Discussion:
Magazines
Add Reply
MELMOTH
2021-01-23 13:36:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
What are the best Anglo-American music magazines ? Thanks...
M&S Frost
2021-01-23 14:14:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MELMOTH
What are the best Anglo-American music magazines ? Thanks...
My favs are American Record Guide, Fanfare and BBC Music. I don't much care for Gramophone.

MIFrost
Al Eisner
2021-01-26 21:07:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by M&S Frost
Post by MELMOTH
What are the best Anglo-American music magazines ? Thanks...
My favs are American Record Guide, Fanfare and BBC Music. I don't much care for Gramophone.
MIFrost
I haven't looked at any of those for perhaos a decade. Frankly, I found
none of them really satisfactory, especially compared to the rmcr of
that era. If I had to choose one it would be Fanfare (but not based
on current exposure to it). My standards were set by High Fidelity.
The last really good recordings magazine was the International Record
Review, which approached those standards. Unfortunately, I only
caught on to its digital subscription less than two years before the
demise of its publisher (and the magazine) in 2015.

MELMOTH's question may have been more general, since the reference was
to "music", not just "recordings".
--
Al Eisner
Mr. Mike
2021-01-26 22:28:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:07:00 -0800, Al Eisner
Post by Al Eisner
My standards were set by High Fidelity.
High Fidelity:
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/High-Fidelity-Magazine.htm

Stereo Review:
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/HiFI-Stereo-Review.htm

Speaking of the latter, I remember some issue(s) where reviewers
listed the composers they really liked and hated. Any idea
approximately when those were published?
dk
2021-01-26 23:37:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mr. Mike
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/HiFI-Stereo-Review.htm
Speaking of the latter, I remember some issue(s) where
reviewers listed the composers they really liked and hated.
What else would one expect reviewers to do? Poll 1,000
likely listeners? There is no such thing as an objective
review -- unless one subscribes to "Consumer Reports". ;-)

dk
MELMOTH
2021-01-27 08:52:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by dk
What else would one expect reviewers to do? Poll 1,000
likely listeners? There is no such thing as an objective
review -- unless one subscribes to "Consumer Reports". ;-)
When I fell into the world of Music, around 1955, I was quite happy to
be able to orientate my choices thanks to the (numerous) musical
magazines of the time...
dk
2021-01-27 09:25:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MELMOTH
Post by dk
What else would one expect reviewers to do? Poll 1,000
likely listeners? There is no such thing as an objective
review -- unless one subscribes to "Consumer Reports". ;-)
When I fell into the world of Music, around 1955, I was
quite happy to be able to orientate my choices thanks
to the (numerous) musical magazines of the time...
Those were different times when it was impossible for
most people to sample recordings before buying, and
when going to record stores or public libraries to listen
to records one did not own took a serious amount of
time.

Nowadays one can sample a dozen performances in
an hour on YouTube, Spotify or amazon Music. The
music review magazines have become irrelevant,
unless one prefers to rely on the reviewers' ears
rather than their own.

dk
Herman
2021-01-27 14:40:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by dk
Nowadays one can sample a dozen performances in
an hour on YouTube, Spotify or amazon Music. The
music review magazines have become irrelevant,
unless one prefers to rely on the reviewers' ears
rather than their own.
dk
Indeed. It's over.
Gerard
2021-01-27 18:53:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
Post by dk
Nowadays one can sample a dozen performances in
an hour on YouTube, Spotify or amazon Music. The
music review magazines have become irrelevant,
unless one prefers to rely on the reviewers' ears
rather than their own.
dk
Indeed. It's over.
It is .... for the experienced buyer/collector/listener/rmcr
participants/etc.
Reinhold Gliere
2021-01-27 16:36:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by dk
Post by MELMOTH
Post by dk
What else would one expect reviewers to do? Poll 1,000
likely listeners? There is no such thing as an objective
review -- unless one subscribes to "Consumer Reports". ;-)
When I fell into the world of Music, around 1955, I was
quite happy to be able to orientate my choices thanks
to the (numerous) musical magazines of the time...
Those were different times when it was impossible for
most people to sample recordings before buying, and
when going to record stores or public libraries to listen
to records one did not own took a serious amount of
time.
Nowadays one can sample a dozen performances in
an hour on YouTube, Spotify or amazon Music. The
music review magazines have become irrelevant,
unless one prefers to rely on the reviewers' ears
rather than their own.
It's impossible that in addition to one's own recorded library to listen to recordings at youtube, spotify. or Amazon music, so to be selective about your choices, reviewers and critics offer interesting choices for consideration 'no more, no less'.
Post by dk
dk
dk
2021-01-27 19:18:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Reinhold Gliere
Post by dk
Post by MELMOTH
Post by dk
What else would one expect reviewers to do? Poll 1,000
likely listeners? There is no such thing as an objective
review -- unless one subscribes to "Consumer Reports". ;-)
When I fell into the world of Music, around 1955, I was
quite happy to be able to orientate my choices thanks
to the (numerous) musical magazines of the time...
Those were different times when it was impossible for
most people to sample recordings before buying, and
when going to record stores or public libraries to listen
to records one did not own took a serious amount of
time.
Nowadays one can sample a dozen performances in
an hour on YouTube, Spotify or amazon Music. The
music review magazines have become irrelevant,
unless one prefers to rely on the reviewers' ears
rather than their own.
It's impossible that in addition to one's own recorded library
to listen to recordings at youtube, spotify. or Amazon music,
so to be selective about your choices, reviewers and critics
offer interesting choices for consideration 'no more, no less'.
One needs efficient search algorithms, no more, no less,
and nothing else. Reviewer recommendations provide
nothing more than social support without any useful
information -- except perhaps as negative filters.

