Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Yuja Wang sets an all-time low
3,495 views
Skip to first unread message
Tony
May 16, 2016, 1:16:19 PM5/16/16
to
So far I've listened only to her dawdling and mawkish Kreisleriana. I don't think I've ever heard such an inept performance. Surely thousands of amateur pianists at home could play this with more style and ability. She turned a part of it into music for a perfume ad. Have a listen to this flat and doodling performance:
http://www.medici.tv/#!/yuja-wang-brahms-schumann-beethoven-carnegie-hall
Very golden age of Hollywood to change dresses for the second half.
This must be how much of the media feels in giving airtime to Trump -- guilt just through mentioning the person.
http://www.medici.tv/#!/yuja-wang-brahms-schumann-beethoven-carnegie-hall
Very golden age of Hollywood to change dresses for the second half.
This must be how much of the media feels in giving airtime to Trump -- guilt just through mentioning the person.
JohnGavin
May 16, 2016, 2:12:40 PM5/16/16
to
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/16/arts/music/review-yuja-wang-tackles-beethovens-hammerklavier-assured-to-a-fault.html
The problem here at RMCR, with the piano mavens, is that they have degenerated into one-dimensional negative bashers. It's as if they are under the illusion that they appear more erudite by being able to point out negatives without any balancing points on the positive side.
Professional reviews will criticize when it is due, but are mostly constructive and fair. Here at RMCR the bashing has become little more than cyber graffiti.
One longs for the days when Simon Roberts, Eric Schissel and others like them, with a broad knowledge of music contributed to the discussions. Even well known performers would pop in, but they wisely disappeared.
Tony
May 16, 2016, 2:32:04 PM5/16/16
to
On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 9:12:40 PM UTC+3, JohnGavin wrote:
>
> The problem here at RMCR, with the piano mavens, is that they have degenerated into one-dimensional negative bashers.
This is just plain wrong. I've uploaded over 600 videos celebrating pianists. There is nothing negative about that. To try to protect Yuja Wang by instead blaming listeners for being 'one-dimensional' or implying they lack 'broad knowledge of music' is the problem here. She is getting away with artless playing because people are either infatuated by her or want to hold back criticism because she's still quite young. This is what it is -- a poor performance. The fact she got an ovation in NY means zero.
>
> The problem here at RMCR, with the piano mavens, is that they have degenerated into one-dimensional negative bashers.
Herman
May 16, 2016, 2:53:56 PM5/16/16
to
On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 8:12:40 PM UTC+2, JohnGavin wrote:
>
>
> The problem here at RMCR, with the piano mavens, is that they have degenerated into one-dimensional negative bashers. It's as if they are under the illusion that they appear more erudite by being able to point out negatives without any balancing points on the positive side.
>
To a degree a concur, but Tony is no Korenite, and of course 99 out of 100 posts by Bozo are positive, too.
>
>
> The problem here at RMCR, with the piano mavens, is that they have degenerated into one-dimensional negative bashers. It's as if they are under the illusion that they appear more erudite by being able to point out negatives without any balancing points on the positive side.
>
O
May 16, 2016, 2:54:56 PM5/16/16
to
In article <c075da3b-acef-4ca5...@googlegroups.com>,
Hate."
We all have our likes and dislikes, and some playing we just can't
stand. Unfortunately, we all wear different brands of ears, each tuned
randomly to some alien frequencies.
>
> One longs for the days when Simon Roberts, Eric Schissel and others like
> them, with a broad knowledge of music contributed to the discussions. Even
> well known performers would pop in, but they wisely disappeared.
Nothing lasts forever. When they were here, there was the same type of
rhetoric. In fact, I think it was much worse. There were far more
personal attacks back then than there are now. I haven't been called a
Fascist for quite some time now. If we're going to argue and bicker,
I'd much prefer it be about musical tastes then mindless name calling.
-Owen, making the trains run on time.
JohnGavin <dag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 1:16:19 PM UTC-4, Tony wrote:
> > So far I've listened only to her dawdling and mawkish Kreisleriana. I don't
> > think I've ever heard such an inept performance. Surely thousands of
> > amateur pianists at home could play this with more style and ability. She
> > turned a part of it into music for a perfume ad. Have a listen to this flat
> > and doodling performance:
> >
> > http://www.medici.tv/#!/yuja-wang-brahms-schumann-beethoven-carnegie-hall
> >
> > Very golden age of Hollywood to change dresses for the second half.
> >
> > This must be how much of the media feels in giving airtime to Trump --
> > guilt just through mentioning the person.
>
> And here's a more balanced and fair review of the recital from the NY Times.
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/16/arts/music/review-yuja-wang-tackles-beethove
> ns-hammerklavier-assured-to-a-fault.html
>
>
> The problem here at RMCR, with the piano mavens, is that they have
> degenerated into one-dimensional negative bashers. It's as if they are
> under the illusion that they appear more erudite by being able to point out
> negatives without any balancing points on the positive side.
>
> Professional reviews will criticize when it is due, but are mostly
> constructive and fair. Here at RMCR the bashing has become little more than
> cyber graffiti.
As the great musician Taylor Swift so elegantly puts it: "Haters Gonna
> On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 1:16:19 PM UTC-4, Tony wrote:
> > So far I've listened only to her dawdling and mawkish Kreisleriana. I don't
> > think I've ever heard such an inept performance. Surely thousands of
> > amateur pianists at home could play this with more style and ability. She
> > turned a part of it into music for a perfume ad. Have a listen to this flat
> > and doodling performance:
> >
> > http://www.medici.tv/#!/yuja-wang-brahms-schumann-beethoven-carnegie-hall
> >
> > Very golden age of Hollywood to change dresses for the second half.
> >
> > This must be how much of the media feels in giving airtime to Trump --
> > guilt just through mentioning the person.
>
> And here's a more balanced and fair review of the recital from the NY Times.
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/16/arts/music/review-yuja-wang-tackles-beethove
> ns-hammerklavier-assured-to-a-fault.html
>
>
> The problem here at RMCR, with the piano mavens, is that they have
> degenerated into one-dimensional negative bashers. It's as if they are
> under the illusion that they appear more erudite by being able to point out
> negatives without any balancing points on the positive side.
>
> Professional reviews will criticize when it is due, but are mostly
> constructive and fair. Here at RMCR the bashing has become little more than
> cyber graffiti.
Hate."
We all have our likes and dislikes, and some playing we just can't
stand. Unfortunately, we all wear different brands of ears, each tuned
randomly to some alien frequencies.
>
> One longs for the days when Simon Roberts, Eric Schissel and others like
> them, with a broad knowledge of music contributed to the discussions. Even
> well known performers would pop in, but they wisely disappeared.
rhetoric. In fact, I think it was much worse. There were far more
personal attacks back then than there are now. I haven't been called a
Fascist for quite some time now. If we're going to argue and bicker,
I'd much prefer it be about musical tastes then mindless name calling.
-Owen, making the trains run on time.
JohnGavin
May 16, 2016, 3:10:50 PM5/16/16
to
HT
May 16, 2016, 3:36:04 PM5/16/16
to
> Yes - Steve (Bozo) is fantastic. Thanks to him for pointing out so many out-of-the-mainstream recordings and repertoire over the years.
Henk
AB
May 16, 2016, 3:57:44 PM5/16/16
to
Instead of bashing members of RMCR, I suggest you bash that idiot T.
The playing of the Beethoven was at best, 2nd rate.....the Brahmns was boring,,,,
her voicing of chords, her lack of color makes her playing mediocre.
AB
O
May 16, 2016, 3:59:18 PM5/16/16
to
In article <d3361fb1-7614-4059...@googlegroups.com>, HT
Thirded.
As a matter of fact, everyone here has made some positive contribution
(or at the very least, tried to make some positive contribution) to
this group. Even though people come and go, it's the contributions of
those who do post here which are the backbone of this group, and why we
continue to read it.
So I think you should all pat yourselves on the back.
-Owen
As a matter of fact, everyone here has made some positive contribution
(or at the very least, tried to make some positive contribution) to
this group. Even though people come and go, it's the contributions of
those who do post here which are the backbone of this group, and why we
continue to read it.
So I think you should all pat yourselves on the back.
-Owen
AB
May 16, 2016, 4:02:49 PM5/16/16
to
I sugest that people go to youtube and listen to Conrad Tao....... that is a genuine young talent, and of course Grosvenor.
AB
AB
May 16, 2016, 4:06:17 PM5/16/16
to
AB
AB
May 16, 2016, 4:09:55 PM5/16/16
to
AB
Mort
May 16, 2016, 5:49:03 PM5/16/16
to
Hammerklavier, the lack of style in the Kreisleriana, and two trashy
encores.
I am a music lover for many decades, but not a musician, so I cannot
express myself in expert musical terms.
Mort Linder
AB
May 16, 2016, 6:36:31 PM5/16/16
to
in general, her playing is superficial and even her technqiue is not that impressive.
It is time for Conrad Tao!!
AB
John Thomas
May 16, 2016, 8:02:00 PM5/16/16
to
On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 11:12:40 AM UTC-7, JohnGavin wrote:
> One longs for the days when Simon Roberts, Eric Schissel and others like them, with a broad knowledge of >music contributed to the discussions. Even well known performers would pop in, but they wisely disappeared.
