Joyce Hatto
Alan Watkins
someone has commented, unfortunately gravely ill at the moment and has
been for quite a while.
Her husband, W.H. Barrington-Coupe, runs Concert Artists label in the
UK and was single handedly responsible for bringing much music to
music lovers that would never have been heard on a recording including
Bax (among many others).
I would suggest that her recordings are, at least, worth hearing and
there may be some "quality" surprises along the way.
It is very easy, in my professional experience, to be seduced into the
famous names while sometimes neglecting those who are not famous names
but nonetheless make a major contribution to music making from time to
time.
Music is not always about "marketing" although of course I appreciate
that it must be so for recording companies to survive. On the night,
however, it is about the artist/orchestra/quartet/whatever and that
can sometimes be very different from what the marketing says.
I think we are all prey to "marketing" in fields that we do not know
intimately but, perhaps, when we do know such fields intimately we
think differently?
If you have specialist knowledge of ANY industry (as people on here
must have) I suspect they might sometimes choose differently from the
advertising big hitters? I do not see why that should be any
different in the music industry, for industry it is.
Kind regards,
Alan M. Watkins
Dan Koren
news:62c8649c.03120...@posting.google.com...
It isn't.
Thanks for reminding all of us that the
big names are often (not always) just
that -- big names inflated by the
music review racket.
Maybe some people can now figure out
why I insist on calling Alfred Brendull,
and Perahia the Moron.
dk
Simon Roberts
says...
>
>Just a comment: Joyce Hatto is a great pianist (I believe) and, as
>someone has commented, unfortunately gravely ill at the moment and has
>been for quite a while.
>
>Her husband, W.H. Barrington-Coupe, runs Concert Artists label in the
>UK and was single handedly responsible for bringing much music to
>music lovers that would never have been heard on a recording including
>Bax (among many others).
Can you (or anyone else) comment on her recordings of the Beethoven piano
sonatas and/or Fiorentino's on the same label? (I like all the Fiorentino I've
encountered very much, but don't know any of his recordings from that period.)
TIA
Simon
Mazzolata
> Maybe some people can now figure out
> why I insist on calling Alfred Brendull,
> and Perahia the Moron.
I just assumed it was for your usual reasons:
- they're not Russian
- their recordings are readily available
- you can actually hear the music without an overlay of aural gunk
- no-one is coughing loudly in the background
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Got to get behind the mule
in the morning and plow
Len of MusicWeb
> sonatas and/or Fiorentino's on the same label? (I like all the Fiorentino
I've
> encountered very much, but don't know any of his recordings from that
period.)
Go here
http://www.musicweb.uk.net/Concert_Artist/Index.htm any reviews are linked
to the discs. Some are picked out for you below.
All available on next day service from MusicWeb post free.
Piano Sonata No. 4 in E flat Op. 7 (1797)
Piano Sonata No. 29 in B flat Op. 106 Hammerklavier (1818)
http://www.musicweb.uk.net/classrev/2003/Dec03/hammer_hatto.htm
Ludwig van BEETHOVEN (1770-1827)
The Piano Sonatas Volume 2
Piano Sonata No 12 in A flat Op. 26 (1800-01)
Piano Sonata No 13 in E flat Op. 27 No 1 (1800-01)
Piano Sonata No 15 in D major Op. 28 Pastoral (1801)
Sergio Fiorentino (piano)
http://www.musicweb.uk.net/classrev/2003/Mar03/Beethoven_PianoSonatas2.htm
Ludwig van BEETHOVEN (1770-1827)
The Piano Sonatas Volume 4
Piano Sonata No 26 in E flat Op. 81a Les Adieux (1809-10)
Piano Sonata No 27 in E minor Op. 90 (1814)
Piano Sonata No 28 in A major Op. 101 (1816)
Piano Sonata No 30 in E major Op. 109 (1820)
Sergio Fiorentino (piano)
http://www.musicweb.uk.net/classrev/2003/Mar03/Beethoven_PianoSonatas4.htm
Edvard GRIEG (1843-1907)
Piano Concerto in A Minor Op 16 (1868)
Frederic CHOPIN (1810-1849)
Piano Concerto No 2 in F Minor Op 21 (1830)
Sergio Fiorentino, piano
http://www.musicweb.uk.net/classrev/2002/Oct02/Grieg_Chopin.htm
Franz LISZT (1811-1886)
Douze Études d'exécution transcendente S139
Sergio Fiorentino, piano
http://www.musicweb.uk.net/classrev/2002/Oct02/Liszt_piano_Fiorentino.htm
"Simon Roberts" <sd...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:bqqru...@drn.newsguy.com...
Dan Koren
news:3FD10089...@hotmail.com...
> Dan Koren wrote:
>
> > Maybe some people can now figure out
> > why I insist on calling Alfred Brendull,
> > and Perahia the Moron.
>
> I just assumed it was for your usual reasons:
>
> - they're not Russian
> - their recordings are readily available
> - you can actually hear the music without an overlay of aural gunk
> - no-one is coughing loudly in the background
>
None of the above.
Brendel and Perahia are creatures of
the music media. There are lots of
much better pianists who never got
a fraction of the attention these
two turkeys got thanks to Times
Square.
dk
deac...@yahoo.com
wrote:
You are quite right, Alan. As someone who has been a part of that
industry, I know how true your words are.
At a time when Lang Lang is being touted as "the future of classical
music", we might all do well to listen to Joyce Hatto. Unsung,
perhaps, but not unsongful!
TD
deac...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>Maybe some people can now figure out
>why I insist on calling Alfred Brendull,
>and Perahia the Moron.
I know that is an altrustic cape you are wrapping around your little
body, Koren, but it doesn't wash. Sorry.
There is Lang Lang and then there are Brendel and Perahia. You may not
like them, but they have won their place in the public's heart by
legitimate means. Your cynical distortions of their names is not only
distasteful, it is entirely mean-spirited and vindictive. Also quite
obviously ridiculous.
TD
Dan Koren
news:fi42tv42jnj85ji6k...@4ax.com...
You're speaking from both corners of your mouth.
More than anyone else on this newsgroup, you have
been a member of the music industry conspiracy that
has annointed the Brendels, the Perahias and Mmes.
Strudel-Haebler "great pianists". What a fucking
hypocrite!
Everything you pretend to know about piano music
fits completely inside the tiniest moosehole.
dk
Dan Koren
news:4n42tv0vldgeht016...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 21:26:23 GMT, "Dan Koren" <dank...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Maybe some people can now figure out
> >why I insist on calling Alfred Brendull,
> >and Perahia the Moron.
>
> I know that is an altrustic cape you are
> wrapping around your little body, Koren,
> but it doesn't wash. Sorry.
Not at all. This has been one of my
favorite themes for a long time.
> There is Lang Lang and then there are
> Brendel and Perahia.
You're right. Lang Lang is obviously
being manipulated. On the other hand,
Brendull and the Moron have made it
to the ranks of the manipulators.
Take a good long look at the covers
the Moron's debut recordings of 30
years ago, and you will see another
Lang Lang.
> You may not like them, but they have
> won their place in the public's heart
> by legitimate means.
By which you mean, I suppose, support
from Papa Serkin, Peter Gelb, and Tom
Deacon?
> Your cynical distortions of their names
> is not only distasteful, it is entirely
> mean-spirited and vindictive. Also quite
> obviously ridiculous.
My "cynical distortion" of their names is
par for the course. Have you bothered to
read any reviews penned by G. B. Shaw or
Dr. Hanslick?
Not to mention that my "cynical distortion"
of their names does not even come close to
*THEIR* cynical distortion of the music
they play.
dk
deac...@yahoo.com
wrote:
><deac...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
It is you, the cynical, disabused, ignorant and self-anointed guru of
piano music who expresses such thoughts of Mr. Brendel, Mr. Perahia
and Madame Haebler. You have to deal with your own problems in this
regard. I do not. Fortunately.
The music "industry" did not create these great artists; the public
did. And still does, in the face of "marketed" counterfeit artists
such as Bang Bang, Fullofshit, and others of their ilk.
Apparently you cannot distinguish the one from the other. Another one
of your problems. Of course, you cannot hear, so should we really be
surprised?
TD
deac...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>> Your cynical distortions of their names
>> is not only distasteful, it is entirely
>> mean-spirited and vindictive. Also quite
>> obviously ridiculous.
>
>
>My "cynical distortion" of their names is
>par for the course.
Par for your course, as you cannot make any rational criticisms.
>Have you bothered
You think I have to BOTHER to read music criticism? I do it all the
time, and with pleasure. But have never confused your babbling with
criticism.
>to read any reviews penned by G. B. Shaw or
>Dr. Hanslick?
You flatter yourself.
You are nothing but a two-bit, loud-mouthed, frustrated would-be-but-
never-could-be pianist, who has found AN audience, albeit small and
gullible, and in the meantime toils in ones and zeros to put food on
the table.
Pathetic!
George Bernard Shaw indeed!
Get a grip, man. You're not even George Gobel!
TD
Dan Koren
news:vjf2tv8o258ebkjht...@4ax.com...
>
> The music "industry" did not create these great artists; the public
> did. And still does, in the face of "marketed" counterfeit artists
> such as Bang Bang, Fullofshit, and others of their ilk.
>
The public is easily brainwashed by
the musical and non-musical press,
as well as by the many figures of
"authority". You know that as well
as, if not better than anyone else.
What is your box of "great pianists"
if not packaged brainwashing?
The Moron would not have made the
career he made without the glowing
reviews of his early recordings. He
was called "another Lipatti".
Stop pretending. There's nothing
more disgusting than people who
keep lying in spite of the fact
they know full well everybody
knowd they're lying.
dk
Andrys Basten
Alan Watkins <alanwa...@aol.com> wrote:
>I would suggest that her recordings are, at least, worth hearing and
>there may be some "quality" surprises along the way.
Definitely an understatement, Alan ...
- Andrys
--
A Mephisto Waltz audio segment at
http://andrys.com/hatto.html
Simon Roberts
says...
>
>> Can you (or anyone else) comment on her recordings of the Beethoven piano
>> sonatas and/or Fiorentino's on the same label? (I like all the Fiorentino
>I've
>> encountered very much, but don't know any of his recordings from that
>period.)
>
>Go here
[snip]
Thanks - that was useful.
Simon
Alan Watkins
> In article <62c8649c.03120...@posting.google.com>,
> Alan Watkins <alanwa...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >I would suggest that her recordings are, at least, worth hearing and
> >there may be some "quality" surprises along the way.
