Bal 24.01.15 - Bartok: Music for Strings, Percussion & Celesta

[Beef Oven!]

That's CD no 34 in the 1960s box. The recording date is given as September 20/21 and November 9 1965.

Thanks Petrushka.

Seems like there's a difference between the dates that you and I have, and the ones given by the Bal presenters and Karafan.

[Beef Oven!]

I'm not massively a Karajan fan, although I have some CDs of him which really are amongst my favs; (Work that one out!) but I thought the brief extracts of HvK which were played sounded pretty damn good....

I think the double-headed eagle is beginning to take it's place on the BaL coat of arms - I actually enjoy the little 'asides' that come up in the chat......

I've always like Karajan and find it so sad that so many people assess him for non-musical contentions. I like you would identify a number of his recordings as some of my favourites.

Eagle is better than dog! Glad to are positive about the format

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

And I'm pleased that some forumites are embracing this new way of doing things, with at least one member being happy to 'eat his own words'

It still wasn't good - just less awful than other times when this constant interruption format is used. Rob on his own would have been perfect.

[Beef Oven!]

It still wasn't good - just less awful than other times when this constant interruption format is used. Rob on his own would have been perfect.

I think that you are presenting your opinion as if it were a fact. Nothing wrong with you having an opinion, your entitled to it.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Out of genuine interest, BeefO (or anyone who shares this preference) - why do you prefer the "conversation" format over the solo presentation? I find the constant "Oh, that is good", "Yes it is marvellous, isn't it" exchange wastes time and adds nothing to my understanding or appreciation of the recording concerned.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

That's what do here - express opinions, sometimes with verification.

My daughter says all her opinions are facts.

[Beef Oven!]

Out of genuine interest, BeefO (or anyone who shares this preference) - why do you prefer the "conversation" format over the solo presentation? I find the constant "Oh, that is good", "Yes it is marvellous, isn't it" exchange wastes time and adds nothing to my understanding or appreciation of the recording concerned.

I find observing a conversation more engaging, more of a group thing. I think that this week's Bal was just as informative and engaging as last week's - a bit more actually.

As the format develops, I expect the interaction to become more dynamic.

Please don't make the mistake of thinking that the format has anything to do with wasted Bal-time. I think we'd agree that down the years there have been many Bals that have been as dry as toast and no more enlightening!

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I leave many a mistake of thinking on the path of life behind me, and doubtless there shall be many more ahead - but ascribing to the conversation format wasted BaL time isn't one of them.

I rather like the twin-review idea that appears in Fanfare - and I'd quite like a couple of experts having a public spat over a new release (one passionately pro, the other vehemently contra) on Seedy Review. But dry toast is more to my taste than redundant confirmation phrases which do nothing but waste (my) time - to reach a single decision about which recording they think is the best representative of that work is necessarily the choice of an individual. This happened today; RC made his choices independently - all AMcG did, I felt, was to add a few aural nods of agreement. I didn't see the point of his being involved.

[Beef Oven!]

I leave many a mistake of thinking on the path of life behind me, and doubtless there shall be many more ahead - but ascribing to the conversation format wasted BaL time isn't one of them.

I rather like the twin-review idea that appears in Fanfare - and I'd quite like a couple of experts having a public spat over a new release (one passionately pro, the other vehemently contra) on Seedy Review. But dry toast is more to my taste than redundant confirmation phrases which do nothing but waste (my) time - to reach a single decision about which recording they think is the best representative of that work is necessarily the choice of an individual. This happened today; RC made his choices independently - all AMcG did, I felt, was to add a few aural nods of agreement. I didn't see the point of his being involved.

Which has little to do with the format and more to do with AMcG. And I hope I understood you right in not ascribing that to the format.

As I said, as the format develops I expect the interaction to become more dynamic.

[Karafan]

Thanks Petrushka.

Seems like there's a difference between the dates that you and I have, and the ones given by the Bal presenters and Karafan.

Indeed, how strange. I was going by the booklet in the full price issue on DG. I didn't check the big 1960s box but imagine that the latter will be more accurate as it gives specific dates. I will check Hunt later.

[Beef Oven!]

Indeed, how strange. I was going by the booklet in the full price issue on DG. I didn't check the big 1960s box but imagine that the latter will be more accurate as it gives specific dates. I will check Hunt later.

I was going by the single CD issue, Petrushka is the one that has that coooool box

I have also subsequently checked the Hunt

[visualnickmos]

As the format develops, I expect the interaction to become more dynamic.

I hope so. So far so good.

Please don't make the mistake of thinking that the format has anything to do with wasted Bal-time. I think we'd agree that down the years there have been many Bals that have been as dry as toast and no more enlightening!

Now, that IS a fact - though thankfully an exception to the general 'rule' of BaL!

[Barbirollians]

No it wasn't really was it? I think some relief was felt that the annoying dialogue format wasn't as awful as it sometimes is. I really don't see the point of it though. Apart from anything else, the time wasted in chat...maybe only a few seconds here and there...could be devoted instead to a few more extracts and/or versions.

I did quite like Rob's comment that [roughly] 'the trouble with BAL is that you can tick all the boxes and come up with the wrong total'.

He must have been referring to the Schubert 8 BAL !

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

He must have been referring to the Schubert 8 BAL !

Mayhap! There was an ever-so-slightly bitchy comment at the very end of the chat when A McG commented "I don't suppose you'll be disagreeing with the chosen recording this time?"

[Barbirollians]

Mayhap! There was an ever-so-slightly bitchy comment at the very end of the chat when A McG commented "I don't suppose you'll be disagreeing with the chosen recording this time?"

RC is a massive fan of Ivan Fischer so much to be expected .