Amen, Brother.
> One longs for the days when Simon Roberts, Eric Schissel and others like them, with a broad knowledge of >music contributed to the discussions. Even well known performers would pop in, but they wisely disappeared.
Frank Berger
May 16, 2016, 8:10:55 PM5/16/16
to
Mike Painter
May 16, 2016, 9:46:06 PM5/16/16
to
On Mon, 16 May 2016 17:01:57 -0700, John Thomas wrote
(in article <65aab879-f760-4f83...@googlegroups.com>):
The good ol' days ,,,
Mike
(in article <65aab879-f760-4f83...@googlegroups.com>):
Mike
s888...@aol.com
May 17, 2016, 12:02:35 AM5/17/16
to
Herman
May 17, 2016, 1:49:34 AM5/17/16
to
On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 6:02:35 AM UTC+2, s888...@aol.com wrote:
> Finest Hammerklavier I have ever head live or recorded. And I have heard just about all of the most critically acclaimed recordings. IMO this sets a whole new standard of excellence. Better than I thought the Hammerklavier could ever actually be played.
seriously?
> Finest Hammerklavier I have ever head live or recorded. And I have heard just about all of the most critically acclaimed recordings. IMO this sets a whole new standard of excellence. Better than I thought the Hammerklavier could ever actually be played.
Oscar
May 17, 2016, 2:27:10 AM5/17/16
to
On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 10:49:34 PM, herman wrote:
> >
> > Finest Hammerklavier I have ever head live or recorded. And I have heard just about all of the
> > most critically acclaimed recordings. IMO this sets a whole new standard of excellence. Better
> > than I thought the Hammerklavier could ever actually be played.
>
> seriously?
It's her makeup artist, herman.
> >
> > Finest Hammerklavier I have ever head live or recorded. And I have heard just about all of the
> > most critically acclaimed recordings. IMO this sets a whole new standard of excellence. Better
> > than I thought the Hammerklavier could ever actually be played.
>
> seriously?
Gerard
May 17, 2016, 6:03:38 AM5/17/16
to
"AB" wrote in message
news:9fb5280c-2da1-456e...@googlegroups.com...
=================
It's always time for the NEXT hype.
news:9fb5280c-2da1-456e...@googlegroups.com...
It's always time for the NEXT hype.
Bozo
May 17, 2016, 8:08:36 AM5/17/16
to
Thanks for the kind words, John Gavin, but I learn far more here from others like yourself than I ever contribute , and do try to be selective , listen first myself, so as not to waste others' time. A " great " is admittedly not very insightful, but may lead others to music, recordings , that will reward use of others' better analytical and comparative skills.
Bozo
May 17, 2016, 8:22:46 AM5/17/16
to
>On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 1:53:56 PM UTC-5, Herman wrote:
> ....and of course 99 out of 100 posts by Bozo are positive, too.
Just Iowa Nice, I guess. (Are you sure I’ve posted 100 times here,Herman ?)
As I was hoping for success for her , I was surprised at Ms.Wang’s intentional choice of wardrobe for the “Hammerklavier “ , which, for me, neither aided the composer’s music , nor the pianist’s credibility, but perhaps she feels the freedom to be herself does inspire her music making , regardless what old foggies like I think . It is her recital and career, not mine.
The LA Times review of her earlier “Hammer” in LA was correct to the extent Ms.Wang did make the work seem easy, but for me that ease somewhat a problem here, as it was for the NYT critic. Perhaps she needs to give more attention to the “ pauses between the notes “ (Schnabel ) to add some gravitas.Ms.Lim’s recorded “ Hammer” fugue seems too fast for my taste also ( but Ms.Wang’s more digitally dexterous ), although Lim’s fugue has more meat on the bone the Wang here . Perhaps the score supports their tempii (?). One must admire youngsters playing this huge work at all , rather than waiting until they are past 50 , let alone live on a World media stage. Trifonov’s first half last Carnegie was Op.111. Wang’s “Kreisleriana” did not have the intensity and darkness I enjoyed in Kopachevskiy’s great reading at the 2011 Tchaikovsky ( at YT,btw ) , but as I do not connect well with that work most of the time, by most pianists, no critique. Ms.Wang played the “ Carmen” Variations probably better than Horowitz did , and her jazzed-up Mozart encore ( maybe she’s inspired by Debargue ? ) did not seem too trashy, more fun. After all, what was Horowitz’ Liszt 2nd Rhapsody or Rubinstein’s Villa Lobos “Polichinelo “ encore ? The NYT critic is silly to complain she played too many encores compared to Perahia’s none after his “Hammer” ( at 68, my bedtime is 9:30pm, suspect so is 69-year Perahia’s, but probably not Ms.Wang’s ). I recall reading about an early Ignazy Friedman programme in which he opened (!) with LvB Op.111, then proceeded to play about 15 more works, some major like the Schumann Etudes, “Wanderer”, and a couple Chopin Scherzos, others salon pieces. She’s only 29 and understandably wants to take on the world, just as young business school grads want to do ; both usually benefit from some mentoring Ms.Wang may not be getting from DGG ?
> ....and of course 99 out of 100 posts by Bozo are positive, too.
Just Iowa Nice, I guess. (Are you sure I’ve posted 100 times here,Herman ?)
As I was hoping for success for her , I was surprised at Ms.Wang’s intentional choice of wardrobe for the “Hammerklavier “ , which, for me, neither aided the composer’s music , nor the pianist’s credibility, but perhaps she feels the freedom to be herself does inspire her music making , regardless what old foggies like I think . It is her recital and career, not mine.
The LA Times review of her earlier “Hammer” in LA was correct to the extent Ms.Wang did make the work seem easy, but for me that ease somewhat a problem here, as it was for the NYT critic. Perhaps she needs to give more attention to the “ pauses between the notes “ (Schnabel ) to add some gravitas.Ms.Lim’s recorded “ Hammer” fugue seems too fast for my taste also ( but Ms.Wang’s more digitally dexterous ), although Lim’s fugue has more meat on the bone the Wang here . Perhaps the score supports their tempii (?). One must admire youngsters playing this huge work at all , rather than waiting until they are past 50 , let alone live on a World media stage. Trifonov’s first half last Carnegie was Op.111. Wang’s “Kreisleriana” did not have the intensity and darkness I enjoyed in Kopachevskiy’s great reading at the 2011 Tchaikovsky ( at YT,btw ) , but as I do not connect well with that work most of the time, by most pianists, no critique. Ms.Wang played the “ Carmen” Variations probably better than Horowitz did , and her jazzed-up Mozart encore ( maybe she’s inspired by Debargue ? ) did not seem too trashy, more fun. After all, what was Horowitz’ Liszt 2nd Rhapsody or Rubinstein’s Villa Lobos “Polichinelo “ encore ? The NYT critic is silly to complain she played too many encores compared to Perahia’s none after his “Hammer” ( at 68, my bedtime is 9:30pm, suspect so is 69-year Perahia’s, but probably not Ms.Wang’s ). I recall reading about an early Ignazy Friedman programme in which he opened (!) with LvB Op.111, then proceeded to play about 15 more works, some major like the Schumann Etudes, “Wanderer”, and a couple Chopin Scherzos, others salon pieces. She’s only 29 and understandably wants to take on the world, just as young business school grads want to do ; both usually benefit from some mentoring Ms.Wang may not be getting from DGG ?
s888...@aol.com
May 17, 2016, 9:15:07 AM5/17/16
to
Tony
May 17, 2016, 9:16:29 AM5/17/16
to
On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 3:22:46 PM UTC+3, Bozo wrote:
>
> The NYT critic is silly to complain she played too many encores...
I don't think it's so much the number of encores she played as the manner in which she played them and the absence of theme in how they followed. She played what's apparently her own transcription of the Gluck, then stood up, sat back down, and went into the Carmen piece. There's a crude absence of theme and spirit between some of the encores and the major work.
>
> The NYT critic is silly to complain she played too many encores...
I don't think it's so much the number of encores she played as the manner in which she played them and the absence of theme in how they followed. She played what's apparently her own transcription of the Gluck, then stood up, sat back down, and went into the Carmen piece. There's a crude absence of theme and spirit between some of the encores and the major work.
s888...@aol.com
May 17, 2016, 9:20:28 AM5/17/16
to
Frank Berger
May 17, 2016, 10:45:16 AM5/17/16
to
you don't trust your own opinion. Not that it matters.
Frank Berger
May 17, 2016, 10:47:11 AM5/17/16
to
presumably you opinion could be biased therefore valueless.
Not that it mightn't be valueless even if you aren't here
makeup artist.
Herman
May 17, 2016, 12:47:01 PM5/17/16
to
On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 4:45:16 PM UTC+2, Frank Berger wrote:
> >
> > Yes. I am not alone int hat reaction either. Not that it matters.
> >
>
> If it doesn't matter, you needn't have said it. Sound like
> you don't trust your own opinion. Not that it matters.
l e t i t g o
> >
> > Yes. I am not alone int hat reaction either. Not that it matters.