>
> Definitely an understatement, Alan ...
>
>
> - Andrys
I just like her playing and I was, apparently, the 18th person to buy
all her recordings on Concert Artists or so they told me! It was
Arnold Bax who first drew attention to her playing and so (I assume)
he was reasonably satisfied with her performances of his music. There
is a wonderful account of her career on musicweb which I commend to
any interested.
Sometimes, of course, there can be a thrilling performance in just ONE
movement of a work which may disappoint in others. Someone wrote
recently in another thread of Ma Vlast by Smetana and found the
performance of Otakar Jeremias less than inspiring.
It prompted me to search for my old 78's of this performance and while
I can easily hear imperfections (first trumpet is late in the first
movement, rather disastrously so) the harpist opening this work is
magical and stands, I suggest, comparison with anyone right up to
December 2003. Beautiful playing.
I have over 100 commercial/private/radio tapes of the complete Ma
Vlast and while most have imperfections many have moments of great
music making and great majesty.
I think Joyce Hatto to be a great pianist. She does not always get it
absolutely right but neither can I or anyone else in this business
that I know. If only.......
arri bachrach
> >Maybe some people can now figure out
> >why I insist on calling Alfred Brendull,
> >and Perahia the Moron.
>
> I know that is an altrustic cape you are wrapping around your little
> body, Koren, but it doesn't wash. Sorry.
>
> There is Lang Lang and then there are Brendel and Perahia. You may not
> like them, but they have won their place in the public's heart by
> legitimate means.
so did Liberache...... ridiculous comment
Your cynical distortions of their names is not only
> distasteful, it is entirely mean-spirited and vindictive. Also quite
> obviously ridiculous.
>
> TD
now wait here Tom...... I also am hardly enamoured with dk's mode of
"expression" but he has a valid point. Neither Brendel nor Perahia
warrant the reputations that they have (that they are great pianists).
Yes, there is a certain meaness in how he distorts their names which
even *I* find offensive..
that the general population of "music lovers" admire their playing has
no relevance. The average concert patron has nowhere the level of
musical sophistication to enable him or her to really judge pianists
or other musicians.... one could expect that YOU would be able to do
better.....
AB
arri bachrach
> The music "industry" did not create these great artists; the public
> did. And still does, in the face of "marketed" counterfeit artists
> such as Bang Bang, Fullofshit, and others of their ilk.
was "Fullofshit" included in the Greatest Pianists of the 20th Century?
AB
Matthew燘. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:904130a9.0312...@posting.google.com:
>>
>> The music "industry" did not create these great artists; the public
>> did. And still does, in the face of "marketed" counterfeit artists
>> such as Bang Bang, Fullofshit, and others of their ilk.
>
> was "Fullofshit" included in the Greatest Pianists of the 20th Century?
André-Michel Fullofshit? No.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
War is Peace. ** Freedom is Slavery. ** It's all Napster's fault!
Dan Koren
news:Xns9449D29232F...@207.217.77.201...
> abac...@att.net (arri bachrach) appears to have caused the following
> letters to be typed in
news:904130a9.0312...@posting.google.com:
>
> >>
> >> The music "industry" did not create these great artists; the public
> >> did. And still does, in the face of "marketed" counterfeit artists
> >> such as Bang Bang, Fullofshit, and others of their ilk.
> >
> > was "Fullofshit" included in the Greatest Pianists of the 20th Century?
>
> André-Michel Fullofshit? No.
>
It's actually Mitsuko.
And she is in.
dk
deac...@yahoo.com
>that the general population of "music lovers" admire their playing has
>no relevance.
It has all the relevance in the world.
Only an egomaniac, Arri, would pretend that his opinion was somehow
more important, more valuable, more worthy than that of the general
population of music lovers. More knowledgeable, perhaps, but not more
valuable.
The average concert patron has nowhere the level of
>musical sophistication to enable him or her to really judge pianists
>or other musicians....
It doesn't take musical sophistication to judge the performance of an
artist.
Rubinstein appealed to the crowd. They loved him. Critics sometimes
used to huff and puff and sniff and tut-tut, but still he prevailed.
As did the opinion of the crowd, who never wavered in their support
for his brand of showmanship and musicality.
At the same time other pianists, perhaps more respected by the
"intelligentsia", continued to carp.
So, also, today with Brendel and Perhahia. Each has his own audience.
Brendel has his own very special one; Perahia a more generalized one.
but they are both adored by their public, regardless of the sniffs and
huffs and puffs of their detractors. And it looks as though Brendel's
will continue through to the end of his performing career. So also
Perhahia's.
TD
deac...@yahoo.com
>>
>> The music "industry" did not create these great artists; the public
>> did. And still does, in the face of "marketed" counterfeit artists
>> such as Bang Bang, Fullofshit, and others of their ilk.
>
>was "Fullofshit" included in the Greatest Pianists of the 20th Century?
>
>AB
He wasn't even born yet!
TD
deac...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>"Matthew B. Tepper" <oyþ@earthlink.net> wrote in message
Is everyone dense, or do they not see "The Great Arkadi" in this name?
TD
Alan Watkins
Hopefully, some of those recordings can speak far more eloquently
about the artists than I can.
I particularly like Fiorentino's Chopin 2 (it's live) where there is,
I think, some wonderfully expressive playing at which he was such a
master.
On the CD I have the cover shows the orchestra in the background and,
as a small matter of historical interest, the timpanist is James
Bradshaw, not (then) far off retirement and an important member of a
timpani playing family in England with close connections to Elgar and
long before that.
Chopin 2 is rare among concertos of that period in having a meaningful
and important (and well written) timpani part and I especially enjoyed
hearing him playing it so well while listening to a person who (for
me) is one of the very greatest pianists I have heard.
Mr Fiorentino and Joyce Hatto, I hope, show that you do not have to be
"famous" to create and convey great music making. It's done all the
time, I suspect, by people none of us have ever heard of!
Both, for what it's worth, are also revered by many people for their
personal qualities, their kindnesses, their personality, not simply as
musicians.
That, of course, has nothing to do with their technical ability as
musicians but sometimes it is particularly nice when you find the both
in the same person.
Wayne Reimer <wrdsl
> >
> > >Maybe some people can now figure out
> > >why I insist on calling Alfred Brendull,
> > >and Perahia the Moron.
> >
> now wait here Tom...... I also am hardly enamoured with dk's mode of
> "expression" but he has a valid point. Neither Brendel nor Perahia
> warrant the reputations that they have (that they are great pianists).
Actually, Brendel is a great musician who is a pianist. Perahia is merely a
competent and inoffensive pianist - and being inoffensive is majorly offensive
to those who have a standard-issue concept of what piano-playing as an art is
supposed to be.
If you haven't heard Brendel being great - which I have, more than once - then
you've missed out on one of the better things that western civilization
currently has to offer (which isn't saying all that much, I realize, but
relatively speaking, it's pretty amazing). On the other hand, if you are like
dk and simply can't hear what Brendel is doing, and moreover, would have no
interest in it even if you could, it is easy enough to disparage his art, but
that doesn't reflect well on you at all. I mean, it's hardly surprising that
dk doesn't care for a pianist who doesn't do Chopin and who has specialized in
Beethoven, is it? What's weird is that dk has decided that his distinctively
personal response to piano playing and to music in general is somehow a
universal postulate about what music should be to everyone, and everything else
that he personally doesn't respond to is garbage. One has to assume he comes
from a severely dysfunctional background.
wr
Ian Pace
"Wayne Reimer @pacbell.net>" <wrdsl<delete> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a3dd33c9...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net...
Best,
Ian
deac...@yahoo.com
<wrdsl<delete>@pacbell.net> wrote:
>Actually, Brendel is a great musician who is a pianist.
>
>If you haven't heard Brendel being great - which I have, more than once - then
>you've missed out on one of the better things that western civilization
>currently has to offer.
Thank you, Wayne.
TD
Mazzolata
>>In article <904130a9.03120...@posting.google.com>, abac...@att.net says...
>>
>>>>Maybe some people can now figure out
>>>>why I insist on calling Alfred Brendull,
>>>>and Perahia the Moron.
>>>
> <...>
>
>>now wait here Tom...... I also am hardly enamoured with dk's mode of
>>"expression" but he has a valid point. Neither Brendel nor Perahia
>>warrant the reputations that they have (that they are great pianists).
>
>
> Actually, Brendel is a great musician who is a pianist. Perahia is merely a
> competent and inoffensive pianist - and being inoffensive is majorly offensive
> to those who have a standard-issue concept of what piano-playing as an art is
> supposed to be.
I don't have anywhere near the musical knowledge that some people on
this n.g. have - I'm just a classical music fan. However, I have
Beethoven sonatas by several pianists, including Richter, Rosen,
Schnabel, and a few others, and I don't see Brendel being overshadowed
by any of them.
I also have Perahia playing Chopin, and although it's quite pleasant it
doesn't come close to the Rubinstein that I have in the same repertoire.
So I guess that I would agree with Wayne on this.
Simon Roberts
<wrdsl says...
>> now wait here Tom...... I also am hardly enamoured with dk's mode of
>> "expression" but he has a valid point. Neither Brendel nor Perahia
>> warrant the reputations that they have (that they are great pianists).
>
>Actually, Brendel is a great musician who is a pianist. Perahia is merely a
>competent and inoffensive pianist - and being inoffensive is majorly offensive
>to those who have a standard-issue concept of what piano-playing as an art is
>supposed to be.
>
>If you haven't heard Brendel being great - which I have, more than once - then
>you've missed out on one of the better things that western civilization
>currently has to offer (which isn't saying all that much, I realize, but
>relatively speaking, it's pretty amazing).
I suspect Perahia fans would say exactly the same about him.
Simon
Raymond Hall
I also suspect Fiorentino fans would say the same about him also.
Regards, (a Fiorentino fan from an early age)
# http://www.users.bigpond.com/hallraylily/index.html
See You Tamara (Ozzy Osbourne)
Ray, Taree, NSW
Dan Koren
> > >
> > > >Maybe some people can now figure out
> > > >why I insist on calling Alfred Brendull,
> > > >and Perahia the Moron.
> > >
> <...>
> > now wait here Tom...... I also am hardly enamoured with dk's mode of
> > "expression" but he has a valid point. Neither Brendel nor Perahia
> > warrant the reputations that they have (that they are great pianists).
