Building a Library - General Discussion

[crb11]

If I remember correctly IOR , like quite a few other programmes on R3 in the seventies , assumed a greater knowledge of the rudiments of music. The problem , as I must be boring people rigid repeating , is that producers can no longer make those assumptions. It’s a bit of a circular argument because you can then say it’s the job of R3 to educate people but these days people are just a bit too inclined to switch over and there is vastly more choice out there.

I'd broadly agree with this (and the rest of your reply) in general, although personally I feel that the better BALs are still pitched at a reasonable level, or would be if you left the presenter to get on with it.

What I was more interested in though, was what you do about the format given the "problem" of the number of recordings available. One of the most common complaints on the BAL thread is that the presenter didn't mention Karajan or Brautigam or whoever, but it's not clear how you address this given that there may well be 20-30 other recordings which are about as "good" as those on the shortlist, and choosing between them is more a matter of taste than anything else. At least since I've been listening to it, BAL seems to have effectively had a shortlist of 4-6 which are the main feature of the programme, with others namechecked and sometimes played from early on if at all. I note that the IOR programme seems to follow the same pattern - six named recordings plus "others". Is this a good model to keep following, and if so how much effort should be made to justify the shortlist to potentially critical listeners? Or is it better to go deeper into a few recordings, or perhaps cover more options?

[Keraulophone]

I once repeated the Britten quote that “ the rot set in with Beethoven “ to a Catholic musician friend who replied “No, it started with Palestrina” ...

...or "Jubal's lyre" according to Tommy Beecham.

.

[vinteuil]

.

... I wd like it if the invited scholar / critic first addressed what made the work in question special, and then proceeded to demonstrate those qualities as found or not found in as many recordings as were felt necessary to illustrate the point. There need be no question of a 'winner' - a particular performance may 'fall down' in one movement, but still have shown what was important. And with enough examples listeners can decide for themselves - "yes, I see what the critic is saying - but myself I don't like the sound of the harpsichord / fortepiano / modern piano / bloated nineteenth century orchestra / recorded sound of the 1930s... ".

I wd also like it if the radio 3 website flagged up the details of all the recordings considered, and not just 'the winner' as often happens now. Many times it has been, not the winner, but another recording considered that has grabbed me...


.

[Pulcinella]

.

... I wd like it if the invited scholar / critic first addressed what made the work in question special, and then proceeded to demonstrate those qualities as found or not found in as many recordings as were felt necessary to illustrate the point. There need be no question of a 'winner' - a particular performance may 'fall down' in one movement, but still have shown what was important. And with enough examples listeners can decide for themselves - "yes, I see what the critic is saying - but myself I don't like the sound of the harpsichord / fortepiano / modern piano / bloated nineteenth century orchestra / recorded sound of the 1930s... ".

I wd also like it if the radio 3 website flagged up the details of all the recordings considered, and not just 'the winner' as often happens now. Many times it has been, not the winner, but another recording considered that has grabbed me...


.

Which is where the idea of a pre-published shortlist of those under consideration (mentioned in what is currently post #27, 6 April 2021, in response to a comment from makropulos) might hold some merit, if we could persuade R3 to offer such a thing.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I wd also like it if the radio 3 website flagged up the details of all the recordings considered, and not just 'the winner' as often happens now. Many times it has been, not the winner, but another recording considered that has grabbed me...

To be fair, the website also lists some runners up in most weeks. In the OP list, I highlight the chosen winner in red, with the runners up in orange.

[cloughie]

BaL is of variable value and necessarily limited in scope but I still usually find it worth listening to despite irksome twofer format.
Their Excel database of over 800 editions, which I have only just discovered, (downloadable here) is well produced and quite useful.

Looks good gurn - thanks for that.

[Cockney Sparrow]

For the benefit of those of us not old enough to remember Interpretations on Record, could you flesh out what your proposed format would look like in practice, perhaps taking a core classical piece like the Mozart piano concerto recently covered on BAL as an example. I can see the obvious benefits of a single presenter with expertise, but in what other ways would it differ from BAL in its current form?