Anyone here familiar with "Bloom filters"?

dk
raymond....@gmail.com
2021-01-27 23:06:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by dk
Post by Reinhold Gliere
Post by dk
Post by MELMOTH
Post by dk
What else would one expect reviewers to do? Poll 1,000
likely listeners? There is no such thing as an objective
review -- unless one subscribes to "Consumer Reports". ;-)
When I fell into the world of Music, around 1955, I was
quite happy to be able to orientate my choices thanks
to the (numerous) musical magazines of the time...
Those were different times when it was impossible for
most people to sample recordings before buying, and
when going to record stores or public libraries to listen
to records one did not own took a serious amount of
time.
Nowadays one can sample a dozen performances in
an hour on YouTube, Spotify or amazon Music. The
music review magazines have become irrelevant,
unless one prefers to rely on the reviewers' ears
rather than their own.
It's impossible that in addition to one's own recorded library
to listen to recordings at youtube, spotify. or Amazon music,
so to be selective about your choices, reviewers and critics
offer interesting choices for consideration 'no more, no less'.
One needs efficient search algorithms, no more, no less,
and nothing else. Reviewer recommendations provide
nothing more than social support without any useful
information -- except perhaps as negative filters.
Anyone here familiar with "Bloom filters"?
dk
Above the stave? As long as it is ''self recommending" then all is well.

Ray Hall, Taree
dk
2021-01-28 00:19:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by dk
Anyone here familiar with "Bloom filters"?
Above the stave? As long as it is ''self recommending" then all is well.
?!? Not clear what you are referring to.

I meant reading the reviews as "Bloom filers". For instance,
if David Hurwitz, Jed Distler or Donald Vroon recommend a
recording, I know up front there is no point in wasting my
time to hear it.

Check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom_filter.

dk
raymond....@gmail.com
2021-01-28 01:51:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by dk
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by dk
Anyone here familiar with "Bloom filters"?
Above the stave? As long as it is ''self recommending" then all is well.
?!? Not clear what you are referring to.
I meant reading the reviews as "Bloom filers". For instance,
if David Hurwitz, Jed Distler or Donald Vroon recommend a
recording, I know up front there is no point in wasting my
time to hear it.
Check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom_filter.
dk
OK. I thought you were referring to the Penguin Guide's standard "filler phrases" of ''bloom above the stave'', and other useless phrases that beginners are expected to know. The phrase ''self-recommending'' being one of them.

Ray Hall, Taree
Andrew Clarke
2021-01-28 18:04:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by dk
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by dk
Anyone here familiar with "Bloom filters"?
Above the stave? As long as it is ''self recommending" then all is well.
?!? Not clear what you are referring to.
I meant reading the reviews as "Bloom filers". For instance,
if David Hurwitz, Jed Distler or Donald Vroon recommend a
recording, I know up front there is no point in wasting my
time to hear it.
Check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom_filter.
dk
OK. I thought you were referring to the Penguin Guide's standard "filler phrases" of ''bloom above the stave'', and other useless phrases that beginners are expected to know. The phrase ''self-recommending'' being one of them.
Ray Hall, Taree
"Nearly three-quarters of the URLs accessed from a typical web cache are "one-hit-wonders" that are accessed by users only once and never again. It is clearly wasteful of disk resources to store one-hit-wonders in a web cache, since they will never be accessed again. To prevent caching one-hit-wonders, a Bloom filter is used to keep track of all URLs that are accessed by users. A web object is cached only when it has been accessed at least once before, i.e., the object is cached on its second request. The use of a Bloom filter in this fashion significantly reduces the disk write workload, since one-hit-wonders are never written to the disk cache. Further, filtering out the one-hit-wonders also saves cache space on disk, increasing the cache hit rates."

- loc. cit.

The filter is named after Leopold Bloom, the accountant who demonstrated that it is possible to make more money from a flop than a hit.

