BaL 6.07.19 - Stravinsky: The Rite of Spring

[Bryn]

I mostly enjoyed it - the Rite is one of my obsessions. However he tended to pick examples of things being done WELL and it can sometimes be more illuminating to hear the illustrations of where things are done BADLY. I also agree that having two presenters can dilute things rather (also means more talking, less playing...)

I have most of the leading contenders already but the Roth is VERY tempting based on the excerpts played. Didn't Stravinsky once quip that the bassoon solo should be taken up a semitone every decade to keep it scary! Perhaps it's the sense of risk that makes youth orchestras sometimes more compelling.. (Off topic, but has anyone heard the Dudamel Francesca - it's really quite special!)

Not up the recording quality of the CD, but:

and you get an enthusistic presenter into the bargain.

[Mal]

Nijinsky invents pogo dancing:

[Mal]

Not the fantasia rite

[Sir Velo]

I had the sense that when Mal started his BAL reports that they were a useful precis of the broadcast - useful for those of us who had failed to listen.

Now we know that they are thinly-disguised vehicles for parading his musical prejudices.

Citing the Hurwitzer and a certain irish Australian troll, as well as a discredited UK journalist as sources for your views also tend to undermine the case somewhat!

Clever though to dress up prejudice as reportage. If some here are gullible enough to take these so-called reports as verbatim summaries of what was actually said (or heard) then good for them. I, for one, will keep listening to the actual programmes!

[doversoul1]

Citing the Hurwitzer and a certain irish Australian troll, as well as a discredited UK journalist as sources for your views also tend to undermine the case somewhat!

Clever though to dress up prejudice as reportage. If some here are gullible enough to take these so-called reports as verbatim summaries of what was actually said (or heard) then good for them. I, for one, will keep listening to the actual programmes!

What makes you think Mal is ‘reporting’ the programme?

[visualnickmos]

Citing the Hurwitzer and a certain irish Australian troll, as well as a discredited UK journalist as sources for your views also tend to undermine the case somewhat!

Clever though to dress up prejudice as reportage. If some here are gullible enough to take these so-called reports as verbatim summaries of what was actually said (or heard) then good for them. I, for one, will keep listening to the actual programmes!

I don't think 'prejudice' is appropriate term, here. My impression is that Mal is expressing his opinions about the BaL, in his own inimitable, and what I for one, find a highly entertaining and 'shooting from the hip' style. (Apologies for the awkward pun!)

I can't imagine anyone on here takes them as verbatim reportage on the BaL. They are neat précis of the goings on....
Keep 'em, rolling, Mal.

[Mal]

Citing the Hurwitzer and a certain irish Australian troll, as well as a discredited UK journalist as sources for your views also tend to undermine the case somewhat!

These are not "sources for my views", my immediate listening experience is the source for my views. In keeping an open mind, and trying to avoid prejudice, I assume this is also the case for yourself and the three critics you malign. I don't find Hurwitz, Mr Troll, or Mr Discredited, any better or worse than the general run of critics. Sometimes I agree with them, sometimes I don't.

Clever though to dress up prejudice as reportage.

It would hardly be clever to do this when people can so easily check. But I'm not doing this. The reports are mostly for myself, to keep a record of what I think might, for me, be worth listening to in full. Some remarks are probably best left in my private notes as they tend to upset people! "HIPP fails again!" would be one example... but this isn't prejudice, it's a robust verbalisation of an honest emotional reaction which I should have perhaps moderated to, "To my ears, that bassoon doesn't have the beauty of Karajan's or the edgy momentum of Stravinsky's, ...", for public consumption

If some here are gullible enough to take these so-called reports as verbatim summaries of what was actually said (or heard) then good for them.

Is anyone that gullible?

I, for one, will keep listening to the actual programmes!

I would certainly encourage this! No way are my reports an adequate substitute. I'm tempted to just keep the reports to myself, but there seems to be, on balance, a (slightly! ) positive response to the reports so I may keep them coming. For the nay sayers, please stop calling me prejudiced. It would be more useful, to me, and everyone, to point out where I might be missing something. For instance, the cause of that infamous remark of mine was a 1900 French bassoon, which I have since read "is considered by some to have a more vocal and expressive quality. The conductor John Foulds lamented in 1934 the dominance of the Heckel-style bassoon, considering them too homogeneous in sound with the horn... Buffet instruments have greater facility in the upper registers, reaching E5 and F5 with far greater ease and less air resistance."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bassoon#Buffet_(French)_system

So maybe I'll give that particular performance another listen and see if I can hear some of these qualities.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

I don't think 'prejudice' is appropriate term, here. My impression is that Mal is expressing his opinions about the BaL ...

I can't imagine anyone on here takes them as verbatim reportage on the BaL. They are neat précis of the goings on....

It is immediately clear to me where the precis of the programme content stops and Mal's "take" on it begins - he has his own, distinctive style that contrasts sharply with the more measured comments of the reviewer (and even more sharply with AMcG's enthusiastic and time-wasting concurrences). For those of us who aren't so gullible as to wish to continue listening to this caricature of a once-unmissable programme, Mal's resumés provide a great service.

[silvestrione]

It is immediately clear to me where the precis of the programme content stops and Mal's "take" on it begins - he has his own, distinctive style that contrasts sharply with the more measured comments of the reviewer (and even more sharply with AMcG's enthusiastic and time-wasting concurrences). For those of us who aren't so gullible as to wish to continue listening to this caricature of a once-unmissable programme, Mal's resumés provide a great service.

