How Did You 'Lose' a Penguin Guide Rosette?

[Conchis]

Looking through some old Penguin Guides, I noticed some instances of a recording receiving a rosette for several years but later losing it. The rosette was not always transferred to the newer, preferred recording - as in the case of the Solti Lohengrin which lost its rosette when it was 'superseded' by the Abbado version in the mid-90s.


Another instance was the CfP Beethoven Grosse Fugue/Empereor Concerto with Kovacevich and the Australian Chamber Orchestra.


I'm just wondering what process, if any, was followed to remove a rosette? Did the critics have second thoughts about the sound, or did they just become disillusioned with the qualify of the performance? As the same group of critics was involved for much of the liftetime of the series, it wouldn't be surprising if their minds changed about certain things....


I'd be interested if anyone knows, or has any theories.

[visualnickmos]

Looking through some old Penguin Guides, I noticed some instances of a recording receiving a rosette for several years but later losing it. The rosette was not always transferred to the newer, preferred recording - as in the case of the Solti Lohengrin which lost its rosette when it was 'superseded' by the Abbado version in the mid-90s.


Another instance was the CfP Beethoven Grosse Fugue/Empereor Concerto with Kovacevich and the Australian Chamber Orchestra.


I'm just wondering what process, if any, was followed to remove a rosette? Did the critics have second thoughts about the sound, or did they just become disillusioned with the qualify of the performance? As the same group of critics was involved for much of the liftetime of the series, it wouldn't be surprising if their minds changed about certain things....
I'd be interested if anyone knows, or has any theories.

I'd say that it's pretty much as you say. I was always rather dubious about the Penguin Guides. I'm sure some people regarded it as some sort all-knowing oracle. I never bought them - preferring to merely browse occasionally - not for guidance, but for 'information only'

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I'd say that it's pretty much as you say.

- there was always the "disclaimer" in the introductory pages that the Rosette wasn't meant to indicate "the best available", just that one or more of the three reviewers had a special affection for it for whatever reason - so such subjective admiration might well have faded with repeated hearings over the years. (But, as a lot of people didn't tend to read those pages, it was rather misunderstood to be a sort of "oscar".)

[Dave2002]

I'd say that it's pretty much as you say. I was always rather dubious about the Penguin Guides. I'm sure some people regarded it as some sort all-knowing oracle. I never bought them - preferring to merely browse occasionally - not for guidance, but for 'information only'

I think that different people have different opinions - and "fashions" change.

One area which could affect the evaluation could be sound quality. Actually some of the earlier recordings did sound excellent, and probably still do. Some may have been "improved" due to remastering - while others might actually sound worse. Where recordings were done to tape, the degrading of the tape can make remastering difficult.

Generally I think that technology is better now than it was decades ago, though I don't want to get into an argument re digital vs analogue. Some analogue recordings are/were excellent. Perceptions of how good a recording is can vary depending on the replay equipment - it was always thus.

Some recorded performances can be thought of as very good even if the sound quality isn't perfect, while the perception of quality for some others may vary considerably depending on how good the replay equipment is and how well matched to the recording/recording company.

Given a choice between a good/very good/excellent/superb performance with mediocre quality vs excellent quality I'd always go for the better sound quality (as long as it doesn't cost my arms and legs), but a mediocre performance will probably sound mediocre to most listeners however good the audio quailty.

However, many OK performances - right notes, right order etc. do sound acceptable with modern sound quality. There are many decent performances recorded which just do not hit the heights of the best.

[Conchis]

- there was always the "disclaimer" in the introductory pages that the Rosette wasn't meant to indicate "the best available", just that one or more of the three reviewers had a special affection for it for whatever reason - so such subjective admiration might well have faded with repeated hearings over the years. (But, as a lot of people didn't tend to read those pages, it was rather misunderstood to be a sort of "oscar".)

I recall mention of a 'spiritual quality'. :)

Presumably that applied especially to the Karajan Parsifal, which kept its rosette (did it?) right to the end.....

[visualnickmos]

I think that different people have different opinions - and "fashions" change. One area which could affect the evaluation could be sound quality. Actually some of the earlier recordings did sound excellent, and probably still do. Some may have been "improved" due to remastering - while others might actually sound worse. Where recordings were done to tape, the degrading of the tape can make remastering difficult.

Generally I think that technology is better now than it was decades ago, though I don't want to get into an argument re digital vs analogue. Some analogue recordings are/were excellent. Perceptions of how good a recording is can vary depending on the replay equipment - it was always thus.

Some recorded performances can be thought of as very good even if the sound quality isn't perfect, while the perception of quality for some others may vary considerably depending on how good the replay equipment is and how well matched to the recording/recording company.

Given a choice between a good/very good/excellent/superb performance with mediocre quality vs excellent quality I'd always go for the better sound quality (as long as it doesn't cost my arms and legs), but a mediocre performance will probably sound mediocre to most listeners however good the audio quailty.

However, many OK performances - right notes, right order etc. do sound acceptable with modern sound quality. There are many decent performances recorded which just do not hit the heights of the best.

Well-written. I agree with all that you say here. Your very first sentence really hits the nail on the head - mentioning that "fashions" change. That fact is perhaps sometimes overlooked(?) Fashions also diversify; one example being that decades ago HIPP/HIP or whatever, were practically unknown concepts. Another; Portamento was once popular (some might say it still is!) and so on. This could be started as a thread on its own - "Changing 'fashions' in music" Just a thought. Unless it has been done before of course!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Well-written. I agree with all that you say here. Your very first sentence really hits the nail on the head - mentioning that "fashions" change. That fact is perhaps sometimes overlooked(?) Fashions also diversify; one example being that decades ago HIPP/HIP or whatever, were practically unknown concepts. Another; Portamento was once popular (some might say it still is!) and so on. This could be started as a thread on its own - "Changing 'fashions' in music" Just a thought. Unless it has been done before of course!

Not necessarily with regard specifically to the Penguin Guide Rosettes, in that the same three authors were responsible for the books' content throughout the Guide's existence. Their opinions may have altered in that time, but surely not their fashions?