Andrew Clarke
Canberra
raymond....@gmail.com
2021-01-28 23:09:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andrew Clarke
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by dk
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by dk
Anyone here familiar with "Bloom filters"?
Above the stave? As long as it is ''self recommending" then all is well.
?!? Not clear what you are referring to.
I meant reading the reviews as "Bloom filers". For instance,
if David Hurwitz, Jed Distler or Donald Vroon recommend a
recording, I know up front there is no point in wasting my
time to hear it.
Check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom_filter.
dk
OK. I thought you were referring to the Penguin Guide's standard "filler phrases" of ''bloom above the stave'', and other useless phrases that beginners are expected to know. The phrase ''self-recommending'' being one of them.
Ray Hall, Taree
"Nearly three-quarters of the URLs accessed from a typical web cache are "one-hit-wonders" that are accessed by users only once and never again. It is clearly wasteful of disk resources to store one-hit-wonders in a web cache, since they will never be accessed again. To prevent caching one-hit-wonders, a Bloom filter is used to keep track of all URLs that are accessed by users. A web object is cached only when it has been accessed at least once before, i.e., the object is cached on its second request. The use of a Bloom filter in this fashion significantly reduces the disk write workload, since one-hit-wonders are never written to the disk cache. Further, filtering out the one-hit-wonders also saves cache space on disk, increasing the cache hit rates."
- loc. cit.
The filter is named after Leopold Bloom, the accountant who demonstrated that it is possible to make more money from a flop than a hit.
.
Andrew Clarke
Canberra
Thx. Ah never knew.

Ray Hall, Taree
Andrew Clarke
2021-01-29 04:37:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Andrew Clarke
"Nearly three-quarters of the URLs accessed from a typical web cache are "one-hit-wonders" that are accessed by users only once and never again. It is clearly wasteful of disk resources to store one-hit-wonders in a web cache, since they will never be accessed again. To prevent caching one-hit-wonders, a Bloom filter is used to keep track of all URLs that are accessed by users. A web object is cached only when it has been accessed at least once before, i.e., the object is cached on its second request. The use of a Bloom filter in this fashion significantly reduces the disk write workload, since one-hit-wonders are never written to the disk cache. Further, filtering out the one-hit-wonders also saves cache space on disk, increasing the cache hit rates."
- loc. cit.
The filter is named after Leopold Bloom, the accountant who demonstrated that it is possible to make more money from a flop than a hit.
.
Andrew Clarke
Canberra
Thx. Ah never knew.
Ray Hall, Taree
He came a long way from canvassing for newspaper ads in Dublin. Especially when he kicked out Molly and replaced her with Uma Thurman.

Andrew Clarke
Canberra
Oscar
2021-01-28 07:47:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by dk
I meant reading the reviews as "Bloom filers". For instance,
if David Hurwitz, Jed Distler or Donald Vroon recommend a
recording, I know up front there is no point in wasting my
time to hear it.
I buy anything Vroon likes.
Herman
2021-01-28 09:53:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
The Joyce Hatto fiasco is a good reminder that people who write music reviews generally have no idea what they're talking about. They usually started in the business because they loved the sound of their own voice more than music, plus (very important) they wanted to get their LPs / CDs for free, and were willing to write any kind of purple prose in order to get their fix of freebies.

I say this having reviewed books (for money though) for fifteen years.
Reinhold Gliere
2021-01-28 18:07:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
The Joyce Hatto fiasco is a good reminder that people who write music reviews generally have no idea what they're talking about. They usually started in the business because they loved the sound of their own voice more than music, plus (very important) they wanted to get their LPs / CDs for free, and were willing to write any kind of purple prose in order to get their fix of freebies.
I say this having reviewed books (for money though) for fifteen years.
A popular youtube contribution pays money. Some people try earning their livelihoods from it.
Frank Berger
2021-01-28 18:16:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
The Joyce Hatto fiasco is a good reminder that people who write music reviews generally have no idea what they're talking about. They usually started in the business because they loved the sound of their own voice more than music, plus (very important) they wanted to get their LPs / CDs for free, and were willing to write any kind of purple prose in order to get their fix of freebies.
I say this having reviewed books (for money though) for fifteen years.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, critique.