'Gullible'? Hey, steady on. Last Saturday's was still very informative, and educative, for me anyway; at the very least, intriguing extracts to hear, with perceptive commentary (from Jonathan Cross).

[visualnickmos]

.....Mal's resumés provide a great service.

Absolutely. I look forward to them as a regular part of my weekly BaL 'experience'.
Unles of course, as sometimes happens the BaL piece is of no interest to me.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

'Gullible'? Hey, steady on. Last Saturday's was still very informative, and educative, for me anyway; at the very least, intriguing extracts to hear, with perceptive commentary (from Jonathan Cross).

A little harsh to recycle Sir Velo's own provocative vocabulary, I admit. Apologies - but not for my own description of the present manifestation of the programme as a "caricature of a once-unmissable programme". (Jonathan Cross is an insightful - and, as you say, perceptive - commentator on Stravinsky [and Birtwistle]. Anything he has to say will be worth hearing - so the interruptions from AMcG were all the more pernicious.)

[silvestrione]

A little harsh to recycle Sir Velo's own provocative vocabulary, I admit. Apologies - but not for my own description of the present manifestation of the programme as a "caricature of a once-unmissable programme". (Jonathan Cross is an insightful - and, as you say, perceptive - commentator on Stravinsky [and Birtwistle]. Anything he has to say will be worth hearing - so the interruptions from AMcG were all the more pernicious.)

Yes, I have and would also recommend his book on Birtwistle.

[jayne lee wilson]

'Gullible'? Hey, steady on. Last Saturday's was still very informative, and educative, for me anyway; at the very least, intriguing extracts to hear, with perceptive commentary (from Jonathan Cross).

Absolutely. The recent Bals on Sibelius' Legends and the Mozart Piano Quartets were enjoyable in themselves, and inspired or led me (before and after...) to some wonderful further listening, with some lovely discoveries.... (lossless/HD streaming changes everything in respect to BaL....it is the perfect adjunct....no need to get cross because your favourite recording wasn't in the shortlist, you can open yourself up to the ones you never heard...Paavo Jarvi's Lemminkainen and the Fauré Quartett's Mozart (BaL top choices) were revelatory for me...)...

I'm always puzzled by the brickbats aimed at AMcG.....he has an attractive Radio Voice, the dialogue is never a problem for me, it all depends on the knowledge, vocal delivery and communicative skills of the reviewer herself.

I would just add that the recent trend to work off a BaL-reviewer-curated shortlist of 10 or so recordings seems perfect reasonable within the programmatic limitations...of course we'd all love a 2-hour Interpretations on Record, but I think the critiques of the programme itself here are overstated and unfair.

(Mal couldn't produce his provocative summaries if he hadn't heard it (and enjoyed it, or enjoyed being annoyed by it ) in the first place...)

[silvestrione]

Absolutely. The recent Bals on Sibelius' Legends and the Mozart Piano Quartets were enjoyable in themselves, and inspired or led me (before and after...) to some wonderful further listening, with some lovely discoveries.... (lossless/HD streaming changes everything in respect to BaL....it is the perfect adjunct....no need to get cross because your favourite recording wasn't in the shortlist, you can open yourself up to the ones you never heard...Paavo Jarvi's Lemminkainen and the Fauré Quartett's Mozart (BaL top choices) were revelatory for me...)...

I'm always puzzled by the brickbats aimed at AMcG.....he has an attractive Radio Voice, the dialogue is never a problem for me, it all depends on the knowledge, vocal delivery and communicative skills of the reviewer herself.

I would just add that the recent trend to work off a BaL-reviewer-curated shortlist of 10 or so recordings seems perfect reasonable within the programmatic limitations...of course we'd all love a 2-hour Interpretations on Record, but I think the critiques of the programme itself here are overstated and unfair.

(Mal couldn't produce his provocative summaries if he hadn't heard it (and enjoyed it, or enjoyed being annoyed by it ) in the first place...)

It's slightly unfortunate, for those of us who have been listening to him since he took over from Richard Osborne (when was that?) , that A McG, who has all the qualities you mention, also has mannerisms and tricks of intonation that with eternal repetition drive you up the wall. However, as someone said above, he seems to be getting better at managing his supporting role less obtrusively.

[jayne lee wilson]

It's slightly unfortunate, for those of us who have been listening to him since he took over from Richard Osborne (when was that?) , that A McG, who has all the qualities you mention, also has mannerisms and tricks of intonation that with eternal repetition drive you up the wall. However, as someone said above, he seems to be getting better at managing his supporting role less obtrusively.

I don't recall RO ever being regular presenter of Record Review itself - was he?..... though in common with other Gramophonians he often did the BaL survey until Kenyon's 1990s populist clearout, and was sometimes on those end-of-year panel things later..........I guess RR was, latterly at least, only usually an adjunct to Gramophone for me, so I wasn't constantly exposed to tics and manners.... but I tend to be less easily annoyed by such things anyway....
(I'm more annoyed by the all-too-common invited-critic's way of showing off how professionally-critical they are, with colourful or clever-clever dismissals or pejoratives).

Perhaps there's a list of previous presenters somewhere......John Lade, Paul Vaughn......that would be interesting.