Well, I have an mp3 of one. Michael Oliver - 1996 - Turangalila Symphony. PM me if you (or anyone - for a week or so) would like to download it from dropbox. 73 minutes - grieve for what we have lost.........

[Dermot]

For the benefit of those of us not old enough to remember Interpretations on Record, could you flesh out what your proposed format would look like in practice, perhaps taking a core classical piece like the Mozart piano concerto recently covered on BAL as an example. I can see the obvious benefits of a single presenter with expertise, but in what other ways would it differ from BAL in its current form?

Something like this, perhaps

https://www.br-klassik.de/programm/radio/ausstrahlung-2363274.html

The sound is appalling, it was recorded on medium wave in south-east Ireland, but here is an episode of Interpretations on Record from 1988. John Steane discusses the role of Don José in Bizet's Carmen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJz_v9t7240

[Edgy 2]

Well, I have an mp3 of one. Michael Oliver - 1996 - Turangalila Symphony. PM me if you (or anyone - for a week or so) would like to download it from dropbox. 73 minutes - grieve for what we have lost.........

I have been doing so for a long time

[gurnemanz]

Something like this, perhaps

https://www.br-klassik.de/programm/radio/ausstrahlung-2363274.html

Looks good. I'd like to hear that Kreisleriana edition but I couldn't find a way to listen again - a la BBC Sounds.

Seems only to appear once every two months. https://www.br-klassik.de/programm/s...leich-100.html

[Ein Heldenleben]

I'd broadly agree with this (and the rest of your reply) in general, although personally I feel that the better BALs are still pitched at a reasonable level, or would be if you left the presenter to get on with it.

What I was more interested in though, was what you do about the format given the "problem" of the number of recordings available. One of the most common complaints on the BAL thread is that the presenter didn't mention Karajan or Brautigam or whoever, but it's not clear how you address this given that there may well be 20-30 other recordings which are about as "good" as those on the shortlist, and choosing between them is more a matter of taste than anything else. At least since I've been listening to it, BAL seems to have effectively had a shortlist of 4-6 which are the main feature of the programme, with others namechecked and sometimes played from early on if at all. I note that the IOR programme seems to follow the same pattern - six named recordings plus "others". Is this a good model to keep following, and if so how much effort should be made to justify the shortlist to potentially critical listeners? Or is it better to go deeper into a few recordings, or perhaps cover more options?

Confusingly the IOR that popped up on Genome was from 1965 when there would have been vastly fewer recordings available . I wouldn’t mind betting that the very thorough Deryck Cooke would have listened to all of them including historic recordings and, as the blurb says , the composer’s own.

[Dermot]

Looks good. I'd like to hear that Kreisleriana edition but I couldn't find a way to listen again - a la BBC Sounds.

Seems only to appear once every two months. https://www.br-klassik.de/programm/s...leich-100.html

I have contacted the radio station, by e-mail, enquiring if the programme can be heard again. I await their response.

[Hitch]

Their Excel database of over 800 editions, which I have only just discovered, (downloadable here) is well produced and quite useful.

Well, that just takes all the fun out of it. I like to imagine an enthralled audience swapping bets on which recording will grasp the laurel wreath.

(Thank you for the link.)

[crb11]

Confusingly the IOR that popped up on Genome was from 1965 when there would have been vastly fewer recordings available . I wouldn’t mind betting that the very thorough Deryck Cooke would have listened to all of them including historic recordings and, as the blurb says , the composer’s own.

That would seem reasonable. Even today, I would assume that a qualified reviewer would be listening to 20+ recordings in preparation for putting together the shortlist, and have previously heard the bulk of those which could be considered "signifiicant" (or even of the 100+ extant for some works). My question though is how many of them you want to cover in the broadcast itself.

[Ein Heldenleben]

That would seem reasonable. Even today, I would assume that a qualified reviewer would be listening to 20+ recordings in preparation for putting together the shortlist, and have previously heard the bulk of those which could be considered "signifiicant" (or even of the 100+ extant for some works). My question though is how many of them you want to cover in the broadcast itself.

I would have thought in an hour long IOR 10 recordings would have been reasonable . For Don Juan I’m guessing in the sixties that would be 50 per cent of available recordings ( including mono) . Now there’d be 80 plus ?