Is there a single "expert" who publicly expressed skepticism
early on in the Hatto affair? Realizing that it might have
taken a certain amount of courage to do so.
Andrew Clarke
2021-01-29 00:35:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Frank Berger
The Joyce Hatto fiasco is a good reminder that people who write music reviews generally have no idea what they're talking about. They usually started in the business because they loved the sound of their own voice more than music, plus (very important) they wanted to get their LPs / CDs for free, and were willing to write any kind of purple prose in order to get their fix of freebies.
I say this having reviewed books (for money though) for fifteen years.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, critique.
Is there a single "expert" who publicly expressed skepticism
early on in the Hatto affair? Realizing that it might have
taken a certain amount of courage to do so.
I think the Hatto hoax succeeded as long as it did

(a) because her husband used recordings by perfectly competent but perhaps lesser-known pianists as the basis for his wife's 'interpretations'. If he'd used Giesekings or Brendels or Backhauses on the one hand, or the vicar's wife on the other, he'd have been rumbled straight away.
(b) Boiling frog. If he'd continued to produce a trickle of the Viennese classics, the hoax would have succeeded longer. I think it was when this critically ill woman was said have been capable of recording Liszt and Messaien that people began to have their doubts.
(c) I Am Woman. Nobody was going to pour cold water on the story of a brilliant young female pianist who'd been despised and rejected by the patriarchal clique who ran the recording industry, and who was now, in her last days alive, proving how wrong they had been.

Maybe the only critics who really had egg on their faces were those who had damned (e.g.) Skrzrchenski's recordings of Chopin while subsequently praising to the skies almost exactly the same recording - speeded up and slowed down a bit in places - only with Joyce Hatto's name on the label.

Andrew Clarke
Canberra
Herman
2021-01-29 08:36:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andrew Clarke
Post by Frank Berger
The Joyce Hatto fiasco is a good reminder that people who write music reviews generally have no idea what they're talking about. They usually started in the business because they loved the sound of their own voice more than music, plus (very important) they wanted to get their LPs / CDs for free, and were willing to write any kind of purple prose in order to get their fix of freebies.
I say this having reviewed books (for money though) for fifteen years.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, critique.
Is there a single "expert" who publicly expressed skepticism
early on in the Hatto affair? Realizing that it might have
taken a certain amount of courage to do so.
I think the Hatto hoax succeeded as long as it did
(a) because her husband used recordings by perfectly competent but perhaps lesser-known pianists as the basis for his wife's 'interpretations'. If he'd used Giesekings or Brendels or Backhauses on the one hand, or the vicar's wife on the other, he'd have been rumbled straight away.
(b) Boiling frog. If he'd continued to produce a trickle of the Viennese classics, the hoax would have succeeded longer. I think it was when this critically ill woman was said have been capable of recording Liszt and Messaien that people began to have their doubts.
(c) I Am Woman. Nobody was going to pour cold water on the story of a brilliant young female pianist who'd been despised and rejected by the patriarchal clique who ran the recording industry, and who was now, in her last days alive, proving how wrong they had been.
Maybe the only critics who really had egg on their faces were those who had damned (e.g.) Skrzrchenski's recordings of Chopin while subsequently praising to the skies almost exactly the same recording - speeded up and slowed down a bit in places - only with Joyce Hatto's name on the label.
Andrew Clarke
Canberra
I disagree. The Hatto Hoax was a success for some time because some music writers or critics went all out in their purple prose on her. Scott Morrisson and Tom Deacon were prime examples, the kind of people who claim to have a photographic memory for piano playing (and oddly, only for piano playing), being able to perfectly recall a recital, the way it sounded, decades ago. All kinds of auditory Olympic feats no one can check.

A lot of people do not hear the music; they hear what a guy told them to hear. This is why people can totally love some performer or performance even though there is nothing really special about it. They hear the words a writer put in their minds. The same goes for most art forms. People need reassurance and guidance. I don't know why, but that's what happens.

The Hatto story was perfect for this kind of writing, and, if the Hoax had not been revealed, people would today still be listening to Hatto's recordings as this unique case of a neglected piano genius. Though in all likelyhood a new strange star would have come in her place. Hatto was a tough case, with Barrington Coupe pushing ever more and ever more disparate music. I believe he was even going into Messiaen territory?

That's why I was an early sceptic, aside from not being too interested in the sob story, and having a natural reluctance to believe purple prose. However, that's what did it: the way people put words over music. That's why people love those silly sophomoric lists as quoted above, too. Imagine the power of dismissing Wagner with just a handful of words!
Herman
2021-01-29 08:42:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
To give examples of this kind of listener and the opposite. Our quotebot is clearly someone who is more interested in words about music than music, ever posting links to endless blatherings about music.
Dan K. is his opposite, always posting bare links to performances - most of those performances don't appeal to me at all, but the point is, he doesn't "write" about them.
raymond....@gmail.com
2021-01-29 08:55:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
To give examples of this kind of listener and the opposite. Our quotebot is clearly someone who is more interested in words about music than music, ever posting links to endless blatherings about music.
Dan K. is his opposite, always posting bare links to performances - most of those performances don't appeal to me at all, but the point is, he doesn't "write" about them.
I thought dk's Francesca link showed a very tight and disciplined orchestra, in good sound. Not quite Mravinsky, the orchestra was too good, but pretty solid. Imho.

