should I believe
that kind of knowledge makes anyone's opinions "correct?" But
besides, if you hold to the position you've taken here then you must
agree with the highly knowledgeable Michael that you yourself lack the
qualifications to have useful opinions about music.
<grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "John Thomas" wrote in message
>
> news:f2a1c8c7-f13e-4f05...@j2g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 11, 6:55 am, "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >>>> It's true you can find "experts" whose taste agrees with yours, but
> >>>> that doesn't mean they're necessarily "right" about anything. How
> >>>> can any opinion about something like an art work be "right"?
> >>> But then is there no such thing as a wrong opinion?
> >> It's not a question of right/wrong. It is a question of
> >> informed/uninformed,
> >> justifiable/unjustifiable.
> > According to whom?
>
> I think that's self-explanatory -- but I'll explain it.
>
> If a person knows little about a work or performer, and/or cannot justify
> their opinions (perhaps be citing a particular passage), then one is
> less-likely to trust their opinion, relative to other reviewers.
Since even highly knowledgeable reviewers differ in their opinions
> "John Thomas" wrote in message
>
> news:f2a1c8c7-f13e-4f05...@j2g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> On Feb 11, 6:55 am, "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
> >>>> It's true you can find "experts" whose taste agrees with yours, but
> >>>> that doesn't mean they're necessarily "right" about anything. How
> >>>> can any opinion about something like an art work be "right"?
> >>> But then is there no such thing as a wrong opinion?
> >> It's not a question of right/wrong. It is a question of
> >> informed/uninformed,
> >> justifiable/unjustifiable.
> > According to whom?
>
> I think that's self-explanatory -- but I'll explain it.
>
> If a person knows little about a work or performer, and/or cannot justify
> their opinions (perhaps be citing a particular passage), then one is
> less-likely to trust their opinion, relative to other reviewers.
about works and performers why should I believe
that kind of knowledge makes anyone's opinions "correct?" But
besides, if you hold to the position you've taken here then you must
agree with the highly knowledgeable Michael that you yourself lack the
qualifications to have useful opinions about music.
John Thomas
Feb 11, 2013, 5:56:30 PM2/11/13
to
forecasts.
JohnGavin
Feb 11, 2013, 6:03:45 PM2/11/13
to
Christopher Webber
Feb 11, 2013, 6:07:53 PM2/11/13
to
On 11/02/2013 22:41, John Thomas wrote:
> Since even highly knowledgeable reviewers differ in their opinions
> about works and performers why should I believe
> that kind of knowledge makes anyone's opinions "correct?"
Of course highly knowledgeable reviewers differ. I should hope they do.
> Since even highly knowledgeable reviewers differ in their opinions
> about works and performers why should I believe
> that kind of knowledge makes anyone's opinions "correct?"
You aren't taking in what is being suggested to you from several quarters.
To looking for what is "correct" is one almighty mistake, because you
will never find it. You're in the wrong business completely. You'd do
better to be looking for what's illuminating, inspiring or entertaining
in the music criticism you read, and to be influenced accordingly.
That's the joy of it. My own life for example has been immeasurably
enriched by what writers such as John Steane have made me see and feel
about music.
This is a marvellous way to supplement and expand your own tastes,
unless you are simply one of those insular, arrogant Millers of Dee who
"cares for nobody, no not I" when it comes to reviewers. Which I am sure
you are not.
Christopher Webber
Feb 11, 2013, 6:13:46 PM2/11/13
to
On 11/02/2013 22:25, John Thomas wrote:
> Only the under- and unemployed are so desperate for attention that
> they need to post here.
Speak for yourself. There may be other reasons for posting. Some of us
> Only the under- and unemployed are so desperate for attention that
> they need to post here.
are busy chaps and chapesses who enjoy communicating our enthusiasm for
the music we love with like-minded souls, even if we're not being paid
to do so.
William Sommerwerck
Feb 11, 2013, 8:14:29 PM2/11/13
to
"John Thomas" wrote in message
news:d7d53bd9-d211-4545...@cd3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 11, 11:00 am, "William Sommerwerck"
<grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "John Thomas" wrote in message
<grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "John Thomas" wrote in message
>>>>> It's true you can find "experts" whose taste agrees with yours, but
>>>>> that doesn't mean they're necessarily "right" about anything. How
>>>>> can any opinion about something like an art work be "right"?
>>>> But then is there no such thing as a wrong opinion?
