BaL 19.05.12 Gesualdo

[verismissimo]

I wish they could have recorded and edited the discussion.

My guess is that it was both pre-recorded and edited, ferney.

[Ariosto]

Professor Knighton's BALs are always most informative. We were told at one stage she even contemplated becoming a nun so as to gain access to rare Spanish manuscripts kept in monasteries and otherwise inaccessible to female academics...

Had I known that I would have sent Prof Knighton my old habit, so she could get on with it. Mind you, it's a pretty dirty old habit.

I switched off the CD review this morning as shortly after 9am my FM tuner started making strange noises, and I wasn't sure if it was the equipment or the programme.

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

damn the playllist i was far more taken by the Hilliard than the recommended artists and by the instrumental arrangements and there are no details ...any info appreciated greatly


an eye opener as far as music despite the irritation of Prof K's pausing chat and not always finding that i agreed with her call on the music [and the Consort of Musicke were stunning I thought] a very valuable BAL

[verismissimo]

... and the Consort of Musicke were stunning I thought

Oh yes. That's what I've investing in.

[ardcarp]

Yes; what was she talking about vis-a-vis the Consort of Musike? She kept referring to 'clipped vowels'. How do you clip a vowel? And AMcG kept agreeing. They've got my money...well actually they had it some time ago! Whilst I'm glad Gesualdo had an outing, and his life and work was explained (as if to 1st year undergraduates), I didn't find this the best of BALs

[Ariosto]

Yes; what was she talking about vis-a-vis the Consort of Musike? She kept referring to 'clipped vowels'. How do you clip a vowel? And AMcG kept agreeing. They've got my money...well actually they had it some time ago! Whilst I'm glad Gesualdo had an outing, and his life and work was explained (as if to 1st year undergraduates), I didn't find this the best of BALs

Yes, and although I did not hear this BaL I do find I have a problem with Andrew. Whilst I realise he is a very nice guy, and extremely knowledeable, he does tend to agree with his guests a bit too much. One day I would like him to politely say "oh no, I don't agree at all, and I think ..."

There is a general tendency on the BBC, especially in the last few years, to put a positive spin on everything. Oh, OK, I know that some BaL presenters when on their own do lay into people on occasion, but this is mainly confined to occasional BaLs. I did like it the other day when the BaL presenter laid into Matthew Trussler over his appalling Goldmark concerto - especially as I had the misfortune to hear him attempt it live at the Barbican some months ago, when supporting a youth orchestra. In fact the young lady of about seventeen leading the orchestra had a bigger and better sound than he did in her orchestral solos in other works!!

Just my innocent observations - you can all disagree. (And probably will).

[BBMmk2]

What a missed oppurtunity

[rank_and_file]

I remember posting a comment a month or so ago saying that I did not really like these sort of chat “Building a Library” formats.

The Gesualdo one really is a contradiction in terms, and earlier posters have rightly picked up on this sort of format as not being very satisfying. The facts are that what McGregor calls a “special” Building a Library is nothing of the sort. Certainly, there is room in CD Review for, say, a 30 minute slot on “How Gesualdo is interpreted on disc” where the main views Knighton had could have been made.

I am not sure where the demand for this sort of BaL format is coming from - the producer, McGregor?

There must be hundreds of major works that either do not have a Building a Library recommendation, or one which is now so out of date or no longer available, that a revisit would be very welcome.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

There must be hundreds of major works that either do not have a Building a Library recommendation, or one which is now so out of date or no longer available, that a revisit would be very welcome.

Well, yes; but are you suggesting that Gesualdo doesn't deserve a place in a Library of recorded Music? Or less of a place?

If not, and you believe as I do that this extraordinary Music should be a part of everybody's listening experience, then how do we treat this composer? Alas, there are not, as yet, sufficient numbers of recordings of any "one" work (say, the Third Book of Madrigals) to fill an entire BaL. It's not like the "round-table chat" of Mahler releases that was a BaL a couple of years ago; with this composer there has to be an "overview" of what's available.

Probably done better as a solo "introduction", I agree. But this BaL made me aware of some great performances (yes, including many of the ones she "dismissed") that I want to hear in full and has inspired me to hunt out the CDs I've neglected to listen with refreshed enthusiasm. Apart from the demands on my Bank balance (about as balanced as the Tower of Pisa at the moment!) I don't think I could have asked more from the programme.

[Panjandrum]

Was I alone in detecting the irony between AMG (not ad majorem dei gloriam BTW) blithering on about Gesualdo the "murderer" at every opportunity and TK berating anyone who fixates on this aspect of the life to the detriment of the music? AMG, himself, did not appear to note the contradiction. Notwithstanding, I find the notion she was keen to propound that Don Carlo was a reluctant assassin, a little hard to swallow.

[ardcarp]

Was I alone in detecting the irony

Probably! I'm delighted you managed to find a cigarette paper's difference in their views.

[Nick Armstrong]

Probably! I'm delighted you managed to find a cigarette paper's difference in their views.

Exactly - that was the problem, wasn't it - not much of a discussion, when both are tumbling over each other to say how wonderful it all is. What's the point? Yes, the 'murderer' thing kept coming back thanks to AMcG, and the lady's attempts to minimise it by reference to an 'honour code' were unconvincing.

Annoying that this meandering chat was allowed over an hour, whereas some recent BAL's in the proper sense were bottled up into 45 minutes when they really needed that extra 15 minutes.

I wonder if these unstructured chats happen when there's a gap in the schedule and they haven't been able to find anyone to do a proper BAL... Must be much quicker to prepare for.

Unsatisfying.

[Panjandrum]

Probably! I'm delighted you managed to find a cigarette paper's difference in their views.

It probably was the only place they diverged. I'm with the lady on this as I was shouting "Shut TFU" every time McGregor wittered on about it.

Nevertheless, unlike some here I'm not really sure that it would be particularly valuable for AMG and his guests to disagree profoundly on a BAL. Otherwise, why have a so-called "expert" on the programme if McGregor undercuts everything they say? Moreover, it would make it extremely difficult to have a recommended recording if neither could agree! Furthermore, it would either call into question their expertise or his, so doubt whether that kind of approach is likely to happen. The only occasion I could envisage a difference of opinion would be if they extended the format to a round table discussion involving multiple critics.

[Nick Armstrong]

Nevertheless, unlike some here I'm not really sure that it would be particularly valuable for AMG and his guests to disagree profoundly on a BAL. Otherwise, why have a so-called "expert" on the programme if McGregor undercuts everything they say? Moreover, it would make it extremely difficult to have a recommended recording if neither could agree! Furthermore, it would either call into question their expertise or his, so doubt whether that kind of approach is likely to happen. The only occasion I could envisage a difference of opinion would be if they extended the format to a round table discussion involving multiple critics.

That's true too, Pans... It's difficult to see how that 'discussion' format can work either way.

[Don Petter]

Nevertheless, unlike some here I'm not really sure that it would be particularly valuable for AMG and his guests to disagree profoundly on a BAL. Otherwise, why have a so-called "expert" on the programme if McGregor undercuts everything they say? Moreover, it would make it extremely difficult to have a recommended recording if neither could agree! Furthermore, it would either call into question their expertise or his, so doubt whether that kind of approach is likely to happen. The only occasion I could envisage a difference of opinion would be if they extended the format to a round table discussion involving multiple critics.

Exactly. The host isn't going to be of any value either way, so why have him in BaL at all?