> >
>
> If it doesn't matter, you needn't have said it. Sound like
> you don't trust your own opinion. Not that it matters.
Norman Schwartz
May 17, 2016, 12:55:10 PM5/17/16
to
"AB" wrote in message
news:7949ea2e-b706-4b1a...@googlegroups.com...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZVw72f2V4s
YW would never play LvB in that manner.
Herman
May 17, 2016, 1:42:20 PM5/17/16
to
On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 6:55:10 PM UTC+2, Norman Schwartz wrote:
> I listened to Tao's Beethoven here and thought it was Rachmaninov:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZVw72f2V4s
> YW would never play LvB in that manner.
>
That's funny. I used to think that that's exactly what YW did, pouring a sweet Rachmaninoff sauce over everything she played.
> I listened to Tao's Beethoven here and thought it was Rachmaninov:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZVw72f2V4s
> YW would never play LvB in that manner.
>
Maybe I should listen to the Hammerklavier after all. I stopped halfway in her Klueless Kreisleriana, life being too short.
We definitely miss Tom Pianomaven Deaco's YW advocacy.
s888...@aol.com
May 17, 2016, 9:08:52 PM5/17/16
to
s888...@aol.com
May 17, 2016, 9:13:14 PM5/17/16
to
s888...@aol.com
May 17, 2016, 9:15:17 PM5/17/16
to
Frank Berger
May 17, 2016, 9:23:29 PM5/17/16
to
not know the difference?
>So is everyone's opinion a joke? If you think you or anyone else here is not biased that would be the joke.
>
Frank Berger
May 17, 2016, 9:24:53 PM5/17/16
to
On 5/17/2016 9:13 PM, s888...@aol.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 7:45:16 AM UTC-7, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On 5/17/2016 9:15 AM, s888...@aol.com wrote:
>>> On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 10:49:34 PM UTC-7, Herman wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 6:02:35 AM UTC+2, s888...@aol.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Finest Hammerklavier I have ever head live or recorded. And I have heard just about all of the most critically acclaimed recordings. IMO this sets a whole new standard of excellence. Better than I thought the Hammerklavier could ever actually be played.
>>>>
>>>> seriously?
>>>
>>> Yes. I am not alone int hat reaction either. Not that it matters.
>>>
>>
>> If it doesn't matter, you needn't have said it. Sound like
>> you don't trust your own opinion. Not that it matters.
>
> It was merely an observation. If my personal opinion and observations make you so uncomfortable
You have indeed begun making me uncomfortable.
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 7:45:16 AM UTC-7, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On 5/17/2016 9:15 AM, s888...@aol.com wrote:
>>> On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 10:49:34 PM UTC-7, Herman wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 6:02:35 AM UTC+2, s888...@aol.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Finest Hammerklavier I have ever head live or recorded. And I have heard just about all of the most critically acclaimed recordings. IMO this sets a whole new standard of excellence. Better than I thought the Hammerklavier could ever actually be played.
>>>>
>>>> seriously?
>>>
>>> Yes. I am not alone int hat reaction either. Not that it matters.
>>>
>>
>> If it doesn't matter, you needn't have said it. Sound like
>> you don't trust your own opinion. Not that it matters.
>
> It was merely an observation. If my personal opinion and observations make you so uncomfortable
that you feel the need to question whether or not I trust
my own opinion then perhaps you are merely projecting.
>
s888...@aol.com
May 17, 2016, 10:15:20 PM5/17/16
to
Frank Berger
May 17, 2016, 10:56:33 PM5/17/16
to
> I merely pointed out that so is everyone else's?
harder.
> Is that so hard to understand?
For someone it seems to be.
I repeat. Bias is not the same as opinion. Ever the hear
the expression "I have no dog in the hunt?"
If you have a dog in the hunt (like if you are a personal
friend or relative or makeup artist of a performer) you MAY
BE biased. That is, your opinion CAN BE colored by factors
other than the actual performance. It may not be; it's
possible your opinion remains unbiased. But people will be
wary.
>>
>>> So is everyone's opinion a joke?
it out.
> If you think you or
>>> anyone else here is not biased that would be the
>>> joke.
>>>
This could be difficult, since I haven't once expressed an
opinion about her playing.
Hint: there might actually be something, but I don't know
whether it biases me for or against her.
Bye.
s888...@aol.com
May 17, 2016, 11:29:08 PM5/17/16
to
>
> > I merely pointed out that so is everyone else's?
>
> You continue to confuse bias and opinion. You need to try
> harder.
You continue to fail to understand that all opinions are biased on the subject of something like music.
> > I merely pointed out that so is everyone else's?
>
> You continue to confuse bias and opinion. You need to try
> harder.
>
> > Is that so hard to understand?
>
> For someone it seems to be.
>
> I repeat. Bias is not the same as opinion.
> Ever the hear
> the expression "I have no dog in the hunt?"
> If you have a dog in the hunt (like if you are a personal
> friend or relative or makeup artist of a performer) you MAY
> BE biased.
> That is, your opinion CAN BE colored by factors
> other than the actual performance. It may not be; it's
> possible your opinion remains unbiased. But people will be
> wary.
>
> >>
> >>> So is everyone's opinion a joke?
>
> No. Someone made a joke and you didn't get it, so I pointed
> it out.
>
> > If you think you or
> >>> anyone else here is not biased that would be the
> >>> joke.
> >>>
> >> Now that I've explained the difference between opinion and bias, please tell me how I am biased about Yuja Wang's pianism.
> This could be difficult, since I haven't once expressed an
> opinion about her playing.
> Hint: there might actually be something, but I don't know
> whether it biases me for or against her.
>
> Bye.
Herman
May 18, 2016, 2:14:14 AM5/18/16
to
just let it go. Frank can't help himself.
Main thing is you enjoyed YW's Hammerklavier a lot, so it's 1 - 0 for you.
Main thing is you enjoyed YW's Hammerklavier a lot, so it's 1 - 0 for you.
HT
May 18, 2016, 3:30:55 AM5/18/16
to
Op woensdag 18 mei 2016 08:14:14 UTC+2 schreef Herman:
Henk
> just let it go. Frank can't help himself.
>
> Main thing is you enjoyed YW's Hammerklavier a lot, so it's 1 - 0 for you.
Seconded!
>
> Main thing is you enjoyed YW's Hammerklavier a lot, so it's 1 - 0 for you.
Henk
dk
May 18, 2016, 3:46:50 AM5/18/16
to
dk
dk
May 18, 2016, 3:50:37 AM5/18/16
to
On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 9:02:35 PM UTC-7, s888...@aol.com wrote:
>
> And I have heard just about all of the most critically
> acclaimed recordings. IMO this sets a whole new standard
> of excellence. Better than I thought the Hammerklavier
> could ever actually be played.
Here's something to flush your ears:
>
> And I have heard just about all of the most critically
> acclaimed recordings. IMO this sets a whole new standard
> of excellence. Better than I thought the Hammerklavier
> could ever actually be played.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-U6r6ScDmyk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OsdZE2FWmM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7aFllDGZ450
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9gvHwj2hP8
dk
Herman
May 18, 2016, 6:36:41 AM5/18/16
to
On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 9:50:37 AM UTC+2, dk wrote:
> Here's something to flush your ears:
>
He's totally happy with his ears, so there's no problem that needs fixing.
> Here's something to flush your ears:
>
Get over it.
s888...@aol.com
May 18, 2016, 7:32:46 AM5/18/16
to
AB
May 18, 2016, 10:10:56 AM5/18/16
to
AB
Frank Berger
May 18, 2016, 3:05:24 PM5/18/16
to
I didn't say your opinion was biased. I said it could be.
Huge difference.
>>> I merely pointed out that so is everyone else's?
>>
>> You continue to confuse bias and opinion. You need to try
>> harder.
>
> You continue to fail to understand that all opinions are biased on the subject of something like music.
>
is simply wrong. If listen to Yuja play and can't see her
and don't know who's playing, I (or anyone) can easily offer
an unbiased opinion (that is not an oxymoron). If I know
it's her, even if I can't see her, my opinon MIGHT be biased
if already know I like her (as a person, or her looks) or
don't like her. If I have a personal connection, my opinion
of her playing might or might not be biased. It could be
biased and I might not even know it. Anyone knowing my
personal connection would be right to suspect there could be
bias. Are you getting any of this? If I don't know her,
have opinion on how she dresses and just evaluate her
playing, my opinion can easily be unbiased. I suggest you
look up the word in a dictionary. Preferably English.
>>
>>> Is that so hard to understand?
>>
>> For someone it seems to be.
>
> Indeed, you continue to fail on this one.
>
>>
>> I repeat. Bias is not the same as opinion.
>
>
> repeating irrelevent points doesn't magically make them relevant.
>
discussing is irrelevant isn't going to win any debating points.
>> Ever the hear
>> the expression "I have no dog in the hunt?"
>
> No. I have heard the expression "I have no dog in this fight."
it means?
>I have also heard the expression "That dog won't hunt."
>But I haven't heard "I have no dog in the hunt."
>Have you heard the expression Denial isn't just a rivie in Africa? I know, it doesn't work when it is written out.