>
> Actually, Brendel is a great musician who is a pianist.Â
> to those who have a standard-issue concept
> If you haven't heard Brendel being great -
> you've missed out on one of the better things
> Beethoven, is it?Â
Wayne Reimer <wrdsl
True enough, but then, they are in the market for his aural doilies and afghans
that are of good quality, and I'm not.
No, that's too harsh. I'm willing to admit the possibility that some few of
Perahia's fans are actually experiencing extraordinary things while listening
to him. It's a long stretch indeed, but I'll admit it's possible. There is
something he does to music that has to do with his ideas of musical "purity", I
think, that could work for some folks, particularly ones who think that
fastidiousness is a spiritual quality of the highest order.
wr
deac...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>Incidentally, my only concept of what piano
>playing as an art is supposed to be is that
>it should move the audience. No more and no
>less.
A rather limited view of the art of performance, I would say.
I have often been "moved", but it has usually been to anger, outrage,
and boredom, and finally walked out of many a "performance".
Perhaps your problem, Koren, is that you have had a lobotomy at an
early stage in your life, removing the brain from any noticeable
function.
Such a pity, as the brain is really needed to appreciate the full
impact of a work of art.
TD
deac...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>"Wayne Reimer @pacbell.net>" <wrdsl<delete> wrote in message news:MPG.1a3dd33c9...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net...
Yes. But do you still beat your wife?
Seems Koren is off his meds again. Can't someone please take care of
this lunatic on a semi-regular basis?
Or, perhaps it is time for the asylum after all.
TD
Gerrit Stolte
wrote:
> Not so fast. Brendel has butchered pretty
> much everything he plays or has recorded.
> Forget about Chopin. Even his Beethoven
> is bad, and his Schubert stinks (with
> one exception).
Which? The only composition that comes to mind is D959, though I doubt
that you are referring to this.
Gerrit
deac...@yahoo.com
<wrdsl<delete>@pacbell.net> wrote:
>True enough, but then, they are in the market for his aural doilies and afghans
>that are of good quality, and I'm not.
>
>No, that's too harsh. I'm willing to admit the possibility that some few of
>Perahia's fans are actually experiencing extraordinary things while listening
>to him. It's a long stretch indeed, but I'll admit it's possible. There is
>something he does to music that has to do with his ideas of musical "purity", I
>think, that could work for some folks, particularly ones who think that
>fastidiousness is a spiritual quality of the highest order.
I am glad you amended your first statement, Wayne.
You should know that you really cannot fool the audience for long, and
Perahia's lengthy career, spanning a period of over thirty years, is
sufficient testimony to his abilities to have his fans "actually
experience extraordinary things while listening to him".
You bring up the terms "fastidious" and "pure". These are both
relevant to Perahia's art. Sometimes they are bothersome, other times
they are perfectly appropriate. It depends upon the music, I think.
The recent Schubert went too far in the direction of both those terms
for my liking, I would say. But if you listen to his Mendelssohn
concerti, or the Chopin Ballades, or his Schumann, and even some of
the Beethoven (not the Emperor, of course) you get him at his best.
TD
Andrys Basten
Say, are you visiting the air of San Francisco too ? :-)
Actually, my own feeling when reading Dan's definition yesterday
was that when he says "it should move the audience. No more and no less"
this doesn't quite work, since many pianists Dan that disdains do
move their audiences.
I think it comes down to who the audience is.
- A
Steve Emerson
wrote:
> You should know that you really cannot fool the audience for long, and
> Perahia's lengthy career, spanning a period of over thirty years, is
> sufficient testimony to his abilities to have his fans "actually
> experience extraordinary things while listening to him".
The argument that an audience's long-time liking for a performer is
significant, that it's some sort of index of that performer's real value -- is
an argument that I think is without merit.
Do you really need examples? Guy Lombardo's career lasted much longer than
Perahia's has to date, and his popularity did not wane. Kenny Gee has been
around for 20 years or so, still selling it off the shelves. Pearl Buck's
popularity had a very long run and in fact she won the Nobel Prize.
For a record-company executive, a performer's popularity is of course a prime
consideration. I accept that. In fact it's often a consideration for
disinterested observers of a marketplace too. Some may even wish to follow and
pass judgment on an artist's managing of his/her own career, and his/her
handlers' managing of same.
But none of those things have anything to do with the inherent interest of a
recording.
SE.
arri bachrach
>
> Seems Koren is off his meds again. Can't someone please take care of
> this lunatic on a semi-regular basis?
>
> Or, perhaps it is time for the asylum after all.
>
> TD
Tom,
he may be off his "meds" as you say, (though I doubt that there are
ANY meds that could help him) BUT what he says about ALL the pianists
in his previous post is correct..
dont confuse insanity with lack of musical judgement :-))))
your RELATIVE sanity does not seem to improve your understanding
regarding pianists.....
AB
Bob Lombard
<eme...@nospamsonic.net> wrote:
>In article <dbjbtvct3f77e6vfk...@4ax.com>, deac...@yahoo.com
>wrote:
>
>> You should know that you really cannot fool the audience for long, and
>> Perahia's lengthy career, spanning a period of over thirty years, is
>> sufficient testimony to his abilities to have his fans "actually
>> experience extraordinary things while listening to him".
>
>The argument that an audience's long-time liking for a performer is
>significant, that it's some sort of index of that performer's real value -- is
>an argument that I think is without merit.
>
>Do you really need examples? Guy Lombardo's career lasted much longer than
>Perahia's has to date, and his popularity did not wane. Kenny Gee has been
>around for 20 years or so, still selling it off the shelves. Pearl Buck's
>popularity had a very long run and in fact she won the Nobel Prize.
Steve, I think the 'performer's real value' issue is pretty complex,
and longtime popularity is worth some value points, particularly if
some how-was-it-maintained criterion is a major factor. Arthur
Rubinstein is one of the performers who complicates the issue. His
career wasn't so different from the one that Perahia is pursuing, on
the 'popularity' side. One is essentially left with an estimate of
comparative musicianship. But if Perahia were not popular, would there
be a contest?
bl
Alan Watkins
Chopin Etudes (CACD 9035-2).
These are (to me) very special pieces, in particular Op 10, but I
would suggest they also hold another very special place in
music....being "studies" that are not just among the most taxing
studies ever written for the instrument (if you can play these well, I
suspect you can play ANYTHING) but are also intensely musical.
This music can, I think, be enjoyed on two levels: for the technical
level of skill involved in even playing it and for the music itself.
There are any number of great pianists technically capable of
"rattling" their way through this music and that is not meant in any
derogatory sense because to "rattle" your way through you must have,
in the first place, a superb technique.
Listening to Joyce Hatto playing Op 10 is, for me, to hear an artist
doing her best to realise BOTH at the same time and absolutely
stunning. Like Fiorentino what a "great" left hand, absolutely vital
in this music; wonderful arpeggio's and a left hand of tremendous
power and real independence. Both the study aspect and the musical
aspect appear to this Old Chap to shine out at the same time which
doesn't always happen.
She is not alone in achieving this, of course, but perhaps is one of
the lesser known "lights" upon this music. Once you know her work
(and assuming you like some of it) I would suggest you might just
wonder how this now (elderly) lady got "lost in the system". Alas,
she is not alone (either then or now).
DelMarva LaPoule
I would just like to innocuously add that Brendel (and Lupu and Pollini)
are anti-musicians. They actively and with malice subvert all that is
uplifting, inspired and disturbing in the music they "type."
--
DelMarva LaPoule
Poetry in Poultry
"Opinion, in the face of reality, becomes dogma."
Steve Emerson
Bob Lombard <thor...@adelphia.net> wrote:
> Steve, I think the 'performer's real value' issue is pretty complex,
> and longtime popularity is worth some value points, particularly if
> some how-was-it-maintained criterion is a major factor. Arthur
> Rubinstein is one of the performers who complicates the issue. His
> career wasn't so different from the one that Perahia is pursuing, on
> the 'popularity' side. One is essentially left with an estimate of
> comparative musicianship. But if Perahia were not popular, would there
> be a contest?
Yes, certainly it's a complex issue. But I guess my point is, when there is a
plane on which Rubinstein and Perahia are comparable (and with them,
Lombardo), it's a plane I'm not interested in.
Bob, I may not be tracking with your remark about comparative musicianship.
Has that got something to do with careers?
SE.
Steve Emerson
alanwa...@aol.com (Alan Watkins) wrote:
> Could I particularly draw attention to Joyce Hatto's recording of the
> Chopin Etudes (CACD 9035-2).
>
> These are (to me) very special pieces, in particular Op 10, but I
> would suggest they also hold another very special place in
> music....being "studies" that are not just among the most taxing
> studies ever written for the instrument (if you can play these well, I
> suspect you can play ANYTHING) but are also intensely musical.
>
> This music can, I think, be enjoyed on two levels: for the technical
> level of skill involved in even playing it and for the music itself.
> There are any number of great pianists technically capable of
> "rattling" their way through this music and that is not meant in any
> derogatory sense because to "rattle" your way through you must have,
> in the first place, a superb technique.
>
> Listening to Joyce Hatto playing Op 10 is, for me, to hear an artist
> doing her best to realise BOTH at the same time and absolutely
> stunning. Like Fiorentino what a "great" left hand, absolutely vital
> in this music; wonderful arpeggio's and a left hand of tremendous
> power and real independence. Both the study aspect and the musical
> aspect appear to this Old Chap to shine out at the same time which
> doesn't always happen.
>
> She is not alone in achieving this, of course,
If she does, she may actually be almost alone. (You know the Cortot line,
neither the musician without virtuosity nor the virtuoso without music can
succeed here...?)
> but perhaps is one of
> the lesser known "lights" upon this music. Once you know her work
> (and assuming you like some of it) I would suggest you might just
> wonder how this now (elderly) lady got "lost in the system". Alas,
> she is not alone (either then or now).
When did she record these, Alan? Also, do we get a strong dose of vigor from
Op. 10 No's 1 and 12?
Thx,
SE.
Mazzolata
>
> I would just like to innocuously add that Brendel (and Lupu and Pollini)
> are anti-musicians. They actively and with malice subvert all that is
> uplifting, inspired and disturbing in the music they "type."
>
I can only assume that you haven't listened to Pollini's Schubert D959.
this>@xs j.winter4all.nl
Basten) wrote:
>>On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 04:24:37 GMT, "Dan Koren" <dank...@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Incidentally, my only concept of what piano
>>>playing as an art is supposed to be is that
>>>it should move the audience. No more and no
>>>less.