Ray Hall, Taree
dk
2021-01-29 20:49:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
I thought dk's Francesca link showed a very tight and disciplined orchestra,
in good sound. Not quite Mravinsky, the orchestra was too good, but pretty
solid. Imho.
Thanks for listening and for the capsule review.
Can you figure out who are the performers?

As to Mravinsky, many of his readings are
marred by sloppy recording and overly
powerful brass.

dk
weary flake
2021-01-29 22:16:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
To give examples of this kind of listener and the opposite. Our quotebot is clearly someone who is more interested in words about music than music, ever posting links to endless blatherings about music.
Dan K. is his opposite, always posting bare links to performances - most of those performances don't appeal to me at all, but the point is, he doesn't "write" about them.
They're not opposites: they both post many blind links.
Links without some description of what they are linking to
are called blind links.

A complete article from a DK/ggggg collaboration might look
something like this:

Subject: Something of great advantage to you

bit.ly/huhweuih
dk
2021-01-29 23:15:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by weary flake
They're not opposites: they both post many blind links.
Links without some description of what they are linking to
are called blind links.
This is outright defamation! All the links I post have some
description, and are clearly framed in their contexts. This
is quite different from the quote bot swamping the drain!

dk
Todd Michel McComb
2021-01-29 23:26:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Links without some description of what they are linking to are
called blind links.
Indeed. I don't even have a web browser on this computer....
(Too old.)
Owen
2021-02-01 14:48:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Todd Michel McComb
Links without some description of what they are linking to are
called blind links.
Indeed. I don't even have a web browser on this computer....
(Too old.)
I assume it's the computer that's too old. :-)

Pre-1994 and Netscape? I'm not sure when web browsers were first
capable of over the web video streaming but I believe audio streaming
capability was very near to the first browsers.

-Owen
Todd Michel McComb
2021-02-01 17:47:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Owen
I assume it's the computer that's too old. :-)
Maybe. :-)
Post by Owen
Pre-1994 and Netscape?
The complicated commercial websites got to be too much, overloading
the computer & making it crash. I finally swore off running a
browser last summer. I'm supposed to get a new computer, but I
never seem to get around to it....

Andrew Clarke
2021-01-29 12:24:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
Post by Andrew Clarke
I think the Hatto hoax succeeded as long as it did
(a) because her husband used recordings by perfectly competent but perhaps lesser-known pianists as the basis for his wife's 'interpretations'. If he'd used Giesekings or Brendels or Backhauses on the one hand, or the vicar's wife on the other, he'd have been rumbled straight away.
(b) Boiling frog. If he'd continued to produce a trickle of the Viennese classics, the hoax would have succeeded longer. I think it was when this critically ill woman was said have been capable of recording Liszt and Messaien that people began to have their doubts.
(c) I Am Woman. Nobody was going to pour cold water on the story of a brilliant young female pianist who'd been despised and rejected by the patriarchal clique who ran the recording industry, and who was now, in her last days alive, proving how wrong they had been.
Maybe the only critics who really had egg on their faces were those who had damned (e.g.) Skrzrchenski's recordings of Chopin while subsequently praising to the skies almost exactly the same recording - speeded up and slowed down a bit in places - only with Joyce Hatto's name on the label.
Andrew Clarke
Canberra
I disagree. The Hatto Hoax was a success for some time because some music writers or critics went all out in their purple prose on her. Scott Morrisson and Tom Deacon were prime examples, the kind of people who claim to have a photographic memory for piano playing (and oddly, only for piano playing), being able to perfectly recall a recital, the way it sounded, decades ago. All kinds of auditory Olympic feats no one can check.
Scott Morrison is the current Prime Minister of Australia, a man not given to purple prose, and whose opinions of the classical piano repertoire are unknown. I think you mean Bryce Morrison.
Post by Herman
A lot of people do not hear the music; they hear what a guy told them to hear. This is why people can totally love some performer or performance even though there is nothing really special about it. They hear the words a writer put in their minds. The same goes for most art forms. People need reassurance and guidance. I don't know why, but that's what happens.
It may happen in some cases, but certainly not in my case. In fact the more purple the prose, the less credible the review as far as I'm concerned. This is why I don't read "The Gramophone".
Post by Herman
The Hatto story was perfect for this kind of writing, and, if the Hoax had not been revealed, people would today still be listening to Hatto's recordings as this unique case of a neglected piano genius. Though in all likelyhood a new strange star would have come in her place. Hatto was a tough case, with Barrington Coupe pushing ever more and ever more disparate music. I believe he was even going into Messiaen territory?
On purely aesthetic grounds they would have had every right to enjoy the recordings. They were played by some very accomplished pianists.
Post by Herman
That's why I was an early sceptic, aside from not being too interested in the sob story, and having a natural reluctance to believe purple prose. However, that's what did it: the way people put words over music.
That is a rather sweeping statement. I have read various sober comments about the quality of John Wilson's recordings with the Sinfonia of London, I have bought two of them, and I am happy to add my own sober comments, e.g. that these recordings are stunning. A port-and-cigars review in The Gramophone would have been less likely to arouse my interest.