>
>> If you have a dog in the hunt (like if you are a personal
>> friend or relative or makeup artist of a performer) you MAY
>> BE biased.
>
> No, I am biased. So are you and everyone else who has an opinion on this. That is a basic fact of being a human being. Somehow this seems to continue to escape you. you stated that as someone who maybe biased my opinion is valueless. But that would make *all* opinions on music valueless. They are all subject to bias.
>
>> That is, your opinion CAN BE colored by factors
>> other than the actual performance. It may not be; it's
>> possible your opinion remains unbiased. But people will be
>> wary.
>
> My opinions are colored by factors other than actual performance. So are yours and everybody else's. Doesn't make them valueless.
It's not all or nothing.
If you think not I would be more than willing to put it to
the test and see if your preferences match under blind
conditions. I'd be willing to wager they do not.
>
timwill...@gmail.com
May 18, 2016, 5:20:31 PM5/18/16
to
Op dinsdag 17 mei 2016 02:10:55 UTC+2 schreef Frank Berger:
> >
>
> Yeah, if only Tom Deacon would return.
What happened to him?
TW
> >
>
> Yeah, if only Tom Deacon would return.
What happened to him?
TW
Oscar
May 18, 2016, 5:28:49 PM5/18/16
to
Mr. Deacon is on Facebook nowadays.
s888...@aol.com
May 18, 2016, 7:11:12 PM5/18/16
to
>
> >>> I merely pointed out that so is everyone else's?
> >>
> >> You continue to confuse bias and opinion. You need to try
> >> harder.
> >
> > You continue to fail to understand that all opinions are biased on the subject of something like music.
> >
>
> This statement shows that you equate bias and opinion which
> is simply wrong.
> If listen to Yuja play and can't see her
> and don't know who's playing, I (or anyone) can easily offer
> an unbiased opinion
> (that is not an oxymoron). If I know
> it's her, even if I can't see her, my opinon MIGHT be biased
> if already know I like her (as a person, or her looks) or
> don't like her. If I have a personal connection, my opinion
> of her playing might or might not be biased.
> It could be
> biased and I might not even know it.
> Anyone knowing my
> personal connection would be right to suspect there could be
> bias. Are you getting any of this?
> If I don't know her,
> have opinion on how she dresses and just evaluate her
> playing, my opinion can easily be unbiased.
> I suggest you
> look up the word in a dictionary. Preferably English.
>
>
>
> >>
> >>> Is that so hard to understand?
> >>
> >> For someone it seems to be.
> >
> > Indeed, you continue to fail on this one.
> >
> >>
> >> I repeat. Bias is not the same as opinion.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Saying that something that is at the very heart of what we
> discussing is irrelevant isn't going to win any debating points.
You are in way over your head in this discussion. You can't even wrap your head around the fact that the assertion that all opinions on music are biased opinions is not equating biases and opinions. You don't even know the difference between an adjective and a noun. I don't even know how to communicate with someone who consistently fails to understand that basic difference.
>
> Saying that something that is at the very heart of what we
> discussing is irrelevant isn't going to win any debating points.
>
>
> >> Ever the hear
> >> the expression "I have no dog in the hunt?"
> >
> > No. I have heard the expression "I have no dog in this fight."
>
> Good. Similar expression, same meaning. Do you know what
> it means?
Indeed and you sure have made quite the investment for a man who has no dog in the "hunt." "The lady doth protest to much, me thinks." do you know what that famous quote means?
>
> >> Ever the hear
> >> the expression "I have no dog in the hunt?"
> >
> > No. I have heard the expression "I have no dog in this fight."
>
> Good. Similar expression, same meaning. Do you know what
> it means?
>
>
> >I have also heard the expression "That dog won't hunt."
>
> Something else entirely. But a good expression, properly used.
I wish you all the best in getting these things right in the future.
>
> >I have also heard the expression "That dog won't hunt."
>
> Something else entirely. But a good expression, properly used.
>
>
> >But I haven't heard "I have no dog in the hunt."
>
> Now you have.
>
> >Have you heard the expression Denial isn't just a river in Africa? I know, it doesn't work when it is written out.
> >
> >> If you have a dog in the hunt (like if you are a personal
> >> friend or relative or makeup artist of a performer) you MAY
> >> BE biased.
> >
> > No, I am biased. So are you and everyone else who has an opinion on this. That is a basic fact of being a human being. Somehow this seems to continue to escape you. you stated that as someone who maybe biased my opinion is valueless. But that would make *all* opinions on music valueless. They are all subject to bias.
> >
> >> That is, your opinion CAN BE colored by factors
> >> other than the actual performance. It may not be; it's
> >> possible your opinion remains unbiased. But people will be
> >> wary.
> >
> > My opinions are colored by factors other than actual performance. So are yours and everybody else's. Doesn't make them valueless.
>
> Absolutely it may.
No not may. Will. You really ought to do some research on human bias before responding any further.
> >> If you have a dog in the hunt (like if you are a personal
> >> friend or relative or makeup artist of a performer) you MAY
> >> BE biased.
> >
> > No, I am biased. So are you and everyone else who has an opinion on this. That is a basic fact of being a human being. Somehow this seems to continue to escape you. you stated that as someone who maybe biased my opinion is valueless. But that would make *all* opinions on music valueless. They are all subject to bias.
> >
> >> That is, your opinion CAN BE colored by factors
> >> other than the actual performance. It may not be; it's
> >> possible your opinion remains unbiased. But people will be
> >> wary.
> >
> > My opinions are colored by factors other than actual performance. So are yours and everybody else's. Doesn't make them valueless.
>
> Absolutely it may.
> It depends on the extent of the bias.
> It's not all or nothing.
Frank Berger
May 18, 2016, 7:36:40 PM5/18/16
to
therefore discount anything you say about performances in
the future UNLESS you clearly characterize the nature of
your bias as it pertains to said performers.
>>
>>>>> I merely pointed out that so is everyone else's?
>>>>
>>>> You continue to confuse bias and opinion. You need to try
>>>> harder.
>>>
>>> You continue to fail to understand that all opinions are biased on the subject of something like music.
>>>
>>
>> This statement shows that you equate bias and opinion which
>> is simply wrong.
>
> Talk about reading comprehension problems. I guess you don't know the difference between a noun and adjective. All opinions (noun) on music are biased (adjective) I did not "equate" the two. If that is what you got from what I said you didn't understand what I said. I bet you still don't get this point even after having it spelled out for you.
>
simply wrong. Note that you've made no attempt to explain
HOW opinons (yours, mine) are biased. You just assert that
they are.
>> If listen to Yuja play and can't see her
>> and don't know who's playing, I (or anyone) can easily offer
>> an unbiased opinion
>
> Nonsense. All you have eliminated is sighted bias and the bias of knowing who is playing. There are other biases that can't be eliminated by blind protocols.
>
>> (that is not an oxymoron). If I know
>> it's her, even if I can't see her, my opinon MIGHT be biased
>
> No. It *will* be biased. Not "might"
>
>> if already know I like her (as a person, or her looks) or
>> don't like her. If I have a personal connection, my opinion
>> of her playing might or might not be biased.
>
> No. It *will* be biased. Not "might."
>
>> It could be
>> biased and I might not even know it.
>
> Clearly *you* don't know this about yourself by virtue of the inference that it "might" not be biased. It's not a matter of might be. It is. Period. You can disagree with that assertion but you would be wrong.
>
>> Anyone knowing my
>> personal connection would be right to suspect there could be
>> bias. Are you getting any of this?
>
> Indeed. You don't understand the basics of human bias. I am getting that.
>
>> If I don't know her,
>> have opinion on how she dresses and just evaluate her
>> playing, my opinion can easily be unbiased.
>
> Nope. Not even possible. Unless.....you aren't an actual human being...Is there something you want to tell us about yourself?
>
>
>> I suggest you
>> look up the word in a dictionary. Preferably English.
>
> I suggest you go beyond that and do a little research on human biases.
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Is that so hard to understand?
>>>>
>>>> For someone it seems to be.
>>>
>>> Indeed, you continue to fail on this one.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I repeat. Bias is not the same as opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>> repeating irrelevant points doesn't magically make them relevant.
>>>
>>
>> Saying that something that is at the very heart of what we
>> discussing is irrelevant isn't going to win any debating points.
>
> You are in way over your head in this discussion. You can't even wrap your head around the fact that the assertion that all opinions on music are biased opinions >is not equating biases and opinions.
> You don't even know the difference between an adjective and a noun.
all opinions are biased and I say you have equated opinion
and bias, and you say I don't know the difference between a
noun and an adjective. It doesn't follow. There isn't any
logic in anything your saying, just assertion. You need to
do better.
> I don't even know how to communicate with someone who consistently fails to understand that basic difference.
>>
>>>> Ever the hear
>>>> the expression "I have no dog in the hunt?"
>>>
>>> No. I have heard the expression "I have no dog in this fight."
>>
>> Good. Similar expression, same meaning. Do you know what
>> it means?
>
> Indeed and you sure have made quite the investment for a man who has no dog in the "hunt." "The lady doth protest to much, me thinks." do you know what that famous quote means?