>
> Actually, my own feeling when reading Dan's definition yesterday
>was that when he says "it should move the audience. No more and no less"
>this doesn't quite work, since many pianists Dan that disdains do
>move their audiences.
>
> I think it comes down to who the audience is.
Bingo!
I think mr Koren was too modest here. The real definition should be:
"it should move ME. No more and no less".
--
Jan Winter, Amsterdam
< j.winter<delete this>@xs<delete this>4all.nl >
Bob Lombard
Hah. Maybe I should have said 'respective' musicianship? musicianship
being mechanism+technique+valid(it works) interpretation, just in case
we are wording past each other there. Anyhow, I'm saying that neither
you nor I as individuals determine 'performer's real value', only
partly because our estimate of those qualities is subjective, but also
because empirical measurement of them doesn't exist., I gather there
is a philosophy that disagrees with my assessment of 'subjective', but
I think that subjective is not real. The deacontde's materialistic,
market based notions reflect a subdivision of real. Rubinstein and
Perahia are comparable on that, valid, basis. The many fans of Perahia
may subjectively rate their guy equal or superior to Rubinstein in the
'it works' measure, and there is no sensible basis for calling them
wrong.
Lombardo is a special case. His popularity (and sellability) was
refreshed every New Years Eve.
bl
Ian Pace
"DelMarva LaPoule" <vze28thq@**nospam**verizon.net> wrote in message
news:W5rBb.2605$mF2....@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
> arri bachrach wrote:
> >>Yes. But do you still beat your wife?
> >>
> >>Seems Koren is off his meds again. Can't someone please take care of
> >>this lunatic on a semi-regular basis?
> >>
> >>Or, perhaps it is time for the asylum after all.
> >>
> >>TD
> >
> >
> > Tom,
> >
> > he may be off his "meds" as you say, (though I doubt that there are
> > ANY meds that could help him) BUT what he says about ALL the pianists
> > in his previous post is correct..
> > dont confuse insanity with lack of musical judgement :-))))
> > your RELATIVE sanity does not seem to improve your understanding
> > regarding pianists.....
> >
> > AB
>
> I would just like to innocuously add that Brendel (and Lupu and Pollini)
> are anti-musicians. They actively and with malice subvert all that is
> uplifting, inspired and disturbing in the music they "type."
>
>
life-affirming pianists I have heard, in most of the repertoire he plays.
Obviously his output is a bit mixed, but that's true of any player; for me,
very few can match the joy, insight and sophistication he brings to
Beethoven, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms and Schoenberg. It is no exaggeration to
say that some of Brendel's performances penetrate to the heart of what I
love most about music.
Ian
John Gavin
> In article <dbjbtvct3f77e6vfk...@4ax.com>, deac...@yahoo.com
> wrote:
>
> > You should know that you really cannot fool the audience for long, and
> > Perahia's lengthy career, spanning a period of over thirty years, is
> > sufficient testimony to his abilities to have his fans "actually
> > experience extraordinary things while listening to him".
>
BRAND NAME phenomenon. Other members are Perlman, Kissin, Zuckerman,
fill in the rest - you know who they are. They are the ones who are
likely to win Grammy's year after year, even when they don't deserve
it. They are the brand names that the subscription audiences
recognize and are happy to shell out money to hear year after year.
The participants here are obviously knowlegeable and don't fall into
the above category, but face it, many of the seats are filled by
people who love name recognition and don't like to take chances.
Simon Roberts
>
>I would just like to innocuously add that Brendel (and Lupu and Pollini)
>are anti-musicians. They actively and with malice subvert all that is
>uplifting, inspired and disturbing in the music they "type."
"Actively" and "with malice"? A change from narcissism, I suppose....
Simon
Dan Koren
Baby Kant now learning to write short sentences?
Uncle Immanuel is about to disown you.
dk
Dan Koren
>
> I think it comes down to who the audience is.
>
Isn't that implicit in the very
definition of any performing art?
dk
Dan Koren
No, of course not.
The only decent Schubert performances from
the Brendull are D958 and D940 with Evelyne
Crochet from the first Schubert set that
came out on Vox/Vanguard. Everything
else stinks big time.
dk
Jim Smith
I see Ward Moron has a rival for the Matthew's old position as
provider of boring unfunny insults. I'm sorry, Tom, but it's not
enough; to compete with Ward you have to give off a general air of
utter retardation.
Steve Emerson
Bob Lombard <thor...@adelphia.net> wrote:
> Hah. Maybe I should have said 'respective' musicianship? musicianship
> being mechanism+technique+valid(it works) interpretation, just in case
> we are wording past each other there. Anyhow, I'm saying that neither
> you nor I as individuals determine 'performer's real value', only
> partly because our estimate of those qualities is subjective, but also
> because empirical measurement of them doesn't exist., I gather there
> is a philosophy that disagrees with my assessment of 'subjective', but
> I think that subjective is not real. The deacontde's materialistic,
> market based notions reflect a subdivision of real. Rubinstein and
> Perahia are comparable on that, valid, basis. The many fans of Perahia
> may subjectively rate their guy equal or superior to Rubinstein in the
> 'it works' measure, and there is no sensible basis for calling them
> wrong.
Whether you or I determine what I called the "value" of a performer['s work],
or whether anyone can quantify it, has no bearing on the question whether
popularity is an indicator of it.
But I see what's troubling you here. Probably I should have used the term
"merit."
I wasn't speaking about something that pertains to a social economy.
I am merely saying that popularity is no indicator at all of the merit of a
musician's playing.
SE.
Wayne Reimer <wrdsl
> "Wayne Reimer @pacbell.net>" <wrdsl<delete> wrote in message news:MPG.1a3dd33c9...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net...
> > > In article <904130a9.03120...@posting.google.com>, abac...@att.net says...
> > > >
> > > > >Maybe some people can now figure out
> > > > >why I insist on calling Alfred Brendull,
> > > > >and Perahia the Moron.
> > > >
> > <...>
> > > now wait here Tom...... I also am hardly enamoured with dk's mode of
> > > "expression" but he has a valid point. Neither Brendel nor Perahia
> > > warrant the reputations that they have (that they are great pianists).
> >
> > Actually, Brendel is a great musician who is a pianist.
>
>
> And how does one tell a pianist is a
> great musician if is not a good pianist?
> Reading his/her mind? Just curious....
>
Mind-reading does help. Who are we talking about? Can't be Brendel, who is an
exceptional pianist.
>
> > Perahia is merely a competent and inoffensive pianist -
>
>
> I disagree. He is very offensive, if for no
> other reason than denying some space in the
> market to others worthier than him.
>
Nonsense...the space he's filling will never be occupied by worthier musicians.
They've got a different audience.
>
> > and being inoffensive is majorly offensive
> > to those who have a standard-issue concept
> > of what piano-playing as an art is supposed
> > to be.
>
>
> See above.
>
> Incidentally, my only concept of what piano
> playing as an art is supposed to be is that
> it should move the audience. No more and no
> less. If we can't agree on that much, we are
> not referring to a *PERFORMING* art.
>
Being moved isn't it to me - if the pianist projects anything that holds my
interest, that's what does it for me. What holds my interest usually is, in
fact, being moved, but I hold the door open for other things. Brendel often
moves me - for example, the Brahms Ballades he did in SF a couple of years ago
was more than just moving, it was emotionally shattering by the end of the last
one. But he also has an uncanny knack for making music "talk" in a really
concentrated and very specific way, just as if the music was narrating itself
to the listener. I know that a lot of good musicians can get some kind of
similar effect going, but his ability for that is really amazing. It's not
exactly what I would call moving the audience, but it's related, and I know
it's part of the art of piano playing.
>
> > If you haven't heard Brendel being great -
> > which I have, more than once - then
>
>
> On what planet, if one may respectfully ask?
>
Not on the one you've found to live on all by yourself, wherever that is.
>
> > you've missed out on one of the better things
> > that western civilization currently has to offer
>
>
> If Brendel counts as one of the better things
> western civilization has to offer, it's time
> to turn off the lights and go home.
>
You got it, finally. He is. And it is, although it is looking more and more
like someone else turned the lights out for us already...
>
> > (which isn't saying all that much, I realize,
>
>
> It is in fact saying a lot, but probably not
> what you meant to say.
>
>
> > but relatively speaking, it's pretty amazing).
>
>
> Yes, just slightly better than a rap concert.
>
>
> > On the other hand, if you are like dk and
> > simply can't hear what Brendel is doing,
>
>
> Hold it. Has it occurred to you that some of
> us may actually hear what Brendel is doing,
> and reject it?
>
Yeah, it's occurred to me many times. It doesn't work, though, because I'm not
about to deny what I've heard him do, and denying my own experience is what
accepting your line would require. No, what you need is a new set of ears.
(You should be getting that old "am I looking into a mirror?" feeling about
now.)
> Incidentally, this is again the old line of
> reasoning of the fucking left: anyone who
> does not agree with what we say/hear/think
> must of necessity be an idiot who does not
> understand the "higher" things and meaning
> of life, and therefore his/her opinion cannot
> possibly count.
>
Completely off your rocker here, although it's nice that you credit the left
with having a good love life - I'm guessing in contrast to your experience on
the right.
My saying you've got a musical blind spot is not calling you an idiot or any of
the other nonsense you attribute to it. Not long ago, there was a fairly long
thread here in which people were talking about their self-recognized inability
to comprehend certain kinds of music, composers, performers, what have you. I
don't remember thinking that any of those folks posting in that thread were
idiots (well, maybe one or two, but I already thought they were idiots anyway).
You missed your opportunity. Instead of continuing to do to us Brendel fans
exactly what you just accused me of doing to you (damn mirror again, huh?), you
could have talked about why you don't pick up on Brendel's art when people all
around you seem to. But no, you'd rather keep putting him down (and by
extension, all the people who think he's great) for reasons that aren't real
clear. What is it, anyway? If you truly think that all of us people who hold
Brendel in high regard (including some of us who have devoted large parts of
our lives to our love of music and have plenty of experience in listening
critically), are totally fooled by a no-talent charlatan and are therefore
worthy only of your disdain - well, if that's what you think, how can you
possibly expect any respect of your opinion from any of us in return?
> Argue to the point if you can, not besides it.
>
> For the record, I hold Brendel as a
>
> *** CRIMINAL ***
>
> Brendel's playing is a crime against music
> as a PERFORMING ART, a crime against the
> audience who is entitled to hear a real,
> live PERFORMANCE for their hard earned
> money, and a crime against the composer
> who implicitely trusts performers to
> move their audiences when performing
> their works.
