Choral Fall-out

[DracoM]

They were staple fare under Michael Nicholas at Norwich...

SS

Ah, but M. Nicholas fell out with the BBC over CE, did he not? So we did not hear Norwich for many years until last December 7th 'under different management'.

[Gabriel Jackson]

Ah, but M. Nicholas fell out with the BBC over CE, did he not? So we did not hear Norwich for many years until last December 7th 'under different management'.

What??!! Michael Nicholas left Norwich years ago

[Vile Consort]

In 1994 according to his Wikipedia article.

[Mr Stoat]

Ah, but M. Nicholas fell out with the BBC over CE, did he not? So we did not hear Norwich for many years until last December 7th 'under different management'.

I was unaware of this. Can the details be aired publicly? Or by PM?

[Gabriel Jackson]

I was unaware of this. Can the details be aired publicly? Or by PM?

You were unaware of it because it isn't true!

[orbis factor]

You were unaware of it because it isn't true!

Quite.

[Wolsey]

So we did not hear Norwich for many years until last December 7th 'under different management'.

There are, though, details online of Norwich's broadcasts in 2003, 2004 and 2006.

[orbis factor]

Ah, but M. Nicholas fell out with the BBC over CE, did he not? So we did not hear Norwich for many years until last December 7th 'under different management'.

Are you prepared to back up this claim of a fall-out?

[DracoM]

For a whole variety of confidential reasons I'm afraid I can't be any more explicit. Sincere apologies.

[orbis factor]

For a whole variety of confidential reasons I'm afraid I can't be any more explicit. Sincere apologies.

I don't think you should be directing your apology to me..

[DracoM]

Clarification off-board has been sought and given.

All I can say is that one assumes a reliable source to be just that. If this is not the case then I apologise unreservedly. I have no intention to give offence or mislead others on this message board.

[orbis factor]

Clarification off-board has been sought and given.

All I can say is that one assumes a reliable source to be just that. If this is not the case then I apologise unreservedly. I have no intention to give offence or mislead others on this message board.

I'm sure your apology will be gratefully received.
'Reliable' source or not, perhaps you'll think twice before posting hearsay in the future.

[french frank]

I'm sure your apology will be gratefully received.
'Reliable' source or not, perhaps you'll think twice before posting hearsay in the future.

A 'reliable source' is not the same as 'hearsay'.

Perhaps everyone here should 'think twice' about grinding their axes? Knowing that people are participants, performers, composers or closely involved with particular foundations helps others to estimate the value of their comments.

[underthecountertenor]

A 'reliable source' is not the same as 'hearsay'.

Sorry to take issue with you ff, but if DracoM does not have direct personal knowledge of that of which he speaks, then it is hearsay, however reliable his source might be. Of course, without knowing who his source is, it is impossible to form a judgment as to the reliability of that source (beyond taking DracoM's word for it). This may be the gravamen of your second para.

[orbis factor]

Sorry to take issue with you ff, but if DracoM does not have direct personal knowledge of that of which he speaks, then it is hearsay, however reliable his source might be. Of course, without knowing who his source is, it is impossible to form a judgment as to the reliability of that source (beyond taking DracoM's word for it). This may be the gravamen of your second para.

Absolutely. Even if it is a reliable source (which I doubt) then that sort of sensitive info about a distinguished musician ought not to end up on a public forum like this. No axes to grind - it's simply tittle-tattle.