>>
whatsoever about Yuja's performances.
>>> I have also heard the expression "That dog won't hunt."
>>
>> Something else entirely. But a good expression, properly used.
>
> I wish you all the best in getting these things right in the future.
>
expression to the discussion? Yes, you are.
>>
>>
>>> But I haven't heard "I have no dog in the hunt."
>>
>> Now you have.
>
> Now that you mangled the two common expressions, yes I have.
>
irrelevant phrase into the conversation.
>>
>>> Have you heard the expression Denial isn't just a river in Africa? I know, it doesn't work when it is written out.
>>>
>>>> If you have a dog in the hunt (like if you are a personal
>>>> friend or relative or makeup artist of a performer) you MAY
>>>> BE biased.
>>>
>>> No, I am biased. So are you and everyone else who has an opinion on this. That is a basic fact of being a human being. Somehow this seems to continue to escape you. you stated that as someone who maybe biased my opinion is valueless. But that would make *all* opinions on music valueless. They are all subject to bias.
>>>
>>>> That is, your opinion CAN BE colored by factors
>>>> other than the actual performance. It may not be; it's
>>>> possible your opinion remains unbiased. But people will be
>>>> wary.
>>>
>>> My opinions are colored by factors other than actual performance. So are yours and everybody else's. Doesn't make them valueless.
>>
>> Absolutely it may.
>
> No not may. Will.
So why are you offering opinions?
You really ought to do some research on human bias before
responding any further.
>
that all opinions are based. You have to decide whether
that makes them valueless or not, though, sice you've taken
both positions.
>
>> It depends on the extent of the bias.
>> It's not all or nothing.
>
> It's neither. The value of human opinion is in and of itself a matter of opinion and those opinions are also affected by human bias. As I type this I realize this is all going way way over your head. Please do some research on human bias. Please.
>
your assertions logically and with data. Until then, no
sensible person would take them seriously.
Bye.
s888...@aol.com
May 18, 2016, 9:06:19 PM5/18/16
to
>
> >>
> >>>>> I merely pointed out that so is everyone else's?
> >>>>
> >>>> You continue to confuse bias and opinion. You need to try
> >>>> harder.
> >>>
> >>> You continue to fail to understand that all opinions are biased on the subject of something like music.
> >>>
> >>
> >> This statement shows that you equate bias and opinion which
> >> is simply wrong.
> >
> > Talk about reading comprehension problems. I guess you don't know the difference between a noun and adjective. All opinions (noun) on music are biased (adjective) I did not "equate" the two. If that is what you got from what I said you didn't understand what I said. I bet you still don't get this point even after having it spelled out for you.
> >
>
> Same thing. The statement that all opinons are biased is
> simply wrong.
> Note that you've made no attempt to explain
> HOW opinons (yours, mine) are biased. You just assert that
> they are.
>
> >> If listen to Yuja play and can't see her
> >> and don't know who's playing, I (or anyone) can easily offer
> >> an unbiased opinion
> >
> > Nonsense. All you have eliminated is sighted bias and the bias of knowing who is playing. There are other biases that can't be eliminated by blind protocols.
> >
>
> Name some that generally apply in this case.
>
>
>
>
>
> >> (that is not an oxymoron). If I know
> >> it's her, even if I can't see her, my opinon MIGHT be biased
> >
> > No. It *will* be biased. Not "might"
> >
> >> if already know I like her (as a person, or her looks) or
> >> don't like her. If I have a personal connection, my opinion
> >> of her playing might or might not be biased.
> >
> > No. It *will* be biased. Not "might."
> >
> >> It could be
> >> biased and I might not even know it.
> >
> > Clearly *you* don't know this about yourself by virtue of the inference that it "might" not be biased. It's not a matter of might be. It is. Period. You can disagree with that assertion but you would be wrong.
> >
>
> I do, and I am not.
You really need to do some research on the subject of human bias.
>
>
>
>
> >> (that is not an oxymoron). If I know
> >> it's her, even if I can't see her, my opinon MIGHT be biased
> >
> > No. It *will* be biased. Not "might"
> >
> >> if already know I like her (as a person, or her looks) or
> >> don't like her. If I have a personal connection, my opinion
> >> of her playing might or might not be biased.
> >
> > No. It *will* be biased. Not "might."
> >
> >> It could be
> >> biased and I might not even know it.
> >
> > Clearly *you* don't know this about yourself by virtue of the inference that it "might" not be biased. It's not a matter of might be. It is. Period. You can disagree with that assertion but you would be wrong.
> >
>
> I do, and I am not.
>
> >> Anyone knowing my
> >> personal connection would be right to suspect there could be
> >> bias. Are you getting any of this?
> >
> > Indeed. You don't understand the basics of human bias. I am getting that.
> >
> >> If I don't know her,
> >> have opinion on how she dresses and just evaluate her
> >> playing, my opinion can easily be unbiased.
> >
> > Nope. Not even possible. Unless.....you aren't an actual human being...Is there something you want to tell us about yourself?
> >
>
> I strongly suspect that one of us is not a human being.
>
> >
> >> I suggest you
> >> look up the word in a dictionary. Preferably English.
> >
> > I suggest you go beyond that and do a little research on human biases.
> >
> >
>
> I'm biased against doing research.
>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Is that so hard to understand?
> >>>>
> >>>> For someone it seems to be.
> >>>
> >>> Indeed, you continue to fail on this one.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I repeat. Bias is not the same as opinion.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> repeating irrelevant points doesn't magically make them relevant.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Saying that something that is at the very heart of what we
> >> discussing is irrelevant isn't going to win any debating points.
> >
> > You are in way over your head in this discussion. You can't even wrap your head around the fact that the assertion that all opinions on music are biased opinions is not equating biases and opinions.
>
> Correct.
>
>
> > You don't even know the difference between an adjective and a noun.
>
> But I do. I'm highly educated. But not in music. You say
> all opinions are biased and I say you have equated opinion
> and bias, and you say I don't know the difference between a
> noun and an adjective. It doesn't follow. There isn't any
> logic in anything your saying, just assertion. You need to
> do better.
OK... let's see if you can identify the noun and the adjective in this sentence. All opinions on music are biased opinions.
>
> > You don't even know the difference between an adjective and a noun.
>
> But I do. I'm highly educated. But not in music. You say
> all opinions are biased and I say you have equated opinion
> and bias, and you say I don't know the difference between a
> noun and an adjective. It doesn't follow. There isn't any
> logic in anything your saying, just assertion. You need to
> do better.
>
>
> > I don't even know how to communicate with someone who consistently fails to understand that basic difference.
> >>
>
> It's true that you don't seem to know how to communicate.
>
> >>>> Ever the hear
> >>>> the expression "I have no dog in the hunt?"
> >>>
> >>> No. I have heard the expression "I have no dog in this fight."
> >>
> >> Good. Similar expression, same meaning. Do you know what
> >> it means?
> >
> > Indeed and you sure have made quite the investment for a man who has no dog in the "hunt." "The lady doth protest to much, me thinks." do you know what that famous quote means?
> >>
>
> That doesn't make sense either, since I've taken no position
> whatsoever about Yuja's performances.
>
>
> >>> I have also heard the expression "That dog won't hunt."
> >>
> >> Something else entirely. But a good expression, properly used.
> >
> > I wish you all the best in getting these things right in the future.
> >
>
> Are you not the one who just introduced an irrelevant
> expression to the discussion? Yes, you are.
>
> >>
> >>
> >>> But I haven't heard "I have no dog in the hunt."
> >>
> >> Now you have.
> >
> > Now that you mangled the two common expressions, yes I have.
> >
>
> Ha Ha. You're so confused now, you think I brought the
> irrelevant phrase into the conversation.
the irony keeps pouring out. The phrase you brought out was a mangled amalgamation of two common phrases. You can't even own up to that.
>
> > I don't even know how to communicate with someone who consistently fails to understand that basic difference.
> >>
>
> It's true that you don't seem to know how to communicate.
>
> >>>> Ever the hear
> >>>> the expression "I have no dog in the hunt?"
> >>>
> >>> No. I have heard the expression "I have no dog in this fight."
> >>
> >> Good. Similar expression, same meaning. Do you know what
> >> it means?
> >
> > Indeed and you sure have made quite the investment for a man who has no dog in the "hunt." "The lady doth protest to much, me thinks." do you know what that famous quote means?
> >>
>
> That doesn't make sense either, since I've taken no position
> whatsoever about Yuja's performances.
>
>
> >>> I have also heard the expression "That dog won't hunt."
> >>
> >> Something else entirely. But a good expression, properly used.
> >
> > I wish you all the best in getting these things right in the future.
> >
>
> Are you not the one who just introduced an irrelevant
> expression to the discussion? Yes, you are.
>
> >>
> >>
> >>> But I haven't heard "I have no dog in the hunt."
> >>
> >> Now you have.
> >
> > Now that you mangled the two common expressions, yes I have.
> >
>
> Ha Ha. You're so confused now, you think I brought the
> irrelevant phrase into the conversation.
