Gramophone

[Sir Velo]

What do you all do to avoid this? I've tried putting the query in quotes as I'm only interested in both elements together but that doesn't seem to work...

You have to add more words to narrow the search down further; in this instance try adding "Concertgebouw"; "symphony;" "Amsterdam"; "Adagietto" (no review will omit mention of this movement!).

It's frustrating isn't it, and amazing, considering what they're asking, that they haven't worked on this.

[VodkaDilc]

I am wondering whether to go back to Gramophone . Despite the length of the reviews IRR is beginning to go downhill in my opinion .

They have recently added a number of reviewers that I do not rate at all . One of whom must have cloth ears to have liked the Liszt Concertos of Matsuev and the insufferable Michael Jameson - who gave a bizarre rave review to a dreary Mahler 2 from Simone Young and who as a cellist ( though his recorded catalogue seems rather slim) appears to dislike every recording that is not played as he might have played it had he had the chance - his endless railings against the late Jacqueline du Pre were no credit to BBCMM in the past and I see he is at it again in the most recent IRR .

It still has some very good reviewers - some are shared with Gramophone and indeed we have two of its very best as members on here but it is worryingly inconsistent and I find Richard Whitehouse's monopolising of Shostakovich as irritating as some do Seckerson with Mahler in Gramophone .

I find IRR as stimulating as ever. If you have a problem with a specific reviewer, write to the Editor. I was one who wrote on the subject of ****** ******** (not the only one, I gather) and he didn't last long on the panel of reviewers. That was an extreme case - he was appallingly bad - but the editor really does listen.

And I've asked it before and not got an answer, but what is wrong with Ed Seckerson? He's certainly much missed on R3.

[MickyD]

I must say I share VodkaDilc's satisfaction regarding IRR. Although being more interested in the baroque side of things, I am lucky that those reviews are covered by such admirable critics as Nicholas Anderson and Simon Heighes etc, so maybe I am biased. Even so, I find the mag great value for money - despite its thin appearance, the lack of advertisements and preponderance of text means that it takes me a long time to read it each month.

[gurnemanz]

I used to be a Gramophone reader but I've just thrown out 30 years' worth of the mag which I loved. When I read postings as above I get a strange hankering to go back. However, with collection-bloat a factor, I'm trying to slow down my recorded music buying and a subscription would just encourage me, so I think I will resist. There is a lot of stuff to read online. I would pay just to subscribe to the online Archive but this doesn't seem to be possible.

[Gordon]

I used to be a Gramophone reader but I've just thrown out 30 years' worth of the mag which I loved. When I read postings as above I get a strange hankering to go back. However, with collection-bloat a factor, I'm trying to slow down my recorded music buying and a subscription would just encourage me, so I think I will resist. There is a lot of stuff to read online. I would pay just to subscribe to the online Archive but this doesn't seem to be possible.

Agreed G, I did the same as you have done and feel the odd regret which is stamped on by my wiser self!! I'd also subscribe to the back catalogue if allowed. My Gramophones, from 1950 to 1998 when I gave it up, all went out in moment of strong will about 5 years ago. Tried advertising them but no takers.

[akiralx]

You have to add more words to narrow the search down further; in this instance try adding "Concertgebouw"; "symphony;" "Amsterdam"; "Adagietto" (no review will omit mention of this movement!).

It's frustrating isn't it, and amazing, considering what they're asking, that they haven't worked on this.

Won't that just also give me every Concertgebouw recording and every symphony recording as well...

[Sir Velo]

Won't that just also give me every Concertgebouw recording and every symphony recording as well...

Not unless every symphony recording made by the Concertgebouw contains at least one Adagietto and a reference to Mahler and Haitink.

The point is you need to narrow down your search; the more words you put in to the search the fewer recordings will emerge, but you need to be specific. Try it. What have you to lose?

[Parry1912]

But you have to factor in the superb new Gramophone archive to all of this. For about £2 extra per month, it's a great and absorbing resource of some 70 years of reviews, surveys and articles, beautifully implemented and lovely to use. It's great to go back and see what Deryck Cooke, Trevor Harvey or Richard Osborne said about the original releases, and then follow the links, or just follow your nose, through the back issues. The only problem with it is the time that goes by once you're in.

