BaL 23.11.19 - Haydn: Symphony no. 102

[Alison]

Good point Nethersage, it struck me too that there had more preparation than normal, easier when you’re both on the staff perhaps. Some very astute comments on the composer and work pointing to the multifaceted splendour of this symphony.

[underthecountertenor]

On the other hand the live show has made possible a touching tribute to Sir Stephen.

The show itself has always been live, so that would have been possible anyway. It’s the live, faux-conversational, BaL element which is the problem for many, including me.

[Pulcinella]

On the other hand the live show has made possible a touching tribute to Sir Stephen.

Not mutually exclusive: live show with a recorded BaL element?

[Cockney Sparrow]

Good point Nethersage, it struck me too that there had more preparation than normal, easier when you’re both on the staff perhaps. ....

Of course its necessary for BAL reviewers to come from outside the BBC and its "in" pool of contributors. But all of them should be well researched, and authoritative (even if the brief is entry level). I don't think they achieve that with enough of the BALs we are getting these days. And yes, pre-recording would improve the quality - one can only hope! Unlock the archive of BALS on "Sounds" - going back as far as possible, I say.

(I also much prefer one handed BALs, but it seems we are stuck with the "Face of R3" presenter orientation of all BBC Radio and Mc Gregor's intervention in everything..... I don't disapprove of him - its just too much, and I'm sure he doesn't have much choice in the decision...)

[Bryn]

Looks like all the low-priced copies at amazon.co.uk have gone. Probably best to head for the Hyperion site.

[underthecountertenor]

I’m with rauschwerk and Pulcinella on this. Far too much time spent on rather trite (and well-trodden) anecdotal stuff about Haydn being the darling of London, the falling chandelier incident etc. Fine (I suppose) for Sarah Walker’s Sunday morning programme. But it left precious little time for a thorough survey of the available recordings, hence the drastic shortlist from the start, with a pointless namecheck of a few other recordings at the end.
And on at least one occasion SW referred to other reviews, giving me the distinct impression that this was not entirely her own work.

[Bryn]

I’m with rauschwerk and Pulcinella on this. Far too much time spent on rather trite (and well-trodden) anecdotal stuff about Haydn being the darling of London, the falling chandelier incident etc. Fine (I suppose) for Sarah Walker’s Sunday morning programme. But it left precious little time for a thorough survey of the available recordings, hence the drastic shortlist from the start, with a pointless namecheck of a few other recordings at the end.
And on at least one occasion SW referred to other reviews, giving me the distinct impression that this was not entirely her own work.

Indeed, how remiss of her to do her homework regarding other opinions.

[underthecountertenor]

Indeed, how remiss of her to do her homework regarding other opinions.

How about a critic giving his or own opinion based on what he or she heard?

[Bryn]

How about a critic giving his or own opinion based on what he or she heard?

Which is just what we got.

[underthecountertenor]

Which is just what we got.

I’m not convinced that we did.

[DracoM]

Felt like R3Speak to me.

[Goon525]

To be fair, Goodman would not have been a likely choice based on received opinion.

[Alison]

To be fair, Goodman would not have been a likely choice based on received opinion.

[Bryn]

To be fair, Goodman would not have been a likely choice based on received opinion.

Indeed. Then there is the matter of the specific references to various aspects of performance, recordings acoustic, etc. Where did they come from if not the ears and brain of the reviewer in question?

[underthecountertenor]

Indeed. Then there is the matter of the specific references to various aspects of performance, recordings acoustic, etc. Where did they come from if not the ears and brain of the reviewer in question?

They were for the most part so bland that they could have come from anywhere.
Compare Jeremy Summerly last week. Now, I don’t completely buy his line that he listens to all the recordings ‘blind’ and has no clue who the performers are. But he gave a far more convincing impression of someone who had listened and thought for himself, and reached his own conclusions based on nothing but the recordings and a close examination of the score.
I didn’t get that this morning, at all.
Caroline Gill was far more convincing, in substance, later in the morning. For me, anyway.