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=dog%20won%27t%20hunt
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#safe=off&q=no+dog+in+this+fight
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/dog_in_the_hunt
>
> >>
> >>> Have you heard the expression Denial isn't just a river in Africa? I know, it doesn't work when it is written out.
> >>>
> >>>> If you have a dog in the hunt (like if you are a personal
> >>>> friend or relative or makeup artist of a performer) you MAY
> >>>> BE biased.
> >>>
> >>> No, I am biased. So are you and everyone else who has an opinion on this. That is a basic fact of being a human being. Somehow this seems to continue to escape you. you stated that as someone who maybe biased my opinion is valueless. But that would make *all* opinions on music valueless. They are all subject to bias.
> >>>
> >>>> That is, your opinion CAN BE colored by factors
> >>>> other than the actual performance. It may not be; it's
> >>>> possible your opinion remains unbiased. But people will be
> >>>> wary.
> >>>
> >>> My opinions are colored by factors other than actual performance. So are yours and everybody else's. Doesn't make them valueless.
> >>
> >> Absolutely it may.
> >
> > No not may. Will.
>
> Will? Will make them valueless? That's what you just said.
> So why are you offering opinions?
>
>
> You really ought to do some research on human bias before
> responding any further.
> >
>
> Not until you provide some details to back up your assertion
> that all opinions are based. You have to decide whether
> that makes them valueless or not, though, sice you've taken
> both positions.
Your choice to do research on bias effects hinges on me doing it for you? That is pathetically lazy. But... I did give you some basic reading on the subject.
>
> You really ought to do some research on human bias before
> responding any further.
> >
>
> Not until you provide some details to back up your assertion
> that all opinions are based. You have to decide whether
> that makes them valueless or not, though, sice you've taken
> both positions.
>
>
> >
> >> It depends on the extent of the bias.
> >> It's not all or nothing.
> >
> > It's neither. The value of human opinion is in and of itself a matter of opinion and those opinions are also affected by human bias. As I type this I realize this is all going way way over your head. Please do some research on human bias. Please.
> >
>
> Don't hold your breath. I'll be waiting for you to defend
> your assertions logically and with data. Until then, no
> sensible person would take them seriously.
>
> Bye.
Oscar
May 18, 2016, 9:27:08 PM5/18/16
to
Yes, Virginia, there is an American Michael Schaffer.
Frank Berger
May 18, 2016, 9:44:11 PM5/18/16
to
On 5/18/2016 9:27 PM, Oscar wrote:
> Yes, Virginia, there is an American Michael Schaffer.
>
On that subject you are biased, so the statement is
> Yes, Virginia, there is an American Michael Schaffer.
>
worthless. I guess.
Herman
May 19, 2016, 1:54:14 AM5/19/16
to
Okay, guys. It's official now.
It's been a while, but we're looking at another Berger Topic.
To Bergerize a topic, you pick apart a side issue in strict 'logical' ways (it should in NO WAY reflect anything connected to the ostensible topic subject), condescend to whomever you've picked as your silly adversary, and keep on telling him he doesn't begin to understand what it's about.
A Classic Berger Topic ends with the Bergerer saying he's been insulted.
It's been a while, but we're looking at another Berger Topic.
To Bergerize a topic, you pick apart a side issue in strict 'logical' ways (it should in NO WAY reflect anything connected to the ostensible topic subject), condescend to whomever you've picked as your silly adversary, and keep on telling him he doesn't begin to understand what it's about.
A Classic Berger Topic ends with the Bergerer saying he's been insulted.
Gerard
May 19, 2016, 4:49:39 AM5/19/16
to
"Oscar" wrote in message
news:17438f2f-e020-47c6...@googlegroups.com...
Mr. Deacon is on Facebook nowadays.
As far as I can see: not nowadays (last activity there was in November
2015).
Oscar
May 19, 2016, 4:57:44 AM5/19/16
to
On Wednesday, May 18, 2016 at 6:44:11 PM, Frank Berger wrote:
>
> On that subject you are biased, so the statement is worthless. I guess.
Yes, Frank, you guessed it: I like black-and-white movies, and I happen to believe in Santa Claus. (A hunch more than an opinion, but hardly biased speculation.) Okay?! Sock it to me!
>
> On that subject you are biased, so the statement is worthless. I guess.
Gerard
May 19, 2016, 4:58:11 AM5/19/16
to
"Frank Berger" wrote in message
news:NZ6dnYnrJpkYYaHK...@supernews.com...
We're almost back on topic.
This is a good example of a Berger thread (even while it is not about "the
market solves everything" or Israel).
It will stop after Berger writes "Plonk" only.
Gerard
May 19, 2016, 5:02:47 AM5/19/16
to
"Herman" wrote in message
news:af874232-2083-4106...@googlegroups.com...
Right.
See my other post - Berger will write "Plonk".
I wonder why he didn't already. OTOH he has already written twice (of more)
"Bye".
But "Bye" is not an official Berger concept. He wants to continue, so up to
now it is "Bye".
Oscar
May 19, 2016, 5:16:17 AM5/19/16
to
On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 11:14:14 PM, herman wrote:
>
> just let it go. Frank can't help himself.
>
> Main thing is you enjoyed YW's Hammerklavier a lot, so it's 1 - 0 for you.
Puh-leeeze. Three and a half years ago, you and the other guy were having a passive-aggressive pity party. Now, it's Bowie & Jagger time over here!
>
> just let it go. Frank can't help himself.
>
> Main thing is you enjoyed YW's Hammerklavier a lot, so it's 1 - 0 for you.
On Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 10:01:48 AM, Scott wrote:
> On Nov 4, 8:41 AM, herman wrote:
> > > >
> > > > It's rather amusing that Kosman ends the review comparing Yuja Wang favorably. Sure,
> > > > she has more musicality than LL. And then there are tons of other pianists who have more
> > > > musicality than Yuja Wang and LL combined. They just don't happen to be as hip.
> > >
> > > I disagree. Right now Yuja wang is pretty much at the top even in musicality.
> >
> > I pity you.
>
> I'm crushed
<end>
Herman
May 19, 2016, 7:00:50 AM5/19/16
to
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 11:16:17 AM UTC+2, Oscar wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 11:14:14 PM, herman wrote:
> >
> > just let it go. Frank can't help himself.
> >
> > Main thing is you enjoyed YW's Hammerklavier a lot, so it's 1 - 0 for you.
>
> Puh-leeeze. Three and a half years ago, blaH BLAH BLAH
> On Tuesday, May 17, 2016 at 11:14:14 PM, herman wrote:
> >
> > just let it go. Frank can't help himself.
> >
> > Main thing is you enjoyed YW's Hammerklavier a lot, so it's 1 - 0 for you.
>
I have never said I changed my mind about YW. But if somebody else enjoys her playing without trying to Deaconize the entire boards she's the greatest thing since Rubinstein or Horowitz, I'm fine with it.
Oscar
May 19, 2016, 7:16:59 AM5/19/16
to
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 4:00:50 AM, herman wrote:
>
> I have never said I changed my mind about YW. But if somebody else enjoys her playing without
> trying to Deaconize the entire boards she's the greatest thing since Rubinstein or Horowitz, I'm fine
> with it.
Well, that doesn't make a bit of sense. What was uttered above in this thread (see below) is a far bolder proclamation than what was said 3.5 years ago:
>
> I have never said I changed my mind about YW. But if somebody else enjoys her playing without
> trying to Deaconize the entire boards she's the greatest thing since Rubinstein or Horowitz, I'm fine
> with it.
On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 9:02:35 PM, s888 wrote:
>
> Finest Hammerklavier I have ever head live or recorded. And I have heard just about all of the
> most critically acclaimed recordings. IMO this sets a whole new standard of excellence. Better
> than I thought the Hammerklavier could ever actually be played.
s888...@aol.com
May 19, 2016, 7:45:55 AM5/19/16
to
Tony
May 19, 2016, 7:58:27 AM5/19/16
to
Frank Berger
May 19, 2016, 8:03:27 AM5/19/16
to
HT
May 19, 2016, 8:27:52 AM5/19/16
to
> I couldn't remember any posts by you except these positive ones on Yuja Wang, so I checked the archive and in 2013 you said about YW, 'She's a good friend of mine'. That unfortunately explains all your positivity for her, which is bias, not opinion.
Henk
Frank Berger
May 19, 2016, 9:07:28 AM5/19/16
to
bias is affecting their review. It's like conflict of
interest. The potential for wrong doing is almost as
important as actual wrongdoing. My mother was at one time
New York University's printing buyer. Before she got that
job her brother's printing firm had been doing some printing
for NYU for years. When my mother took the job, she
continued giving the same amount of work to my uncle as
before. A jealous rival complained about the conflict of
interest. As a result, my uncle lost NYU's business. Not
fair, but the right decision, probably. How could anyone
know that my mother was being careful not to show
favoritism? How do I know she didn't? She told me. How do
I know that was the truth? 1. I never caught me mother
lying to me. 2. Bias.
Herman
May 19, 2016, 9:55:41 AM5/19/16
to
TBH I think the YW thing has been done to death.