I was a regular subscriber to Gramophone for over 25 years until James Inverne came on the scene. I have recently taken out an online sub so as to have access to the archive and I'm delighted with it. I am especially enjoying the 'Gramophone Collection' articles. I still feel that the current issues lag behind IRR but it is recovering.

As to IRR, I am still thoroughly enjoying it (and they printed one of my letters!). However, I'm not overly keen on Richard Whitehouse's reviews - I find his habit of peppering his comments with timings to be annoying and unhelpful. Surely the timings are of limited value unless I have the recording he's talking about. In which case I wouldn't need his review!

[Barbirollians]

I don't have a particular problem with Richard Whitehouse just that he gets all the Shostakovich it seems . I like Seckerson - largely because I like his sort of Mahler !

I don't mind opinionated reviewing - RMW being very much of that Trevor Harvey school and I can skate over what I do not agree with but Michael Jameson is beyond my personal pale .I tend to think in particular if you are an instrumentalist unless you have a very open mind you should probably not review recordings of your own instrument especially by those whose talent outstrips your own by a country mile .

[Karafan]

I only recently resubscribed to Gramophone for the archive, it is very enjoyable - but my beef is I struggle to track down specific reviews.

For example I was recently looking for Haitink's early 70s Mahler 5 - so putting in 'Haitink Mahler' as the search and even narrowing by each year in the 1970s still brings up every recording by Haitink, and every recording of Mahler - quite a few of both... It took me half an hour of concerted searching to find it - even then only by spotting the right issue from a comparative review of M5. It takes me *ages* to find any specific review. What do you all do to avoid this? I've tried putting the query in quotes as I'm only interested in both elements together but that doesn't seem to work...

Sir Velo is quite right Aki - April 1972, page 1715 - found using searchterms: haitink mahler adagietto concertgebouw

Now who can track down the reviews (if indeed they were covered) of Gielen's Mahler 4 and 5!!

K.

[Flosshilde]

I only recently resubscribed to Gramophone for the archive, it is very enjoyable - but my beef is I struggle to track down specific reviews.

For example I was recently looking for Haitink's early 70s Mahler 5 - so putting in 'Haitink Mahler' as the search and even narrowing by each year in the 1970s still brings up every recording by Haitink, and every recording of Mahler - quite a few of both... It took me half an hour of concerted searching to find it - even then only by spotting the right issue from a comparative review of M5. It takes me *ages* to find any specific review. What do you all do to avoid this? I've tried putting the query in quotes as I'm only interested in both elements together but that doesn't seem to work...

Have you tried putting 'and' (without the quotes) or + between 'Haitinck' and 'Mahler'?

[Sir Velo]

Have you tried putting 'and' (without the quotes) or + between 'Haitinck' and 'Mahler'?

No wonder he's not getting any results if he's keying in "Haitinck" (sic)!

[gurnemanz]

My Gramophones, from 1950 to 1998 when I gave it up, all went out in moment of strong will about 5 years ago. Tried advertising them but no takers.

That's a formidable collection. Mine was 72-06. It was comments such as yours about unsuccessful advertising that made me just dump them in the recycling. I have kept about half a dozen as souvenirs.

[VodkaDilc]

That's a formidable collection. Mine was 72-06. It was comments such as yours about unsuccessful advertising that made me just dump them in the recycling. I have kept about half a dozen as souvenirs.

My collection must be about 1974-2012. I've recycled the more recent few years, but the rest are still in boxes. I really find the whole process of consulting the reviews online very tiresome. I have access to the online archive of Fanfare reviews as part of my subscription, but I've only looked there about once. The computer is unlikely to become a natural part of my life in the way that reading a book, magazine or newspaper is. Given the choice, the computer always seems a very unsatisfactory substitute. (I WAS born in the reign of King George VI, so this is hardly surprising.)

[Thropplenoggin]

I though Gramophone's 90th anniversary issue was very skimpy on anniversary treats, articles, etc. A good opportunity to bring the cover CD back, if only for one issue. The website has had a series of pieces in which critics talk about their first review for the magazine, then re-print the review. Nothing comparable in the magazine. So much they could have examined, but what there is feels lightweight and bite-sized. Poor.