>>> It's not a question of right/wrong. It is a question of
>>> informed/uninformed, justifiable/unjustifiable.
>> According to whom?
> I think that's self-explanatory -- but I'll explain it.
> If a person knows little about a work or performer, and/or cannot justify
> their opinions (perhaps be citing a particular passage), then one is
> less-likely to trust their opinion, relative to other reviewers.
> Since even highly knowledgeable reviewers differ in their opinions
> about works and performers why should I believe
> that kind of knowledge makes anyone's opinions "correct?" But
> besides, if you hold to the position you've taken here then you must
> agree with the highly knowledgeable Michael that you yourself lack the
> qualifications to have useful opinions about music.
You are wandering quite far from the point. We are not talking about amateur
>>>>> that doesn't mean they're necessarily "right" about anything. How
>>>>> can any opinion about something like an art work be "right"?
>>>> But then is there no such thing as a wrong opinion?
>>> It's not a question of right/wrong. It is a question of
>>> informed/uninformed, justifiable/unjustifiable.
>> According to whom?
> I think that's self-explanatory -- but I'll explain it.
> If a person knows little about a work or performer, and/or cannot justify
> their opinions (perhaps be citing a particular passage), then one is
> less-likely to trust their opinion, relative to other reviewers.
> Since even highly knowledgeable reviewers differ in their opinions
> about works and performers why should I believe
> that kind of knowledge makes anyone's opinions "correct?" But
> besides, if you hold to the position you've taken here then you must
> agree with the highly knowledgeable Michael that you yourself lack the
> qualifications to have useful opinions about music.
opinions. We are talking about /expert/ opinions -- however you choose to
define "expert". Furthermore, we are not talking about "correct" opinions (of
which there are and can be none), but useful opinions. Anyone can have a
useful opinion. I, and other non-experts in this group have expressed them and
will continue to do so.
John Thomas
Feb 11, 2013, 8:59:59 PM2/11/13
to
On Feb 11, 5:14 pm, "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net>
I didn't say that I *agreed* with Michael any more than I agree with
you..
you..
aesthete8
Feb 12, 2013, 1:21:40 AM2/12/13
to
On Feb 11, 1:07 pm, Christopher Webber <zarzu...@zarzuela.invalid.net>
wrote:
I feel that when audiences no longer care about correctness, accuracy
and precision, then that is a sign that an artform is in decline.
wrote:
> On 11/02/2013 22:41, John Thomas wrote:
>
> > Since even highly knowledgeable reviewers differ in their opinions
> > about works and performers why should I believe
> > that kind of knowledge makes anyone's opinions "correct?"
>
> Of course highly knowledgeable reviewers differ. I should hope they do.
> You aren't taking in what is being suggested to you from several quarters.
>
> To looking for what is "correct" is one almighty mistake, because you
> will never find it. You're in the wrong business completely. You'd do
> better to be looking for what's illuminating, inspiring or entertaining
> in the music criticism you read, and to be influenced accordingly...
>
> > Since even highly knowledgeable reviewers differ in their opinions
> > about works and performers why should I believe
> > that kind of knowledge makes anyone's opinions "correct?"
>
> Of course highly knowledgeable reviewers differ. I should hope they do.
> You aren't taking in what is being suggested to you from several quarters.
>
> To looking for what is "correct" is one almighty mistake, because you
> will never find it. You're in the wrong business completely. You'd do
> better to be looking for what's illuminating, inspiring or entertaining
I feel that when audiences no longer care about correctness, accuracy
and precision, then that is a sign that an artform is in decline.
aesthete8
Feb 12, 2013, 1:34:53 AM2/12/13
to
basis?
aesthete8
Feb 12, 2013, 2:01:03 AM2/12/13
to
On Feb 11, 8:34 pm, aesthete8 <art...@gmail.com> wrote:
> basis?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Also, shouldn't good music critics be like connoisseurs who point out
how small things in the way of the overlooked, neglected, and
underrated can make all the difference in a performance?:
- They are celebrated because of their rare talent — their gift — for
identifying and appreciating subtle, often hidden, qualities.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/business/connoisseurship-expands-beyond-high-art-and-classical-music.html?ref=businessspecial3&_r=0&pagewanted=all
>
> - Show quoted text -
Also, shouldn't good music critics be like connoisseurs who point out
how small things in the way of the overlooked, neglected, and
underrated can make all the difference in a performance?:
- They are celebrated because of their rare talent — their gift — for
identifying and appreciating subtle, often hidden, qualities.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/business/connoisseurship-expands-beyond-high-art-and-classical-music.html?ref=businessspecial3&_r=0&pagewanted=all
Herman
Feb 12, 2013, 6:50:16 AM2/12/13
to
Op dinsdag 12 februari 2013 08:01:03 UTC+1 schreef aesthete8 het volgende:
>
> Also, shouldn't good music critics be like connoisseurs who point out
>
> how small things in the way of the overlooked, neglected, and
>
> underrated can make all the difference in a performance?:
You're opening the door wide open for major bullshit artists.