About a million years ago (long after Deacon's departure) I said she seems stuck and the oft-heard "give her credit, she's developing"-argument doesn't apply, as the only development I see is more and more rep is given the Rachmaninoff Light treatment with a sprinkle of early Scriabin.
But you know, I don't care. Nobody can stop me from not listening to Yuja Wang. And the issue whether she's degrading standards (a la Arri B), well, those standards were out the window a long time ago. (Plus most of these folks who cry about standards seem to have severe hearing problems themselves, and I'm not saying this in jest, it's just a fact of life, at that age.)
About a million years ago (long after Deacon's departure) I said she seems stuck and the oft-heard "give her credit, she's developing"-argument doesn't apply, as the only development I see is more and more rep is given the Rachmaninoff Light treatment with a sprinkle of early Scriabin.
But you know, I don't care. Nobody can stop me from not listening to Yuja Wang. And the issue whether she's degrading standards (a la Arri B), well, those standards were out the window a long time ago. (Plus most of these folks who cry about standards seem to have severe hearing problems themselves, and I'm not saying this in jest, it's just a fact of life, at that age.)
HT
May 19, 2016, 10:03:37 AM5/19/16
to
> The problem is that it may be hard to tell when someone's
> bias is affecting their review. It's like conflict of
> interest. The potential for wrong doing is almost as
> important as actual wrongdoing.
Agreed. In the case of S888's friendship with YW there are no material consequences. Besides, he only wrote: "Finest Hammerklavier I have ever heard live or recorded." It leaves room for other opinions like mine: "I haven't heard a better Hammerklavier live (if only because I avoid them) but know of many recorded ones I prefer."
> bias is affecting their review. It's like conflict of
> interest. The potential for wrong doing is almost as
> important as actual wrongdoing.
Henk
JohnGavin
May 19, 2016, 10:28:40 AM5/19/16
to
How does anyone overcome biases? I would say that the first step would be giving up the need to be perceived as being more right than the other person. The next step would be to realize that your opinion is not that important. You can hold them, but don't be so attached to them.
I can remember, not very long ago, that 2 prominent posters here (one who has left, another who still posts) would constantly lock horns and engage in single-sentence insults that would go on and on. One day while reading through one of these threads, the realization came to me that if there is a hell, it would resemble these interactions between these 2 men who are, unbelievably, over 70 years old.
A brittle ego leads inevitably to some sort of arrested development. Thinking that your opinion is right while all others' are wrong places you in a consciousness that is downright claustrophobic, and the greatest curse is that most people who inhabit that realm don't even know they are there.
I can remember, not very long ago, that 2 prominent posters here (one who has left, another who still posts) would constantly lock horns and engage in single-sentence insults that would go on and on. One day while reading through one of these threads, the realization came to me that if there is a hell, it would resemble these interactions between these 2 men who are, unbelievably, over 70 years old.
A brittle ego leads inevitably to some sort of arrested development. Thinking that your opinion is right while all others' are wrong places you in a consciousness that is downright claustrophobic, and the greatest curse is that most people who inhabit that realm don't even know they are there.
Herman
May 19, 2016, 10:37:48 AM5/19/16
to
Especially the bit about the futile wish to be perceived as being more right than somebody else.
Frank Berger
May 19, 2016, 10:53:50 AM5/19/16
to
On 5/19/2016 10:03 AM, HT wrote:
>> The problem is that it may be hard to tell when someone's
>> bias is affecting their review. It's like conflict of
>> interest. The potential for wrong doing is almost as
>> important as actual wrongdoing.
>
> Agreed. In the case of S888's friendship with YW there are no material consequences.
Do we know S888's relationship with YW? Do we know he's not
>> The problem is that it may be hard to tell when someone's
>> bias is affecting their review. It's like conflict of
>> interest. The potential for wrong doing is almost as
>> important as actual wrongdoing.
>
> Agreed. In the case of S888's friendship with YW there are no material consequences.
just a groupie?
Herman
May 19, 2016, 11:20:36 AM5/19/16
to
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 4:53:50 PM UTC+2, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 5/19/2016 10:03 AM, HT wrote:
> >> The problem is that it may be hard to tell when someone's
> >> bias is affecting their review. It's like conflict of
> >> interest. The potential for wrong doing is almost as
> >> important as actual wrongdoing.
> >
> > Agreed. In the case of S888's friendship with YW there are no material consequences.
>
> Do we know S888's relationship with YW? Do we know he's not
> just a groupie?
>
Just l e t i t g o
> On 5/19/2016 10:03 AM, HT wrote:
> >> The problem is that it may be hard to tell when someone's
> >> bias is affecting their review. It's like conflict of
> >> interest. The potential for wrong doing is almost as
> >> important as actual wrongdoing.
> >
> > Agreed. In the case of S888's friendship with YW there are no material consequences.
>
> Do we know S888's relationship with YW? Do we know he's not
> just a groupie?
>
HT
May 19, 2016, 12:27:57 PM5/19/16
to
> Do we know S888's relationship with YW? Do we know he's not
> just a groupie?
You are the exception. I don't even know if you like music.
Henk
O
May 19, 2016, 12:40:17 PM5/19/16
to
In article <00d5f107-8883-4e81...@googlegroups.com>, HT
Sign me up for Bavouzet and Wang. I do like Rana too, but I'll leave
her to you. Have to give Eckardstein a listen, because we have similar
tastes.
-Owen
her to you. Have to give Eckardstein a listen, because we have similar
tastes.
-Owen
s888...@aol.com
May 19, 2016, 12:44:41 PM5/19/16
to
s888...@aol.com
May 19, 2016, 12:49:55 PM5/19/16
to
On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 7:53:50 AM UTC-7, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 5/19/2016 10:03 AM, HT wrote:
> >> The problem is that it may be hard to tell when someone's
> >> bias is affecting their review. It's like conflict of
> >> interest. The potential for wrong doing is almost as
> >> important as actual wrongdoing.
> >
> > Agreed. In the case of S888's friendship with YW there are no material consequences.
>
> Do we know S888's relationship with YW? Do we know he's not
> just a groupie?
>
I doubt that anyone here knows me personally. So.....probably not.
> On 5/19/2016 10:03 AM, HT wrote:
> >> The problem is that it may be hard to tell when someone's
> >> bias is affecting their review. It's like conflict of
> >> interest. The potential for wrong doing is almost as
> >> important as actual wrongdoing.
> >
> > Agreed. In the case of S888's friendship with YW there are no material consequences.
>
> Do we know S888's relationship with YW? Do we know he's not
> just a groupie?
>
AB
May 19, 2016, 1:03:27 PM5/19/16
to
AB
Gerard
May 19, 2016, 1:03:36 PM5/19/16
to
"HT" wrote in message
news:00d5f107-8883-4e81...@googlegroups.com...
> Do we know S888's relationship with YW? Do we know he's not
> just a groupie?
If he were, so what? In the past there was someone who believed Lugnasky
were the nec plus ultra. We had Dan who believed Nadia Cole was. Now he has
Lim on his repertoire. Tom was a great fan of Brendel and Barenboim. Ari has
Grosvenor and Tao (with whom he cannot go wrong - pun intended). John Gavin
has Hamelin. Steve has all the non-winners of great competitions. <g> I
have Eckardstein and Rana.
===================
We also had someone who believed in Arrau.
And what about Richter and Argerich?
news:00d5f107-8883-4e81...@googlegroups.com...
> Do we know S888's relationship with YW? Do we know he's not
> just a groupie?
If he were, so what? In the past there was someone who believed Lugnasky
were the nec plus ultra. We had Dan who believed Nadia Cole was. Now he has
Lim on his repertoire. Tom was a great fan of Brendel and Barenboim. Ari has
Grosvenor and Tao (with whom he cannot go wrong - pun intended). John Gavin
has Hamelin. Steve has all the non-winners of great competitions. <g> I
have Eckardstein and Rana.
We also had someone who believed in Arrau.
And what about Richter and Argerich?
Frank Berger
May 19, 2016, 1:07:27 PM5/19/16
to
even imagine why you said it. I don't have the musical
background or aptitude of many in this group. That may
result in my not often verbalizing much about performances.
I just don't have the tools or the language. That has
nothing to do with liking music. Even if I couldn't tell
Horowitz from Helfgott.
Besides, there's a difference between having favorites and
being fixated. If you can't see the difference, I don't
think I can explain it to you.
I'd hate to think such a harsh comment was motivated by
politics.
AB
May 19, 2016, 1:08:09 PM5/19/16
to
AB
AB
May 19, 2016, 1:09:44 PM5/19/16
to
AB
Frank Berger
May 19, 2016, 1:10:03 PM5/19/16
to
>
Frank Berger
May 19, 2016, 1:12:38 PM5/19/16
to
adulation. I would think ignorance would more likely result
in the inability to distinguish among performers.R
HT
May 19, 2016, 1:30:42 PM5/19/16
to
> I'd hate to think such a harsh comment was motivated by
> politics.
Don't forget your logic, Frank. It's the best part.
Best regards,
Henk
HT
May 19, 2016, 1:33:47 PM5/19/16
to
> We also had someone who believed in Arrau.
> And what about Richter and Argerich?