>
> You realize, don't you, that for an artist
> to pretend that (s)he is doing nothing more
> than represent the music as it is and as the
> composer intended it, is the greatest *LIE*
> one can imagine. Or maybe you don't. Keep
> listening to Arrau, Brendel, Perahia,
> Pollini and Uchida until your ears fall off.
>
Yeah, I agree that the "I'm just the vessel that the composer uses and I've got
the intentions nailed" attitude is crappy, but if that what it takes for some
people to get the great results they do, then I'm happy for them to delude
themselves as much as they want. I just don't care that much whether a
performer's philosophy about what they do is in synch with my thinking. An
example: when I was in college, I knew a fanatically religious pianist who
used Bible stories to make sense for himself every single thing he played. He
was totally crazy, but by god, he played like the devil, and the listener
thankfully wasn't required to share in his background story for each piece.
>
> > and moreover, would have no interest in
> > it even if you could, it is easy enough
> > to disparage his art, but that doesn't
> > reflect well on you at all.
>
>
> What fucking art? The man *CANNOT* play
> the piano.
>
Of course he can...get some ears, why don't you?
>
> > I mean, it's hardly surprising that dk
> > doesn't care for a pianist who doesn't
> > do Chopin and who has specialized in
> > Beethoven, is it?
>
>
> Not so fast. Brendel has butchered pretty
> much everything he plays or has recorded.
> Forget about Chopin. Even his Beethoven
> is bad, and his Schubert stinks (with
> one exception).
>
>
> > What's weird is that dk has decided that
> > his distinctively personal response to
> > piano playing and to music in general is
> > somehow a universal postulate about what
> > music should be to everyone,
>
>
> I have never said, suggested, hinted or
> implied anything of the kind. You are
> grossly misrepresenting my position.
>
It's an observation, not a representation of anything you said.
> If you're doing it inadvertently, you
> should apologize *IMMEDIATELY* !!!
>
> If you're doing it deliberately, you
> are a *FUCKING* *LIAR* !!!
>
See above.
>
> > and everything else that he personally
> > doesn't respond to is garbage. One has
> > to assume he comes from a severely
> > dysfunctional background.
>
>
> Not even half as dysfunctional as yours.
>
Indeed, I sincerely hope not.
> I'm not a Communist.
>
>
There, there, now... nobody thinks you're a communist. Now go have some good
capitalist chocolate you paid for with real money and everything will be
better. In fact, every time you get the urge to comment on Brendel, why don't
you just have a bit of chocolate instead? It'd be better for you, and for the
rest of us, too.
Dan Koren
message news:3fd652ac...@newszilla.xs4all.nl...
No, not at all. It should move enough
people that one can notice. All I see
or hear at Brendull's and Perahia's
concerts is hushed, polite applause,
and pretentious conversation about
how "faithfull" to the score they
play, how "deeply" they understand
the composers' idiom, and how
"tasteful" is their playing.
When you go to a restaurant you
don't care whether the chef is
"faithfull" to the cookbook --
or do you?
dk
Dan Koren
news:3FD64207...@hotmail.com...
> DelMarva LaPoule wrote:
>
> >
> > I would just like to innocuously add that Brendel (and Lupu and Pollini)
> > are anti-musicians. They actively and with malice subvert all that is
> > uplifting, inspired and disturbing in the music they "type."
> >
> I can only assume that you haven't listened to Pollini's Schubert D959.
>
I have. And it stinks.
dk
Dan Koren
He is most certainly a Kantian pianist.
dk
Marcus Maroney
> for me,
> very few can match the joy, insight and sophistication he brings to
> Beethoven, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms and Schoenberg.
I'm wondering to which Liszt you're referring? His B minor sonata on
Philips is pretty dull, IMO, and his Hungarian Rhapsodies on Vanguard
may contain some joy (it seems that's going to happen to a certain
extent in these pieces no matter what if you play the correct notes in
the correct rhythm at the correct tempo...), but they lack any playful
lilt, cunning exaggeration or sharp contrast that truly makes this
music, where appropriate, "fun" (Cziffra for one has the "correct"
technique and also the edginess that can make the rhapsodies
intoxicating).
I do think he does well with Schoenberg, though, where an anonymous,
technically perfect interpretation works (in the Concerto, especially)
better for me. I don't know why he concentrates so much on
echt-Romantic music which, for me, requires a bit of insane fire in
the playing and doesn't record more Classical repertoire. I think his
approach works pretty well in the Mozart I've heard and I'd actually
like to hear him play some Mendelssohn (never have...has he recorded
any?). As for Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms - Brendell
just doesn't ever seem to have the balance of riskiness and safety
that I like in music by those composers.
Cheers,
Marcus Maroney
marcus dot maroney at yale dot edu
Dan Koren
What I heard was a very constipated,
small scale performance. I suppose
we're talking abou the same concert.
But maybe we have different standards.
He played like the devil after reading the Bible ?!?
> > > and moreover, would have no interest in
> > > it even if you could, it is easy enough
> > > to disparage his art, but that doesn't
> > > reflect well on you at all.
> >
> >
> > What fucking art? The man *CANNOT* play
> > the piano.
> >
> Of course he can...get some ears, why don't you?
Every time I hread Brendull attempting to
play any works requiring a little technique
(e.g. the Liszt Sonata), he turned them into
total trainwrecks.
Well, I suppose I can have both the
chocolate and lash out at Brendull.
Why settle for less?
dk
LaVirtuosa
away. I'm thinking now of the modest withdrawel from the mass public
of the recently deceased Michel Block. The paradox of a sort of
inverse proportion is,in way, reminiscent of a long tradition of the
human craving for exclusivity. Only the choice few can hear, or are
interested in hearing, those who really *are* the choicest artists.
*************Val
alanwa...@aol.com (Alan Watkins) wrote in message news:<62c8649c.03120...@posting.google.com>...
> Just a comment: Joyce Hatto is a great pianist (I believe) and, as
> someone has commented, unfortunately gravely ill at the moment and has
> been for quite a while.
>
> Her husband, W.H. Barrington-Coupe, runs Concert Artists label in the
> UK and was single handedly responsible for bringing much music to
> music lovers that would never have been heard on a recording including
> Bax (among many others).
>
> I would suggest that her recordings are, at least, worth hearing and
> there may be some "quality" surprises along the way.
>
> It is very easy, in my professional experience, to be seduced into the
> famous names while sometimes neglecting those who are not famous names
> but nonetheless make a major contribution to music making from time to
> time.
>
> Music is not always about "marketing" although of course I appreciate
> that it must be so for recording companies to survive. On the night,
> however, it is about the artist/orchestra/quartet/whatever and that
> can sometimes be very different from what the marketing says.
>
> I think we are all prey to "marketing" in fields that we do not know
> intimately but, perhaps, when we do know such fields intimately we
> think differently?
>
> If you have specialist knowledge of ANY industry (as people on here
> must have) I suspect they might sometimes choose differently from the
> advertising big hitters? I do not see why that should be any
> different in the music industry, for industry it is.
EG
>
> > Perahia is merely a competent and inoffensive pianist -
>
>
> I disagree. He is very offensive, if for no
> other reason than denying some space in the
> market to others worthier than him.
>
I guess the reference to Perahia as a competent and inoffensive
pianist
assumes that elevator music is competent and inoffensive. That of
course depends
on the mood of the person riding the elevator. Most of the time you
can't wait to get out.
>
> > and being inoffensive is majorly offensive
> > to those who have a standard-issue concept
> > of what piano-playing as an art is supposed
> > to be.
>
>
> See above.
>
> Incidentally, my only concept of what piano
> playing as an art is supposed to be is that
> it should move the audience. No more and no
> less. If we can't agree on that much, we are
> not referring to a *PERFORMING* art.
>
This line of argument is not productive. The audience is moved by
piano playing of Elton John.
I'm afraid digging into this will quickly lead to the resurrection of
baby Kants and people
suffering from keyboarditis.
>
> > If you haven't heard Brendel being great -
> > which I have, more than once - then
>
>
> On what planet, if one may respectfully ask?
>
>
> > you've missed out on one of the better things
> > that western civilization currently has to offer
>
>
> If Brendel counts as one of the better things
> western civilization has to offer, it's time
> to turn off the lights and go home.
Time to bring in Osama!
EG
>
>
> > (which isn't saying all that much, I realize,
>
>
> It is in fact saying a lot, but probably not
> what you meant to say.
>
>
> > but relatively speaking, it's pretty amazing).
>
>
> Yes, just slightly better than a rap concert.
>
>
> > On the other hand, if you are like dk and
> > simply can't hear what Brendel is doing,
>
>
> Hold it. Has it occurred to you that some of
> us may actually hear what Brendel is doing,
> and reject it?
>
> Incidentally, this is again the old line of
> reasoning of the fucking left: anyone who
> does not agree with what we say/hear/think
> must of necessity be an idiot who does not
> understand the "higher" things and meaning
> of life, and therefore his/her opinion cannot
> possibly count.
>
> Argue to the point if you can, not besides it.
>
> For the record, I hold Brendel as a
>
> *** CRIMINAL ***
>
> Brendel's playing is a crime against music
> as a PERFORMING ART, a crime against the
> audience who is entitled to hear a real,
> live PERFORMANCE for their hard earned
> money, and a crime against the composer
> who implicitely trusts performers to
> move their audiences when performing
> their works.
>
> You realize, don't you, that for an artist
> to pretend that (s)he is doing nothing more
> than represent the music as it is and as the
> composer intended it, is the greatest *LIE*
> one can imagine. Or maybe you don't. Keep
> listening to Arrau, Brendel, Perahia,
> Pollini and Uchida until your ears fall off.
>
>
> > and moreover, would have no interest in
> > it even if you could, it is easy enough
> > to disparage his art, but that doesn't
> > reflect well on you at all.
>
>
> What fucking art? The man *CANNOT* play
> the piano.
>
>
> > I mean, it's hardly surprising that dk
> > doesn't care for a pianist who doesn't
> > do Chopin and who has specialized in
> > Beethoven, is it?
>
>
> Not so fast. Brendel has butchered pretty
> much everything he plays or has recorded.
> Forget about Chopin. Even his Beethoven
> is bad, and his Schubert stinks (with
> one exception).
>
>
> > What's weird is that dk has decided that
> > his distinctively personal response to
> > piano playing and to music in general is
> > somehow a universal postulate about what
> > music should be to everyone,
>
>
> I have never said, suggested, hinted or
> implied anything of the kind. You are
> grossly misrepresenting my position.