>
> Also, shouldn't good music critics be like connoisseurs who point out
>
> how small things in the way of the overlooked, neglected, and
>
> underrated can make all the difference in a performance?:
>
>
>
> - They are celebrated because of their rare talent — their gift — for
>
> identifying and appreciating subtle, often hidden, qualities.
>
so the "connoisseur" is the creative talent now?
>
>
> - They are celebrated because of their rare talent — their gift — for
>
> identifying and appreciating subtle, often hidden, qualities.
>
SPAM- @xs4all.nl HvT
Feb 12, 2013, 6:54:00 AM2/12/13
to
>> No. Talented professional musicians are seldom capable of saying
>> something sensible about music.
>
> This is patently nonsense.
>
>> That's the reason why I prefer the recommendations of RMCRs.
>>
> Why stop at a fleabitten newsgrope?
> Take it a step further down the scale, Henk,
> and start using on-line and print record reviews.
Hmmm. Rubinstein - the least verbally impaired great pianist in the history
>> something sensible about music.
>
> This is patently nonsense.
>
>> That's the reason why I prefer the recommendations of RMCRs.
>>
> Why stop at a fleabitten newsgrope?
> Take it a step further down the scale, Henk,
> and start using on-line and print record reviews.
of classical music - sings or plays the piano when he wants to make clear
how according to him a piece should be performed. When asked in an interview
about for example the Grieg piano concerto he starts telling anecdotes.
Those who speak or write about music on a regular basis often refer to
precise preconceived notions about a piece and how it should be performed.
Often these notions are external to (the performance of) the piece in
question, for example by expressing doubt about the sense of performing a
Beethoven sonata in a historically uninformed way without wasting a word on
the performance itself.
Here on RMCR we just tell each other what we like or don't like. We don't
sing or play the piano but refer to YT to demonstrate why.
Flea-bitten as we members of RMCR may be, it seems that we have more in
common with Rubinstein than with the participants (most often performing
musicians) in radio programs about classical recordings and the authors of
on-line and printed record reviews.
Henk
William Sommerwerck
Feb 12, 2013, 8:18:12 AM2/12/13
to
>> To looking for what is "correct" is one almighty mistake, because you
>> will never find it. You're in the wrong business completely. You'd do
>> better to be looking for what's illuminating, inspiring or entertaining
>> in the music criticism you read, and to be influenced accordingly...
> I feel that when audiences no longer care about correctness, accuracy
> and precision, then that is a sign that an artform is in decline.
You can have a correct, accurate, precise performance that fails to capture
>> will never find it. You're in the wrong business completely. You'd do
>> better to be looking for what's illuminating, inspiring or entertaining
>> in the music criticism you read, and to be influenced accordingly...
> I feel that when audiences no longer care about correctness, accuracy
> and precision, then that is a sign that an artform is in decline.
the spirit of the music.
Dufus
Feb 12, 2013, 8:49:42 AM2/12/13
to
>On Feb 12, 5:54 am, "HvT" <hvtuijl- SPAM- @xs4all.nl> wrote:
>Henk
Well said , and agree. Genius seems to have a limited ability to
explain how / why it performs a given work. Even Barenboim.
>Henk
Well said , and agree. Genius seems to have a limited ability to
explain how / why it performs a given work. Even Barenboim.
Matthew B. Tepper
Feb 12, 2013, 3:57:14 PM2/12/13
to
"HvT" <hvtuijl- SPAM- @xs4all.nl> appears to have caused the following
letters to be typed in news:511a2d6d$0$6848$e4fe...@news2.news.xs4all.nl:
> Hmmm. Rubinstein - the least verbally impaired great pianist in the
> history of classical music - sings or plays the piano when he wants to
> make clear how according to him a piece should be performed. When asked
> in an interview about for example the Grieg piano concerto he starts
> telling anecdotes.
