Personally I prefer all the detail providing it's not too much work for you .....
Building a Library - General Discussion
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Eine Alpensinfonie View PostA Question. : the BaL work for the first Saturday in April will be Verdi's Aida. There are lots of versions, each with lots of soloists, so it will overspill the opening post. Do you refer it this way, or would a single less informative list be better for general reference?
Important thought - many thanks for all the effort you put into posting this information - much appreciated on my part and surely, most of us.Last edited by Cockney Sparrow; 23-03-17, 13:51.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Eine Alpensinfonie View PostEh? 'Ave I missed something?
Anyroad up (and there are several such around here) - FWIW, I greatly value the information you give each week, Alpie; but I confess that I don't read every detail of every release when an opera cast is listed, nor do I regularly return to the lists. So, I would say that if you wished to save yourself the considerable time and effort required to gather and type the full information, a "highlights" list will be perfectly acceptable to me. (Missing information is readily available online should the need to discover whose Pong graces which Turandot become an essential one.)[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by visualnickmos View PostI may have got this completely wrong - but I was (am) under the impression that there was to be a "blind" listening BaL in November or December, along the lines of France Musique's 'Tribune des critiques'? I'm beginning to wonder if my sanity is intact!
BaL 14.10.17 - Purcell: "My Heart is Inditing"
Blame the cold weather
Comment
-
-
Is BAL a flawed concept?
The problem with a review of such a huge work as Mahler 7 is that it is not possible within a time-slot of approximately 45 minutes to cover even some of the releases over a period of some 40+ years. (To do justice such a review would need more like 90 minutes or even considerably longer) Perhaps the reviewer should have either reviewed the live performances or the studio recordings, and not covered both. In the end it is just one persons preference, and in recent years we have this urge to always have a "winner" rather than say a choice of three or four equally good finalists. (This happens in instrumental competitions where there has to be a "winner" - rather than two or three "winners")
Therefore I would say that BAL is a failed concept, that probably worked in much earlier years, but fails now as the available libraries of recordings for most works has grown to such a large size.
It is of course about who the reviewer is, and your own personal opinion as to how you perceive the reviewer.Last edited by ferneyhoughgeliebte; 05-03-18, 09:10.
Comment
-
-
Oh yes, and I'm surprised that little mention has been made of how well these works have been recorded (although some mention was made I think). With regard to chamber music no one seems to be aware of how in recent years the lower frequencies have become more and more exaggerated with some string quartets for example having extremely bloated bass, with cellists going over the top as far as their part is concerned. Is this the quest for "I must be heard" or just poor recording techniques?
Comment
-
-
Two posts moved from the Mahler #7-specific Thread for general discussion of the BaL format here.Last edited by ferneyhoughgeliebte; 05-03-18, 09:10.[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]
Comment
-
Comment