And the "sob story" wasn't a sob story: the woman was dying.

Andrew Clarke
Canberra
Herman
2021-01-29 12:34:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andrew Clarke
Scott Morrison is the current Prime Minister of Australia, a man not given to purple prose, and whose opinions of the classical piano repertoire are unknown. I think you mean Bryce Morrison.
Touché!
Clearly the Australian Morrison should come out and say how he felt the first time he heard Joyce Hatto's playing.
Herman
2021-01-29 12:36:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andrew Clarke
And the "sob story" wasn't a sob story: the woman was dying.
Andrew Clarke
Canberra
Absolutely. But she wasn't recording Liszt as she was dying, which was the story, if I recall correctly (no doubt I don't)
dk
2021-01-29 21:20:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
Post by Andrew Clarke
And the "sob story" wasn't a sob story: the woman was dying.
Absolutely. But she wasn't recording Liszt as she was dying,
which was the story, if I recall correctly (no doubt I don't)
Recording Liszt was part of her therapy. It clearly failed.

dk
dk
2021-01-29 21:19:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
I disagree. The Hatto Hoax was a success for some time because
some music writers or critics went all out in their purple prose on her.
Scott Morrisson and Tom Deacon were prime examples,
Did you mean Bryce Morrison?
Post by Herman
the kind of people who claim to have a photographic memory for piano
playing (and oddly, only for piano playing), being able to perfectly recall
a recital, the way it sounded, decades ago.
"Photographic memory" does not help with sound! ;-)
Post by Herman
All kinds of auditory Olympic feats no one can check.
A lot of people do not hear the music; they hear what a guy told them to
hear. This is why people can totally love some performer or performance
even though there is nothing really special about it. They hear the words a
writer put in their minds.
Amen.
Post by Herman
The same goes for most art forms. People need reassurance and guidance.
I don't know why, but that's what happens.
For the same reasons most people would not disassemble and reassemble
the engines in their cars -- they are afraid they don't know enough to pull off
the job.
Post by Herman
The Hatto story was perfect for this kind of writing, and, if the Hoax had not
been revealed, people would today still be listening to Hatto's recordings as
this unique case of a neglected piano genius. Though in all likelihood a new
strange star would have come in her place. Hatto was a tough case, with
Barrington Coupe pushing ever more and ever more disparate music. I
believe he was even going into Messiaen territory?
The hoax could have run a lot longer had RBC packaged Joyce Hatto as an
unknown forgotten "Russian pianist".

dk
weary flake
2021-01-29 21:57:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andrew Clarke
Post by Frank Berger
The Joyce Hatto fiasco is a good reminder that people who write music reviews generally have no idea what they're talking about. They usually started in the business because they loved the sound of their own voice more than music, plus (very important) they wanted to get their LPs / CDs for free, and were willing to write any kind of purple prose in order to get their fix of freebies.
I say this having reviewed books (for money though) for fifteen years.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, critique.
Is there a single "expert" who publicly expressed skepticism
early on in the Hatto affair? Realizing that it might have
taken a certain amount of courage to do so.
I think the Hatto hoax succeeded as long as it did
(a) because her husband used recordings by perfectly competent but perhaps lesser-known pianists as the basis for his wife's 'interpretations'. If he'd used Giesekings or Brendels or Backhauses on the one hand, or the vicar's wife on the other, he'd have been rumbled straight away.
(b) Boiling frog. If he'd continued to produce a trickle of the Viennese classics, the hoax would have succeeded longer. I think it was when this critically ill woman was said have been capable of recording Liszt and Messaien that people began to have their doubts.
Yes, the obscurantism and the heating up of the frog: the Hatto
discs were first released exclusively to a few reviewers, later
became sold only by the Hatto web site. It was only when MDT
started selling the Hatto discs that the public had more access
to it, that the Hatto fraud was unmasked. One of the last Hatto
CDs was the transcription of Beethoven Sixth and it was a pressed
CD rather than CD-r, suggesting that production was being
increased, since pressed CDs in quantity are significantly cheaper
to make than CD-r. But the stage of an actual general release was
never reached, as I wouldn't call exclusively selling at the
retailer mdt.co.uk and the Hatto web site to be a general release.
All the Hatto CDs were copied from CDs that got regular releases:
none of the Hatto CDs reached a general release. Still, the small
step of adding MDT as a retailer was enough to cook the frog.