>
> If you're doing it inadvertently, you
> should apologize *IMMEDIATELY* !!!
>
> If you're doing it deliberately, you
> are a *FUCKING* *LIAR* !!!
>
>
> > and everything else that he personally
> > doesn't respond to is garbage. One has
> > to assume he comes from a severely
> > dysfunctional background.
>
>
> Not even half as dysfunctional as yours.
>
> I'm not a Communist.
>
>
>
> dk
> --
Wayne Reimer <wrdsl
> On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 08:56:27 GMT, Wayne Reimer
> <wrdsl<delete>@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
<...>
> I am glad you amended your first statement, Wayne.
>
> You should know that you really cannot fool the audience for long, and
> Perahia's lengthy career, spanning a period of over thirty years, is
> sufficient testimony to his abilities to have his fans "actually
> experience extraordinary things while listening to him".
>
- are related in that way. The competence and inoffensiveness I mentioned can
have quite a large and loyal audience, without the need for any frills such as
unusually intense or revelatory experiences. I mean...Marriner, Entremont,
Rampal, Leinsdorf, Walcha, Parkening, Bell, et al.
> You bring up the terms "fastidious" and "pure". These are both
> relevant to Perahia's art. Sometimes they are bothersome, other times
> they are perfectly appropriate. It depends upon the music, I think.
>
> The recent Schubert went too far in the direction of both those terms
> for my liking, I would say. But if you listen to his Mendelssohn
> concerti, or the Chopin Ballades, or his Schumann, and even some of
> the Beethoven (not the Emperor, of course) you get him at his best.
>
> TD
>
>
The only recording of Perahia's that sticks in my memory to any degree at all
was that live thing from where? Aldeburgh or somewhere like that. Anyway, what
sticks is a Liszt Hungarian Rhapsody and why it sticks is because of an almost
palpable tension between the demands of the music and Murray's sensibility.
It's really quite interesting and he plays it quite well, although I wouldn't
want to use it as a model for how that music should go.
I've heard him live a few times and the best was definitely some Mendelssohn
from that period in the late 1970's or early '80's (somewhere around then,
anyway) when he was kind of still a fresh young thing on the boards and giving
us doses of practically unknown Mendelssohn. He had a certain zeal about
pushing that music that really helped him get out of his "this just so precious
and beautiful I can hardly stand it" mode.
I think he should devote the rest of his career to the music of Morton Feldman,
where his sensibility could be developed even further in its most natural
direction and put to its best use.
Ian Pace
"Marcus Maroney" <newhav...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:75e776be.03120...@posting.google.com...
> " Ian Pace" <i...@ianpace.com> wrote:
>
> > for me,
> > very few can match the joy, insight and sophistication he brings to
> > Beethoven, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms and Schoenberg.
>
> I'm wondering to which Liszt you're referring? His B minor sonata on
> Philips is pretty dull, IMO, and his Hungarian Rhapsodies on Vanguard
> may contain some joy (it seems that's going to happen to a certain
> extent in these pieces no matter what if you play the correct notes in
> the correct rhythm at the correct tempo...), but they lack any playful
> lilt, cunning exaggeration or sharp contrast that truly makes this
> music, where appropriate, "fun" (Cziffra for one has the "correct"
> technique and also the edginess that can make the rhapsodies
> intoxicating).
Well, I am referring to his Liszt Sonata, certainly, one of my favourite of
all recordings. Brendel's attitude to this music both recalls Beethoven and
anticipates Schoenberg in some ways to me. His grasp of the large-scale
harmonic structure is immensely powerful, and he can communicate his own
take on Liszt's lyricism without ever remotely lapsing into sentimentality.
It is a very different approach to Liszt to the more liquid or sumptuous
approaches of Richter and countless others, and Brendel's feeling for some
Liszt's wit and sense of the grotesque is also quite at odds with the humane
earnestness of Arrau, whose recording of this piece I also love very much.
Also his virtuosity is less 'outre' than Horowitz or Cziffra; these applies
also to the recordings of the Rhapsodies of the latter. I wouldn't want to
be without Brendel's recordings of either the Sonata or the Rhapsodies, in
both of which he communicates to me something deeply individual and
personal, quite unlike any other player. Nor would I want to be without
Cziffra's; both Cziffra's half-crazed virtuosity and gypsy-like style, and
Brendel's humour, focus, directness and eschewal of kitsch or banality
(always a danger in these pieces) are equally viable approaches to this
music, imo.
For those who might doubt Brendel's technique, I would suggest listening to
his amazing early recording on Vox of the Paganini Etudes (one should also
hear his spectacular, if poorly recorded, early disc of Mussorgsky Pictures,
Stravinsky Petrouchka and Balakirev Islamey - the latter in particular).
Once more, Brendel, who sees Liszt within a Central European compositional
tradition, is able to show how these pieces amount to much more than just
showy virtuosity, not that the latter quality is in any way lacking. Of
course he is not the only pianist to do this, but his manner of doing so is
unique. On another recording, no-one has projected the spiritual world of
Benediction de Dieu dans le solitude in more 'human' terms; this recording
was a major inspiration to me some 16-17 years ago, one of those that made
me want to rush to the piano to play the work, which I performed numerous
times at one point. Brendel more than anyone could see much more than just
the sonorous, proto-Debussian or proto-Messiaen like colouristic qualities
of this work (not that they weren't present to some extent as well),
projecting a deep sense of harmonic urgency, warmth and ecstacy which I find
one of the most moving Liszt performances of all on disc. His performances
of the Fantasy and Fugue on BACH (always a difficult work to bring off), the
Weinen Klagen Sorgen Zagen Variations (this performance is particularly
stunning) and Pensee des Morts on the same disc are hardly less impressive.
Liszt is in Brendel's hands a music of tremendous generosity, forever I have
feel such a sense of giving in his performances, in contradistinction to an
sort of aloof, rareified mystique; and rarely in Brendel's hands do I sense
empty virtuosity, tricksiness or any other easy superficialities. He amply
demonstrates what differentiates Liszt's music from that of more shallow
virtuoso pianist-composers of the time. I believe strongly that Liszt, at
least in the second half of his life, would have highly approved of this
approach to much of his output.
Above all, perhaps, I love Brendel's playing for its forward-looking
qualities and spirit of hope; he is almost totally free of any type of
lachrymose sentimentality or old-worldish nostalgia. His late Liszt are
visionary rather than merely doom-laden.
>
> I do think he does well with Schoenberg, though, where an anonymous,
> technically perfect interpretation works (in the Concerto, especially)
> better for me.
That's not how I hear his concerto at all - I find that description more apt
to describe Pollini's recording. Not many players express the late Romantic
intensity of Schoenberg to the extent that I would like (one of the best of
all recordings of the solo piano works in this respect is that of Pi-Hsien
Chen - do you know that?), but Brendel is able to make as convincing a case
for the concerto, a problematic work because of the alienated relationship
between intent and realisation, as most.
> I don't know why he concentrates so much on
> echt-Romantic music which, for me, requires a bit of insane fire in
> the playing and doesn't record more Classical repertoire.
His more recent playing doesn't often have the sort of deranged quality as
that of Horowitz, Cziffra, Ginsburg and some others, granted (though that is
certainly there in earlier performances such as his Islamey, for example),
but what he is able to find in his music is no less vital, to me at least.
One could hardly accuse him of neglecting Classical repertoire! I wish he'd
done more Brahms than he has.
> I think his
> approach works pretty well in the Mozart I've heard and I'd actually
> like to hear him play some Mendelssohn (never have...has he recorded
> any?).
I haven't heard any. Do you know his Weber?
> As for Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms - Brendell
> just doesn't ever seem to have the balance of riskiness and safety
> that I like in music by those composers.
>
That's bizarre, we must hear him very differently, because those are
attributes I find in abundance in his recordings of those works. I have
some problems with his Schubert, certainly after hearing what Staier or
Orkis can do with this music, but still it has much to offer.
Best,
Ian
DelMarva LaPoule
> "DelMarva LaPoule" <vze28thq@**nospam**verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:W5rBb.2605$mF2....@nwrdny02.gnilink.net...
>>
>>are anti-musicians. They actively and with malice subvert all that is
>>uplifting, inspired and disturbing in the music they "type."
>>
>>
>
> And I will add that I find Brendel one of the most uplifting and
> life-affirming pianists I have heard, in most of the repertoire he plays.
> Obviously his output is a bit mixed, but that's true of any player; for me,
> very few can match the joy, insight and sophistication he brings to
> Beethoven, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms and Schoenberg. It is no exaggeration to
> say that some of Brendel's performances penetrate to the heart of what I
> love most about music.
>
> Ian
>
>
A few years ago I was getting ready to coach a rehearsal of the Brahms
Horn Trio when the violinist arrived in an ecstatic mood. She had just
attended a Zinman concert (also Brahms, I think) and was ardently
telling everyone who would listen that, to her, Zinman practically
walked on water.
After I finished laughing, I told her: "It wasn't Zinman; it was Brahms."
She was highly offended. (Undergrads operate on the assumption that
their opinions are equal to their teachers'.)
But even the worst musician, assuming competent technique, can convey
something of the greatness of the music. Heck, I fell in love with
Mahler's 6th from a Flipse recording.
But contemporary musicians who deliberately negate the inherent humanism
(pain, exhilaration, nobility, dance impulse, song impulse, anxiety,
wild abandon, any number of other affekts that are endemic to romantic
and late classical music) are simply not serving the composer, but
rather their own (very post-modern) agenda.
So, while it is possible to perceive the greatness of, say, a Schubert
sonata while being anesthetized by Brendel, it ain't easy. And the
schizoid coldness of Pollini and Lupu distort the music so much for me
that the experience is creepy in the extreme.
My brother and I were listening to Piston's 4th tonight in the car. I
asked him why he wanted me to burn the CD for him, because the music was
not attractive to me in the least. He replied that whoever was
conducting didn't even know where the melodic lines were, and could have
as easily stood on the podium picking his nose. (It was Schwartz.)
I have the feeling that a Munch or even a Solti might have made me feel
quite differently about the music. A smart musician can turn second-rate
music into something much better. But a passive-agressive musician like
Brendel or a musician who denatures the music he plays (like Pollini)
makes me marvel that any of the composer's genius gets through. But it
inevitably does.
David Dalle
Why do you not like it?
David
Mazzolata
He didn't say that he didn't like it, he said it stinks. Mr. Koren
apparently doesn't deal in opinions, he deals only in facts. Those of us
who like it are apparently just plain wrong.