Indeed. I just bought a copy of My Many Years, the sequel to his best-
selling autobiography My Young Years, and have been reacquainting myself with
this aspect of his personality. That said, you might not describe Charles
Rosen or Oscar Levant with the term "great pianist," but they certainly did
not hold back on words. Jeremy Denk should be watched, too.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers.
letters to be typed in news:511a2d6d$0$6848$e4fe...@news2.news.xs4all.nl:
> Hmmm. Rubinstein - the least verbally impaired great pianist in the
> history of classical music - sings or plays the piano when he wants to
> make clear how according to him a piece should be performed. When asked
> in an interview about for example the Grieg piano concerto he starts
> telling anecdotes.
selling autobiography My Young Years, and have been reacquainting myself with
this aspect of his personality. That said, you might not describe Charles
Rosen or Oscar Levant with the term "great pianist," but they certainly did
not hold back on words. Jeremy Denk should be watched, too.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!!
Read about "Proty" here: http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/proty.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers.
O
Feb 12, 2013, 11:03:29 PM2/12/13
to
In article <jKcSs.104152$j95....@newsfe31.iad>, John Wiser
listen to?
-Owen, no "he's dead!" jokes.
<cee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That's the reason why I prefer the recommendations of RMCRs.
> >
> Why stop at a fleabitten newsgrope?
> Take it a step further down the scale, Henk,
> and start using on-line and print record reviews.
Would you want Toscanini to select tonight's recordings for you to
>
> > That's the reason why I prefer the recommendations of RMCRs.
> >
> Why stop at a fleabitten newsgrope?
> Take it a step further down the scale, Henk,
> and start using on-line and print record reviews.
listen to?
-Owen, no "he's dead!" jokes.
Roger Kulp
Feb 13, 2013, 9:36:28 AM2/13/13
to
I found after I was listening to cassical music a few years,I felt even more inclined to seek out forgotten and obscure artists lost to the mists of time.
Roger
Roger
cmling
Mar 6, 2013, 9:00:00 PM3/6/13
to
On 10.02.2013 09:34, Frank Berger wrote:
> Matthew Silverstein wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 15:49:29 -0800 (PST), aesthete8 wrote:
>>
>>> Agree/disagree?:
>>>
>>> "I think classical music lovers (including myself) often fall into
>>> the trap of buying or listening to something just because the
>>> "experts" recommend it. While there's nothing wrong with consulting
>>> informed opinions on the many choices of classical recordings, in
>>> the end they are only opinions. Try to hear samples or borrow
>>> recordings to find the version that is best for you before buying,
>>> or own multiple versions if you can afford it."
>>>
>>> http://www.amazon.com/review/R16EOUXR5MU1M7
>>
>
> It's a meaningless statement that applies equally to books, movies,
> cars, clothes, whatever. Who cares if there's some truth to it? There
> is such a thing as"good" art. Evaluation of what is "good" varies, of
> course, but it's not simply a matter of personal preference.
>
>
You are right, but this will make you (us?) unpopular.
Greeting to all,
Charley
--
Charles Milton Ling
Vienna, Austria
http://www.proz.com/profile/1721567
> Matthew Silverstein wrote:
>> On Sat, 9 Feb 2013 15:49:29 -0800 (PST), aesthete8 wrote:
>>
>>> Agree/disagree?:
>>>
>>> "I think classical music lovers (including myself) often fall into
>>> the trap of buying or listening to something just because the
>>> "experts" recommend it. While there's nothing wrong with consulting
>>> informed opinions on the many choices of classical recordings, in
>>> the end they are only opinions. Try to hear samples or borrow
>>> recordings to find the version that is best for you before buying,
>>> or own multiple versions if you can afford it."
>>>
>>> http://www.amazon.com/review/R16EOUXR5MU1M7
>>
>
> It's a meaningless statement that applies equally to books, movies,
> cars, clothes, whatever. Who cares if there's some truth to it? There
> is such a thing as"good" art. Evaluation of what is "good" varies, of
> course, but it's not simply a matter of personal preference.
>
>
You are right, but this will make you (us?) unpopular.
Greeting to all,
Charley
--
Charles Milton Ling
Vienna, Austria
http://www.proz.com/profile/1721567
Frank Berger
Mar 6, 2013, 9:21:24 PM3/6/13
to
piece of art implicitly believe the concept of good/bad applies and not just
"I like it or I don't." If they didn't, the conversation would end after:
A: I like it.
B: I don't like it.
0 new messages