So there's a lesson about trusting record companies that play
"hard to get", and the Hatto fraud is a strong example of this.
Post by Andrew Clarke
(c) I Am Woman. Nobody was going to pour cold water on the story of a brilliant young female pianist who'd been despised and rejected by the patriarchal clique who ran the recording industry, and who was now, in her last days alive, proving how wrong they had been.
Maybe the only critics who really had egg on their faces were those who had damned (e.g.) Skrzrchenski's recordings of Chopin while subsequently praising to the skies almost exactly the same recording - speeded up and slowed down a bit in places - only with Joyce Hatto's name on the label.
Bob Harper
2021-01-27 17:57:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mr. Mike
On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:07:00 -0800, Al Eisner
Post by Al Eisner
My standards were set by High Fidelity.
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/High-Fidelity-Magazine.htm
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/HiFI-Stereo-Review.htm
Speaking of the latter, I remember some issue(s) where reviewers
listed the composers they really liked and hated. Any idea
approximately when those were published?
No, but I remember the piece to which you refer. One reviewer expressed
his strong dislike for Bruckner, and doubled down on Sibelius in a
memorable phrase--"the harmonic *and* contrapuntal immobility". I'll
have to scroll through the archives to see whether I can find the article.

Bob Harper
Mr. Mike
2021-01-28 02:39:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
There was another classical music magazine called Opus which was
staffed by many of the reviewers from High Fidelity who quit that
magazine in protest:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opus_(classical_record_magazine)

This URL may not work, you may have to copy and paste it.

Does anyone know if there is a site which has copies of this magazine,
which only lasted for 4 years? I have only a couple of issues.
Ed Presson
2021-01-28 19:11:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mr. Mike
On Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:07:00 -0800, Al Eisner
Post by Al Eisner
My standards were set by High Fidelity.
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/High-Fidelity-Magazine.htm
https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/HiFI-Stereo-Review.htm
Speaking of the latter, I remember some issue(s) where reviewers
listed the composers they really liked and hated. Any idea
approximately when those were published?
No, but I remember the piece to which you refer. One reviewer expressed
his strong dislike for Bruckner, and doubled down on Sibelius in a
memorable phrase--"the harmonic *and* contrapuntal immobility". I'll
have to scroll through the archives to see whether I can find the article.

Bob Harper

Here is the article


"The Critics Confess: My Ten Favorite Composers" appeared in the Sept.
1967 issue of HiFi/Stereo Review. Seven critics - George Jellinek,
William Flanagan, James Goodfriend, Igor Kipnis, David Hall, Paul
Kresh and Eric Salzman - gave their top ten favorites as follows:

Jellinek - Verdi, Mozart, Schubert, Beethoven, Dvorak, Smetana, Gluck,
Berlioz, Mendelssohn and Tartini.

Flanagan - Mozart, Stravinsky, Ravel, Mahler, Poulenc, Debussy,
Britten, Berg, Henze and Flanagan (!).

Goodfriend - Dufay, Biber, JS Bach, Schubert, Faure, Debussy, R.
Strauss, Satie, Nystroem, and Warlock.

Kipnis - CPE Bach, WF Bach, Boismortier, Fux, Purcell, Brahms, Chopin,
Mendelssohn, Ravel, and Rachmaninoff.

Hall - Monteverdi, Purcell, Moussorgky, Mahler, Sibelius, Nielsen,
Janacek, Bartok, Vaughan Williams, and Ives.

Kresh - Beethoven, Debussy, Stravinsky, Mozart, Sibelius, Gershwin,
Schubert, JS Bach, Walton, and Schoenberg.

Salzman - des Pres, Monteverdi, Chopin, Mahler, Debussy, Moussorgsky,
Stravinsky, Schoenberg, Ives, Varese.

To my mind, these are rather weird lists of "favorites"; they would be
weirder still if listed as the "greatest."

Jeff Lipscomb

Here are the same critics with their "Ten Composers I Hate" (October
1967 HiFi/Stereo REview):

Flanagan - Bruckner, Franck, Sibelius, Messiaen, Schoenberg, Scriabin,
Reger, Wagner, Schubert and Sullivan.

Jellinek - Wagner the librettist, R. Strauss of Capriccio, the
Prokofiev of Semyon Kotko & War and Peace, the songs of Debussy, Falla
of the Harpsichord Concerto, Elgar, Ravel, much recent Stravinsky,
Schoenberg.

Hall - Lully, Telemann, Rimsky-Korsakov, Glazounov, Scriabin, Reger,
Puccini, Milhaud, Weill, and Messiaen.

Kipnis - Bellini, Bruckner, Charpentier, Gluck, Hindemith, Nielsen,
Quantz, Reger, Verdi, and Vivaldi.

Goodfriend - Verdi, Alkan, Tchaik., Puccini, Rachmaninoff, Falla,
Respighi, Hindemith, Khachaturian, Bach-Stokowski

Kresh - Mahler, Berlioz, Francaix, Meyerbeer, Bellini, Chaminade,
Cowell, Mancini, Romberg, Ketelby.