Bob Lombard
wrote:
>>>>I can only assume that you haven't listened to Pollini's Schubert D959.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I have. And it stinks.
>>>
>>>dk
>>
>>
>> Why do you not like it?
>
>He didn't say that he didn't like it, he said it stinks. Mr. Koren
>apparently doesn't deal in opinions, he deals only in facts. Those of us
>who like it are apparently just plain wrong.
Mr. Koren has repeatedly stated that his judgements about the quality
of performaces are opinions, same as everybody elses (except maybe Mr.
Pace). IMO is always assumed.
It ain't easy to get dk to go into detail about a performance he
dislikes, possibly because that would require listening to it again.
If dk does with disliked performances as Simon does, the recording is
no longer in his posession.
All of this is pretty basic rmcr stuff, Maz.
bl
Mazzolata
ok, fair enough. I'm quite new here, and all I've ever seen are his
extremely terse and occasionally obnoxious comments. I've never seen an
admission that anything is an opinion. I'll take your word for it.
deac...@yahoo.com
Basten) wrote:
> Say, are you visiting the air of San Francisco too ? :-)
Not likely. Far too heady for me.
TD
deac...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>When you go to a restaurant you
>don't care whether the chef is
>"faithfull" to the cookbook --
>or do you?
You might just hope that he or she is "faithful to the food"! That is
the genius of the great chefs, Koren, whether they be Italian, French
or Chinese.
TD
deac...@yahoo.com
<eme...@nospamsonic.net> wrote:
>In article <dbjbtvct3f77e6vfk...@4ax.com>, deac...@yahoo.com
>wrote:
>
>> You should know that you really cannot fool the audience for long, and
>> Perahia's lengthy career, spanning a period of over thirty years, is
>> sufficient testimony to his abilities to have his fans "actually
>> experience extraordinary things while listening to him".
>
>The argument that an audience's long-time liking for a performer is
>significant, that it's some sort of index of that performer's real value -- is
>an argument that I think is without merit.
>
>Do you really need examples? Guy Lombardo's career lasted much longer than
>Perahia's has to date, and his popularity did not wane.
And we still love him here in Canada. Is New Year's possible without
the sounds of the Royal Canadians?
>For a record-company executive, a performer's popularity is of course a prime
>consideration. I accept that. In fact it's often a consideration for
>disinterested observers of a marketplace too. Some may even wish to follow and
>pass judgment on an artist's managing of his/her own career, and his/her
>handlers' managing of same.
>
>But none of those things have anything to do with the inherent interest of a
>recording.
To the many people who listen to and like that performer it is at the
very heart of the matter.
TD
deac...@yahoo.com
<eme...@nospamsonic.net> wrote:
>I am merely saying that popularity is no indicator at all of the merit of a
>musician's playing.
And that is a case - or rather, an opinion - that is unprovable.
TD
deac...@yahoo.com
>It seems the inverse--the finest artists are often the ones hidden
>away. I'm thinking now of the modest withdrawel from the mass public
>of the recently deceased Michel Block. The paradox of a sort of
>inverse proportion is,in way, reminiscent of a long tradition of the
>human craving for exclusivity. Only the choice few can hear, or are
>interested in hearing, those who really *are* the choicest artists.
>
>*************Val
I share your admiration, Val. He recorded one of the most beautiful
Iberias imaginable.
His later work was, however, too listless by half, in my opinion.
Something "happened" to him and I still have not figured out what that
something was.
TD
deac...@yahoo.com
<vze28thq@**nospam**verizon.net> wrote:
>I would just like to innocuously add that Brendel (and Lupu and Pollini)
>are anti-musicians. They actively and with malice subvert all that is
>uplifting, inspired and disturbing in the music they "type."
You and Koren would make a lovely couple.
TD
Marcus Maroney
> One could hardly accuse him of neglecting Classical repertoire! I wish he'd
> done more Brahms than he has.
These sentences, unless non sequiturs, make me think we have
fundamentally different views of the repertoire at hand. Brahms is
definitely a Romantic composer (and I prefer interpretations that
treat him as such) - even Schoenberg agreed.
> I haven't heard any. Do you know his Weber?
I know the Konzertstuck - again, a servicable performance, but lacking
the last ounce of controlled abandon that I get from Gulda or even
Frith.
> > As for Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms - Brendell
> > just doesn't ever seem to have the balance of riskiness and safety
> > that I like in music by those composers.
> >
> That's bizarre, we must hear him very differently, because those are
> attributes I find in abundance in his recordings of those works.
We must - something like the opening of the Hammerklavier, which
sounds poundy and awkward in his hands and energetic and powerful in
Richter's, or the retransition to the recap of the first movement of
the Waldstein Philips Duo, which is politely played by Brendel,
failing to capitalize on the barnstorming scalar passage's contrast
with the soft return of the opening theme in the way that, say,
Kovacevich does (both of these I have in Philips Duo releases). Or
the opening two bars of Op. 2/1, which are frankly not phrased in any
audible way - the whole movement just falls flat to my ears (I
remember this from the digital recording, which I've sold...).
I certainly don't think he has poor technique (although there are some
rather awkward moments in the Liszt sonata...), and I would never go
so far as to criticize Brendel to the extent some people on here have,
but I certainly don't see what the big hoopla is - or why there are 3
volumes of him in the Philips series, for instance.
deac...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>And I will add that I find Brendel one of the most uplifting and
>life-affirming pianists I have heard, in most of the repertoire he plays.
>Obviously his output is a bit mixed, but that's true of any player; for me,
>very few can match the joy, insight and sophistication he brings to
>Beethoven, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms and Schoenberg. It is no exaggeration to
>say that some of Brendel's performances penetrate to the heart of what I
>love most about music.
Agreed.
TD
this>@xs j.winter4all.nl
wrote:
OK. But if I'm listening in private the audience is just me, so it
should move me.
>When you go to a restaurant you
>don't care whether the chef is
>"faithfull" to the cookbook --
>or do you?
I seldom goes to restaurants (over here you are still allowed to
smoke, which is however not my main reason), and when I cook I almost
never use a cookbook.
--
Jan Winter, Amsterdam
< j.winter<delete this>@xs<delete this>4all.nl >
Steve Emerson
wrote:
Of course it isn't provable. "Merit" isn't provable. Naturally, by the same
token it isn't provable that popularity *is* an indicator of same.
If you want to think continuing popularity for a few decades is an indicator
of merit, it is fine with me. May you subsist forever on a diet of Kenny Gee
and Barbara Cartland.
SE.
Steve Emerson
DelMarva LaPoule <vze28thq@**nospam**verizon.net> wrote:
> I would just like to innocuously add that Brendel (and Lupu and Pollini)
> are anti-musicians. They actively and with malice subvert all that is
> uplifting, inspired and disturbing in the music they "type."
Lupu a "typist" comparable to Brendel and Pollini? A most unusual sentiment.
SE.
deac...@yahoo.com
<eme...@nospamsonic.net> wrote:
>In article <vuoetvg96pf38uoc4...@4ax.com>, deac...@yahoo.com
>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 21:29:09 -0800, Steve Emerson
>> <eme...@nospamsonic.net> wrote:
>>
>> >I am merely saying that popularity is no indicator at all of the merit of a
>> >musician's playing.
>>
>> And that is a case - or rather, an opinion - that is unprovable.
>
>Of course it isn't provable. "Merit" isn't provable. Naturally, by the same
>token it isn't provable that popularity *is* an indicator of same.
Of course not.
Which is why such statements have no validity except in the minds of
those making them. My generalization about Perahia's enduring
popularity is my own take on the matter. Yours is yours. Fine. Just
try not to expect that you can claim some superior moral or
intellectual ground in making it.
Sometimes, though, it is amazing the extent to which "intellectuals"
get it wrong! In my opinion. Over and over and over again. Just
amazing.
TD
arri bachrach
AB
arri bachrach
D959.
> >
>
> I have. And it stinks.
>
>
>
> dk
good. that's telling him.
I heard Polilini do a Schubert sonata in recital 30 years ago and it
was just bad.........minimal musicality.
AB
arri bachrach
> > I would just like to innocuously add that Brendel (and Lupu and Pollini)
> > are anti-musicians. They actively and with malice subvert all that is
> > uplifting, inspired and disturbing in the music they "type."
> >
> >
> life-affirming pianists I have heard, in most of the repertoire he plays.
> Obviously his output is a bit mixed, but that's true of any player; for me,
> very few can match the joy, insight and sophistication he brings to
> Beethoven, Schumann, Liszt, Brahms and Schoenberg. It is no exaggeration to
> say that some of Brendel's performances penetrate to the heart of what I
> love most about music.
>
can't argue with your sincerity, but his playing gives my heart
palpitations due to the lack of beauty of his sound, etc. How he got
his big reputation is beyond me.....
AB
Steve Emerson
wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:57:09 -0800, Steve Emerson
> <eme...@nospamsonic.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <vuoetvg96pf38uoc4...@4ax.com>, deac...@yahoo.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 21:29:09 -0800, Steve Emerson
> >> <eme...@nospamsonic.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I am merely saying that popularity is no indicator at all of the merit
> >> >of a musician's playing.
> >>
> >> And that is a case - or rather, an opinion - that is unprovable.
> >
> >Of course it isn't provable. "Merit" isn't provable. Naturally, by the same
> >token it isn't provable that popularity *is* an indicator of same.
>
> Of course not.
>
> Which is why such statements have no validity except in the minds of
> those making them.
Fine, I can accept that.
> My generalization about Perahia's enduring
> popularity is my own take on the matter. Yours is yours. Fine. Just
> try not to expect that you can claim some superior moral or
> intellectual ground in making it.
Certainly not. I make no such claims.
In fact for that matter there's certainly such a thing as inverted chic,
wherein extra points are fallaciously assigned for obscurity, and those who
enjoy popularity must be avoided for that reason; on account of epater le
bourgeois. My position as I've said is the obvious one that popularity is
irrelevant one way or the other.
SE.
Mazzolata
Well, if you heard him play badly once, thirty years ago, that proves
without a doubt how bad he is.
Paul Goldstein
>
>Bob Lombard wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 11:36:14 -0500, Mazzolata <mazz...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>
>>>He didn't say that he didn't like it, he said it stinks. Mr. Koren
>>>apparently doesn't deal in opinions, he deals only in facts. Those of us
>>>who like it are apparently just plain wrong.