Henk
s888...@aol.com
May 19, 2016, 1:38:19 PM5/19/16
to
HT
May 19, 2016, 1:59:04 PM5/19/16
to
> Sign me up for Bavouzet and Wang. I do like Rana too, but I'll leave
> her to you. Have to give Eckardstein a listen, because we have similar
> tastes.
I'm curious to know what you think of Eckardstein.
Henk
Frank Berger
May 19, 2016, 2:06:37 PM5/19/16
to
when they speak bias. If you judge a performance negatively
because the pianist plays a piece faster than you think it
should go, I don't think most people what consider that
bias. It's just a preference. But we've been all over
that, haven't we. If you suspect a pianist won't measure up
because her hands are small, that may be a pre-conception,
but there's there's no reason to suspect that will
significantly continue to color your opinion significantly
after you've heard the performance. Unless you biased, of
course.
Bozo
May 19, 2016, 2:13:59 PM5/19/16
to
>On Thursday, May 19, 2016 at 11:27:57 AM UTC-5, HT wrote:
>...Steve has all the non-winners of great competitions. <g> ...
>
2 marks !
I do regard Eckardstein among my top favs, too. Fortunately for him I did not listen to the 2003 QEB Competition.
>...Steve has all the non-winners of great competitions. <g> ...
>
2 marks !
I do regard Eckardstein among my top favs, too. Fortunately for him I did not listen to the 2003 QEB Competition.
Frank Berger
May 19, 2016, 2:37:54 PM5/19/16
to
On 5/19/2016 1:30 PM, HT wrote:
>
>> I'd hate to think such a harsh comment was motivated by
>> politics.
>
> <g> Of course, if we had had the same political preferences I would have been familiar with your musical tastes.
That wasn't my meaning and you know it.
>
>> I'd hate to think such a harsh comment was motivated by
>> politics.
>
> <g> Of course, if we had had the same political preferences I would have been familiar with your musical tastes.
>
> Don't forget your logic, Frank. It's the best part.
>
The reason you participate here is to learn others'
> Don't forget your logic, Frank. It's the best part.
>
opinions? Really?
> Best regards,
> Henk
>
s888...@aol.com
May 19, 2016, 2:48:22 PM5/19/16
to
> Doesn't matter It's just a preference. But we've been all over
> that, haven't we. If you suspect a pianist won't measure up
> because her hands are small, that may be a pre-conception,
> but there's there's no reason to suspect that will
> significantly continue to color your opinion significantly
> after you've heard the performance. Unless you biased, of
> course.
Preconceptions are yet another source for bias. It's a form of expectation bias.
> because her hands are small, that may be a pre-conception,
> but there's there's no reason to suspect that will
> significantly continue to color your opinion significantly
> after you've heard the performance. Unless you biased, of
> course.
HT
May 19, 2016, 2:57:15 PM5/19/16
to
> The reason you participate here is to learn others'
> opinions? Really?
Henk
Steven Bornfeld
May 19, 2016, 3:17:09 PM5/19/16
to
whether it was hard-won. I figured it out, but only after many long and
wasted hours.
The comic Mike Birbiglia relates a long, touching story about how he
came to realize that in personal relationships it's not that important
to always be the one who's right.
Steve
Frank Berger
May 19, 2016, 4:33:41 PM5/19/16
to
opinion (both nouns this time). Opinion can be based on
objective critera. There may not be a rational reason for
me to prefer a piece to be played fast, but holding a
performance to that preference is not bias. It's opinion.
Not the same thing.
> doesn't matter what most people consider a bias and I don't think you can speak for "most people."
to define terms the same. It's like Deacon insisting
antisemitism didn't mean anti-Jewish because Arabs are semites.
>
>> Doesn't matter It's just a preference. But we've been all over
>> that, haven't we. If you suspect a pianist won't measure up
>> because her hands are small, that may be a pre-conception,
>> but there's there's no reason to suspect that will
>> significantly continue to color your opinion significantly
>> after you've heard the performance. Unless you biased, of
>> course.
>
> Preconceptions are yet another source for bias. It's a form of expectation bias.
>
Frank Berger
May 19, 2016, 4:46:12 PM5/19/16
to
guess that is your only reason. I come to RMCR, in part, to
see what people say about musical works and artists and
performers, not just
their opinion about what is good and what isn't. I want to
know why people hold the opinions they do. I want to hear
descriptions that are as objective as possible. Knowing that
Arri likes this guy and hates that guy and you think the
opposite is useless information to me unless you can
communicate why you think what you do in a way that I can
understand. I can't afford the time or money to listen to
every performance of every work to decide for myself.
I also don't have the same high standard (some would say
excessively high) that some others here have. Whether
because of
musical ignorance, inherent lack of taste, something else, I
don't know. I know that I could never, ever be moved to walk
out of a performance of a work I liked. I've also never,
ever failed to finish a novel that I started. But then I
almost never read anything cold. If I start a book, I have
reason to think, from reviews, recommendations, whatever,
that it
would likely be worthwhile to read. There have been a few
where in the end, I felt my time had been wasted, but not many.
laraine
May 19, 2016, 4:55:12 PM5/19/16
to
On Monday, May 16, 2016 at 12:16:19 PM UTC-5, Tony wrote:
> So far I've listened only to her dawdling and mawkish Kreisleriana. I don't think I've ever heard such an inept performance. Surely thousands of amateur pianists at home could play this with more style and ability. She turned a part of it into music for a perfume ad. Have a listen to this flat and doodling performance:
>
> http://www.medici.tv/#!/yuja-wang-brahms-schumann-beethoven-carnegie-hall
>
> Very golden age of Hollywood to change dresses for the second half.
>
> This must be how much of the media feels in giving airtime to Trump -- guilt just through mentioning the person.
Well, you're exaggerating of course. She is quite improving, and
has not played many very complex solo pieces before. The Kreisleriana
was about average, maybe even more, but that's saying a lot. The
Hammerk was actually interesting, I thought, though I'd guess not the
great of the great. She had some minor problems w/technique, which is not
like her. By mawkish you might mean that she seemed to tease at the
rubato occasionally (though rarely), which I'd say is true, but in
general she could do it well.
She should know that showing leg will get attention.
C.
> So far I've listened only to her dawdling and mawkish Kreisleriana. I don't think I've ever heard such an inept performance. Surely thousands of amateur pianists at home could play this with more style and ability. She turned a part of it into music for a perfume ad. Have a listen to this flat and doodling performance:
>
> http://www.medici.tv/#!/yuja-wang-brahms-schumann-beethoven-carnegie-hall
>
> Very golden age of Hollywood to change dresses for the second half.
>
> This must be how much of the media feels in giving airtime to Trump -- guilt just through mentioning the person.
Well, you're exaggerating of course. She is quite improving, and
has not played many very complex solo pieces before. The Kreisleriana
was about average, maybe even more, but that's saying a lot. The
Hammerk was actually interesting, I thought, though I'd guess not the
great of the great. She had some minor problems w/technique, which is not
like her. By mawkish you might mean that she seemed to tease at the
rubato occasionally (though rarely), which I'd say is true, but in
general she could do it well.
She should know that showing leg will get attention.
C.
Gerard
May 19, 2016, 6:02:08 PM5/19/16
to
"Frank Berger" wrote in message
news:OdidnU7k4vCMu6PK...@supernews.com...
I wonder how many people visit this ng to read this irrelevant stuff.
Al Eisner
May 19, 2016, 8:15:01 PM5/19/16
to
On Thu, 19 May 2016, AB wrote:
> speaking of Rana, (will ignore the pun comment above) my friend from
> Brazil sent me a live Tchaikovsky PC #1 which at times was really
> impressive. Lots of talent there.
Rana will be making her San Francisco debut next year with the Goldberg
> speaking of Rana, (will ignore the pun comment above) my friend from
> Brazil sent me a live Tchaikovsky PC #1 which at times was really
> impressive. Lots of talent there.
Variations, an interesting choice! She apparently played that at a
recent recital in Birmingham (I didn't find any reviews) and is scheduled
for the same at a number of recitals in France this summer.
--
Al Eisner
s888...@aol.com
May 19, 2016, 10:30:29 PM5/19/16
to
Look at Mere exposure effect. and selective perception.
> Opinion can be based on
> objective critera. There may not be a rational reason for
> me to prefer a piece to be played fast, but holding a
> performance to that preference is not bias. It's opinion.
> Not the same thing.
"prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another" In this case a prejudice in favor of a faster tempo.
>
>
> > doesn't matter what most people consider a bias and I don't think you can speak for "most people."
>
> If you want to communicate effectively with people you need
> to define terms the same. It's like Deacon insisting
> antisemitism didn't mean anti-Jewish because Arabs are semites.
>
> >
> >> Doesn't matter It's just a preference. But we've been all over
> >> that, haven't we. If you suspect a pianist won't measure up
> >> because her hands are small, that may be a pre-conception,
> >> but there's there's no reason to suspect that will
> >> significantly continue to color your opinion significantly
> >> after you've heard the performance. Unless you biased, of
> >> course.
> >
> > Preconceptions are yet another source for bias. It's a form of expectation bias.
> >
>
> Uh huh.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages