If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
I signed on to say how this week has reminded me how much I hate the chat format only to find you have all beaten me to it. How can they do this to our much loved programme?
Put your bash at it on Facebook - the on;y way the BBC can be contacted unless you contact CD Review direct on email. They have GOT to be made aware of what a real mess they have made of this tricky work. I feel very sorry for Deathridge: he is trying to shut McG up by talking through him, but it ain't working.
Like much of R3, CD-R is gradually being ruined. Although I generally like AMcG, the 2 presenter BaL is an inferior format. But don't expect the powers that be to take any notice. Bah humbug!
I think John Deathridge will be a very good solo reviewer. He speaks clearly with few ers and ums, and the points he made were easy to follow by someone like me who has little knowledge of Bruckner’s music (this may mean rather boring to experts).
I wonder why Andrew does this. Not as if he had not enough to do in a programme lasting over three hours.
What a TOTAL muck this whole BAL is!! AMcG's interventions have virtually destroyed the continuity, made Deathridge improvise, makes the progress sound ha;ting, gushing, with erms and ers and hesitations all the way through,
Unforgivable MESS.
Bruckner 7th is complex and needs a very careful plotting through and is UTTERLY wrong for this kind of 'fireside chat' approach. Dreadful editorial decision. How could they have even thought this would work.
AMcG's contributions added precisely nothing - they largely consisted of repetition or stating the bleedin' obvious - indeed given his egregious error (so much for "live") they detracted. Deathridge obviously too polite to correct him. His job in these chats seems to be to smooth everything out to the point of utter blandness, where the need is for intellectual rigour.
I am glad I missed this BaL, by all accounts. I might just go on their Facebook site and have a moan! We need a sensible critique, a process of illumination, maybe a few bits of knowledge thrown in, ie anecdotes etc.
Don’t cry for me
I go where music was born
J S Bach 1685-1750
Many thanks. I fell asleep during the show after a lousy week at work and missed it. While I'm Andrew McGergor's biggest fan, I have to concur that BAL doesn't suit this chat format. The section just now with the conversation about new cds was much, much better.
I suspect that Andrew has little choice in the format and is simply following orders from 'on high'.
Add me to the list of complaints about the Gruesome Twosome
It did seem to me that BaL today forgot who its audience is. To pitch in with contrasting Celibidache and Norrington, the history of the Haas edition, cymbals and all was surely to start with the esoterica.. Surely this is the role of a coda. It was too complex for the neophyte and too dreary for the experienced listener, I would suggest.
Having said that, I liked the Deathridge way with the final choices, all three of them
Comment