>>
>>
>> Mr. Koren has repeatedly stated that his judgements about the quality
>> of performaces are opinions, same as everybody elses (except maybe Mr.
>> Pace). IMO is always assumed.
>>
>> It ain't easy to get dk to go into detail about a performance he
>> dislikes, possibly because that would require listening to it again.
>> If dk does with disliked performances as Simon does, the recording is
>> no longer in his posession.
>>
>> All of this is pretty basic rmcr stuff, Maz.
>>
>> bl
>
>ok, fair enough. I'm quite new here, and all I've ever seen are his
>extremely terse and occasionally obnoxious comments. I've never seen an
>admission that anything is an opinion. I'll take your word for it.
Another hint, if I may be so bold: Dan Koren's enthusiasms are *very* well
worth investigating. His condemnations, less so.
Paul Goldstein
deac...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>Another hint, if I may be so bold: Dan Koren's enthusiasms are *very* well
>worth investigating. His condemnations, less so.
Go ahead, Paul. Be bold. You are usually rude anyway.
Your comments are not really acceptable: when Koren starts talking
about the "brilliant" Mr. Zhukov's Chopin Preludes, the only reaction
a sane listener can have is doubts about his ears. A more amateur,
soporific, listless performance of that masterpiece is hard to
imagine.
TD
deac...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>can't argue with your sincerity, but his playing gives my heart
>palpitations due to the lack of beauty of his sound, etc. How he got
>his big reputation is beyond me.....
Ah, Arri of the "beautiful sound" school. You should be chained to a
chair and made to listen to Josef Hofmann's Chopin Berceuse over and
over again until you recant.
TD
deac...@yahoo.com
<eme...@nospamsonic.net> wrote:
>In fact for that matter there's certainly such a thing as inverted chic,
>wherein extra points are fallaciously assigned for obscurity, and those who
>enjoy popularity must be avoided for that reason; on account of epater le
>bourgeois.
I know the syndrome well.
It goes something like this:
"You know, if you haven't heard Mirka Pokorna's Chopin Etudes, you
simply don't know what the music should sound like. And talk about
brilliant! She knocks Lhevinne and Pollini and all the others into a
cocked hat. Rank amateurs all. Too bad there were only 300 LPs
pressed, and distributed only to her closest friends, among whom I
count myself, of course. And no, I cannot make a copy of this
treasured item. But if you haven't heard it, you are simply operating
in an abyss of ignorance, poor sap!"
My position as I've said is the obvious one that popularity is
>irrelevant one way or the other.
Not irrelevant. All elements should be examined for what they can tell
us about an artist.
Personally I am now mystified by the adulation heaped on Glenn Gould.
I have grown out of my GG period, I suppose. Don't even remember what
I saw in him. But it would be an arrogant fool who denied that he has
something special, as so many music-lovers, some of whom are admired
and respected, are swept away by his combination of brilliance and
excentricity. The public has spoken, you see, Steve. And their voice
counts. Not enough to persuade me to change my mind, but enough to
garner a modicum of respect. But it is certainly far from irrelevant.
TD
David Dalle
> >He didn't say that he didn't like it, he said it stinks. Mr. Koren
> >apparently doesn't deal in opinions, he deals only in facts. Those of us
> >who like it are apparently just plain wrong.
>
> Mr. Koren has repeatedly stated that his judgements about the quality
> of performaces are opinions, same as everybody elses (except maybe Mr.
> Pace). IMO is always assumed.
>
> It ain't easy to get dk to go into detail about a performance he
> dislikes, possibly because that would require listening to it again.
> If dk does with disliked performances as Simon does, the recording is
> no longer in his posession.
>
> All of this is pretty basic rmcr stuff, Maz.
>
ok, that's fine, but for myself that would award Mr. Koren zero
credibility. Meaning that I would never be interested in a pianist or
a recording based on what he says. For instance I read a great review
(not by Mr. Koren) of a concert by Igor Zhukov (apparently a pianist
Mr. Koren thinks highly of) on rmcr which makes me very much want to
hear this pianist and seek out recordings of his. If Mr. Koren said
"Zhukov kicks ass", my curiosity would not be engaged, I would never
try to find out more about Zhukov. That kind of posting is as
interesting and useful as a teenager writing "classical music sucks".
I've seen enough of those kind of posts from Mr. Koren that my
question was an attempt (though it might be futile, his postings seem
to border on Tholen intransigency) to draw out something useful from
him. For instance in this thread Re: Pollini's D. 959 there is a
whole lot of substance which would be useful to know to grant Mr.
Koren's opinion any credibility. e.g. Maybe Mr. Koren does not even
like this sonata. If he loves it, what does he love about it that
Pollini does not give him; what does his favourite recording give
instead? There could be interesting discussion about music, even if
nobody's opinion on a particular recording changes one bit. Would you
rather just have everyone alternately write "X kicks ass!", "X sucks!"
and that would be the whole discussion?
ah well,
David
deac...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>For instance in this thread Re: Pollini's D. 959 there is a
>whole lot of substance which would be useful to know to grant Mr.
>Koren's opinion any credibility.
I think you exaggerate things slightly, David. There is a whole lot of
nothing and it is not useful to know.
Personally, I cannot imagine anyone caring if Koren likes or doesn't
like D. 959, or likes or dislikes Alfred Brendel's recordings of this
masterpiece.
He only really likes the Russians - I call them Soviet pianists of the
jack-boots school, with all the connotations that go along with that
term. If you like that large, unsubtle approach to music - the
assault troops called in to storm a score - I shudder to think of
poor Schubert cringeing every time they pounce on his music. Witness
Volodos and his Kalashnikov Schubert sonatas. Really loathsome stuff.
Not worth even a cursory listen. Jackboots Schubert wrapped in
cloyingly unctuous moments of precious poetry.
I binned my copy months ago in disgust. This approach to music - it
apparently "moves" him - is what Koren likes. He is quite welcome to
it as far as I am concerned.
TD
Ian Pace
"Marcus Maroney" <newhav...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:75e776be.03121...@posting.google.com...
> " Ian Pace" <i...@ianpace.com> wrote:
>
> > One could hardly accuse him of neglecting Classical repertoire! I wish
he'd
> > done more Brahms than he has.
>
> These sentences, unless non sequiturs, make me think we have
> fundamentally different views of the repertoire at hand. Brahms is
> definitely a Romantic composer (and I prefer interpretations that
> treat him as such) - even Schoenberg agreed.
>
clarity in that respect). I agree with you that Brahms is a Romantic
composer, though I suspect we have different notions of what the word
'Romantic' means.
Ian
Ian Pace
<deac...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:279ftvc26rumulk37...@4ax.com...
over a period of time. There are plenty of musicians who make a big splash,
are immensely popular, then soon afterwards are quickly forgotten. But when
musicians don't just merely achieve a reputation, but achieve one that has a
lasting impact, then for all any of us might individually question the
merits of one such musician, it's much harder to doubt the sincerity of
those who continue to find much in their music-making over a period of time.
If Glenn Gould, or Brendel, or Perahia, or whoever, had been some type of
'one hit wonder', with an exalted reputation for a few years, then people
had lost interest in them, then their popularity might reasonably be viewed
as a rather transient and superficial thing. But this isn't the case at
all. If people still find much to love and admire in their recordings
decades after they were made, then it's more than a little questionable to
suggest their reputation is built upon hype alone.
Best,
Ian
Ian Pace
"arri bachrach" <abac...@att.net> wrote in message
news:904130a9.03121...@posting.google.com...
cypher for a very particular style of playing (involving a particular mode
of voicing. With this thread in mind, was listening again earlier today to
Brendel's Hungarian Rhapsodies and Haydn Sonatas. It is absolutely clear to
me that he is more than capable of producing this type of 'beautiful sound';
the difference between his approach and that of other pianists who treat it
as an all-purpose musical ideal is that Brendel uses this style of playing
selectively, setting it into relief against other modes of pianism. This is
one of the many factors that contributes to the immense variegation of his
playing and the intense sense of drama he can convey.
The sound on Brendel's Vox recordings is hardly beautiful, but that's true
of all pianists that recorded for that label, a reflection of the often
truly terrible recording quality rather than the performer.
Ian
Bob Lombard
wrote:
>ok, that's fine, but for myself that would award Mr. Koren zero
>credibility. Meaning that I would never be interested in a pianist or
>a recording based on what he says. For instance I read a great review
>(not by Mr. Koren) of a concert by Igor Zhukov (apparently a pianist
>Mr. Koren thinks highly of) on rmcr which makes me very much want to
>hear this pianist and seek out recordings of his. If Mr. Koren said
>"Zhukov kicks ass", my curiosity would not be engaged, I would never
>try to find out more about Zhukov.
[snip]
>ah well,
>
Yeah, ah well about covers it. DK has become increasingly abrupt and
uncommunicative about his likes in the past months. As Paul suggested
above, his dislikes have never been of much use as guidelines. Back
when he was wordier about his likes, most of his favored pianists
(there are exceptions - for instance he likes Naida Cole) are worth
investigating.
bl
Matthew燘. Tepper
letters to be typed in news:o4mftv4qleqf0kind...@4ax.com:
Gosh, I wonder what he likes about her?
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
War is Peace. ** Freedom is Slavery. ** It's all Napster's fault!
LaVirtuosa
certainly is a gentle man, from all appearances. Everyone likes plush
toys. They don't bite.
********Val
Wayne Reimer <wrdsl<delete>@pacbell.net> wrote in message news:<MPG.1a3f2df56...@news.sf.sbcglobal.net>...
I'm willing to admit the possibility that some few of
> Perahia's fans are actually experiencing extraordinary things while listening
> to him.
Wayne Reimer <wrdsl
<...>
> I certainly don't think he has poor technique (although there are some
> rather awkward moments in the Liszt sonata...), and I would never go
> so far as to criticize Brendel to the extent some people on here have,
> but I certainly don't see what the big hoopla is - or why there are 3
> volumes of him in the Philips series, for instance.
>
You don't see what the big hoopla is and on the other hand he's given me some
of the most highly cherished musical experiences I've ever had. How can it be
that our experience be so utterly different? I think the answer must be
somehow related to issues that are not really talked about much here on rmcr,
and are really hard to verbalize.
I've said it before and will say it again - a lot of disagreement about
performers here on rmcr has to do with some radical differences in what we
actually are hearing. I think you and I simply do not hear the same thing
when we listen to Brendel, and that's fine. But virtually all dialogue here on
rmcr is based on the preconception that we all are hearing the same thing,
which is clearly not the case.
wr