Salzman - Palestrina, Telemann, Franck, Reger, Faure, Messiaen, Orff,
Shostakovich, Walton [have only nine].

Cheers,

Jeff Lipscomb- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Here are Flanagan's provocative assessments from "Ten Composers I
Hate":

1. Anton Bruckner. That harmonic immobility, and those great, sighing
silences; religious humility seems to have resulted in the ultimate
pomposity.

2. Cesar Franck. The slippery, soupy chromatic sound derived from
improvisational organ practice of legato fingering (Franck was an
organist).

3. Jean Sibelius. The harmonic AND contrapuntal immobility here make
Bruckner's work seem to these ears positively animated by comparison.

4. Olivier Messiaen.Those godawful birdcalls, the opacity of texture,
the tedious rhythmic conceptions, the mumbling mysticism; the
slippery, soupy chromatic sound derived from improvisational organ
practice of legato fingering (Messiaen IS an organist).

5. Arnold Schoenberg. Unlike the compelling and beautiful work of his
famous disciples Berg and Webern, the larger part of his work is to me
unmusical.

6. Alexander Scriabin. More mysticism, even a "mystic chord," which in
turn results in a simplistic serial organizational technique that,
magically, does not prevent the music from SOUNDING improvisational.
Scriabin reminds me of Messiaen, although as far as I know, he was not
an organist.

7. Max Reger. That absurdly complex, academic, sterile, neo-Baroque
contrapuntal virtuosity!

8. Richard Wagner. Words fail me.

9. Franz Schubert. The "Supremely Lyric Gift" is, for me, so much
Kitsch.

10. Sir Arthur Sullivan (and Sir William Gilbert). With genuine
respect for the bias of my good friend, colleague, self-confessed and
unrepentant Savoyard Paul Kresh - I am not, never have been, and never
will be amused.
number_six
2021-01-28 20:43:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ed Presson
Here are Flanagan's provocative assessments from "Ten Composers I
8. Richard Wagner. Words fail me.
That's a telling admission for a critic to make -- and the lapse of time since 1967 has not improved Flanagan's florid prose.
Mr. Mike
2021-01-28 22:26:34 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Bob Harper
Post by Mr. Mike
Speaking of the latter, I remember some issue(s) where reviewers
listed the composers they really liked and hated. Any idea
approximately when those were published?
No, but I remember the piece to which you refer. One reviewer expressed
his strong dislike for Bruckner, and doubled down on Sibelius in a
memorable phrase--"the harmonic *and* contrapuntal immobility". I'll
have to scroll through the archives to see whether I can find the article.
Bob Harper
Here is the article
Cool, many thanks!
Bob Harper
2021-01-29 00:16:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mr. Mike
Post by Bob Harper
Post by Mr. Mike
Speaking of the latter, I remember some issue(s) where reviewers
listed the composers they really liked and hated. Any idea
approximately when those were published?
No, but I remember the piece to which you refer. One reviewer expressed
his strong dislike for Bruckner, and doubled down on Sibelius in a
memorable phrase--"the harmonic *and* contrapuntal immobility". I'll
have to scroll through the archives to see whether I can find the article.
Bob Harper
Here is the article
Cool, many thanks!
Yes, thanks very much.

Bob Harper
dk
2021-01-24 03:22:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by MELMOTH
What are the best Anglo-American music magazines ? Thanks...
30 round 5.56 mm are great for jeu perlé! ;-)

dk
Alan Dawes
2021-01-24 10:41:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by dk
Post by MELMOTH
What are the best Anglo-American music magazines ? Thanks...
30 round 5.56 mm are great for jeu perlé! ;-)
I assume that's for added realism in the 1812 overture and Beethoven's
Battle Symphony :-)

Alan
--
***@argonet.co.uk
***@riscos.org
Using an ARMX6
dk
2021-01-24 23:31:27 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Alan Dawes
Post by dk
Post by MELMOTH
What are the best Anglo-American music magazines ? Thanks...
30 round 5.56 mm are great for jeu perlé! ;-)
I assume that's for added realism in the 1812 overture and Beethoven's
Battle Symphony :-)
The OP asked about magazines, not about artillery! 1812 requires howitzers:
Loading Image...
Preferably pointed at record reviewers! ;-)

dk
Owen
2021-01-26 14:32:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by dk
Post by Alan Dawes
Post by dk
Post by MELMOTH
What are the best Anglo-American music magazines ? Thanks...
30 round 5.56 mm are great for jeu perlé! ;-)
I assume that's for added realism in the 1812 overture and Beethoven's
Battle Symphony :-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howitzer#/media/File:Canon_155mm_TRF1_fh000024.jpg
Preferably pointed at record reviewers! ;-)
dk
For the piano arrangement of the 1812, it requires Horowitzers.

-Owen
Loading...