A recent thread by ardcarp in which he laments the lack of disagreement on CD Review when you McGregor discusses new releases with a guest commentator struck a chord (a Neapolitan sixth, no less).
I've often wondered how reliable the criticism is on CD Review. A recent instance was the gushing over home-grown talent like Paul Lewis. I can't imagine a release by Paul Lewis ever being given a detached critique. A frequent bugbear of Amazon.com reviewers is how Gramophone automatically lavishes praise on new releases by English conductors - JEG being, perhaps, the most notable. I'm often minded of Private Eye's yearly 'log-rolling' issue, in which they list the links between puffs by authors in their 'Book of the Year' lists and publishing houses, agents, friends, etc.
Another noticeable facet of BaL is how often the same names crop up again and again as the first choice. Scrolling through this list, you see the same names cropping up for wildly differing repertoire. You can watch trends emerging, how HIP names become hip, with Harnoncourt, Norrington and JEG immediately apparent. What strikes me is how can one conductor - and I'm thinking here of JEG - be the first choice for so many different musical genres: Early Baroque and Late Romantic, say?
There was an article stating that Amazon reviews are just as "reliable" a source of criticism as newspaper and magazines (not difficult when you see the paltry three lines that makes up a Guardian classical CD review!). Although the star system can be 'gamed' - by authors (see the Orlando Figes debacle), record labels, etc. or lunatics like this crétin des Alpes with his 'communiques from the Bach front', frothing at the mouth with 1-star on every JEG release - I have found some very balanced and in-depth reviews on Amazon.
For me, the beauty of the Internet is skipping around and reading a range of different opinions hither and thither and, best of all, using Spotify to sample for myself (assuming its available on there - Harmonia Mundi aren't).
So, what criticism do you find reliable and/or suitably detached from bias, commercial interest, etc.?
I've often wondered how reliable the criticism is on CD Review. A recent instance was the gushing over home-grown talent like Paul Lewis. I can't imagine a release by Paul Lewis ever being given a detached critique. A frequent bugbear of Amazon.com reviewers is how Gramophone automatically lavishes praise on new releases by English conductors - JEG being, perhaps, the most notable. I'm often minded of Private Eye's yearly 'log-rolling' issue, in which they list the links between puffs by authors in their 'Book of the Year' lists and publishing houses, agents, friends, etc.
Another noticeable facet of BaL is how often the same names crop up again and again as the first choice. Scrolling through this list, you see the same names cropping up for wildly differing repertoire. You can watch trends emerging, how HIP names become hip, with Harnoncourt, Norrington and JEG immediately apparent. What strikes me is how can one conductor - and I'm thinking here of JEG - be the first choice for so many different musical genres: Early Baroque and Late Romantic, say?
There was an article stating that Amazon reviews are just as "reliable" a source of criticism as newspaper and magazines (not difficult when you see the paltry three lines that makes up a Guardian classical CD review!). Although the star system can be 'gamed' - by authors (see the Orlando Figes debacle), record labels, etc. or lunatics like this crétin des Alpes with his 'communiques from the Bach front', frothing at the mouth with 1-star on every JEG release - I have found some very balanced and in-depth reviews on Amazon.
For me, the beauty of the Internet is skipping around and reading a range of different opinions hither and thither and, best of all, using Spotify to sample for myself (assuming its available on there - Harmonia Mundi aren't).
So, what criticism do you find reliable and/or suitably detached from bias, commercial interest, etc.?
Comment