Academy of St Martin in the Fields Chamber Ensemble- Not Sure About This...

[Larry Kart]

I thought they were just studio cats. 

 

 

 

 

.

What studios? There is/was some recording activity for orchestral players in London, but not like (I believe) LA or NYC in their heyday. For that you need film or TV or pop music industries. Or advertising jingles. When the jingle industry flourished in Chicago in the '60s and '70s for some reason, lots of jazz players made good/great livings in that line of work because their talents and training gave them the ability to make the seat of the pants adjustments that such gigs often required.

BTW, one of the reasons such situations arose so often in the jingle trade is that the guys from the ad agency who were in charge typically knew little or nothing about music and could only say something along the lines of "That's not what I'm thinking of/not what I had in mind" without being able to specify musically what they did want -- this while the guy who wrote the music (e.g., Marty Rubenstein or Dick Marx) tore his hair out. Then someone on the date like Art Hoyle or George Bean or Johnny Frigo or Kenny Soderblom would say, "How about this?" and play something that fit the ad guy's inchoate notion of what he wanted, and the problem would be solved. In a "time is money" setting, Hoyle, Bean, Frigo, Soderblom et al. earned every buck they made.

[7/4]

I thought they were just studio cats. 

 

 

 

 

.

What studios? There is/was some recording activity for orchestral players in London, but not like (I believe) LA or NYC in their heyday. For that you need film or TV or pop music industries. Or advertising jingles. When the jingle industry flourished in Chicago in the '60s and '70s for some reason, lots of jazz players made good/great livings in that line of work because their talents and training gave them the ability to make the seat of the pants adjustments that such gigs often required.

BTW, one of the reasons such situations arose so often in the jingle trade is that the guys from the ad agency who were in charge typically knew little or nothing about music and could only say something along the lines of "That's not what I'm thinking of/not what I had in mind" without being able to specify musically what they did want -- this while the guy who wrote the music (e.g., Marty Rubenstein or Dick Marx) tore his hair out. Then someone on the date like Art Hoyle or George Bean or Johnny Frigo or Kenny Soderblom would say, "How about this?" and play something that fit the ad guy's inchoate notion of what he wanted, and the problem would be solved. In a "time is money" setting, Hoyle, Bean, Frigo, Soderblom et al. earned every buck they made.

I didn't think they ever played in public, only on recordings.

[Larry Kart]

I thought they were just studio cats. 

 

 

 

 

.

What studios? There is/was some recording activity for orchestral players in London, but not like (I believe) LA or NYC in their heyday. For that you need film or TV or pop music industries. Or advertising jingles. When the jingle industry flourished in Chicago in the '60s and '70s for some reason, lots of jazz players made good/great livings in that line of work because their talents and training gave them the ability to make the seat of the pants adjustments that such gigs often required.

BTW, one of the reasons such situations arose so often in the jingle trade is that the guys from the ad agency who were in charge typically knew little or nothing about music and could only say something along the lines of "That's not what I'm thinking of/not what I had in mind" without being able to specify musically what they did want -- this while the guy who wrote the music (e.g., Marty Rubenstein or Dick Marx) tore his hair out. Then someone on the date like Art Hoyle or George Bean or Johnny Frigo or Kenny Soderblom would say, "How about this?" and play something that fit the ad guy's inchoate notion of what he wanted, and the problem would be solved. In a "time is money" setting, Hoyle, Bean, Frigo, Soderblom et al. earned every buck they made.

I didn't think they ever played in public, only on recordings.

In one interview Marriner says that they began by giving concerts and then began to make recordings, in another that they didn't play "live" for the first two years. But they certainly did give concerts at some point, as well as make numerous recordings.

 

Edited October 12, 2015 by Larry Kart

[Larry Kart]

Yeah, I did the homework about the band when they started soliciting participation for the pre- and post-concert events. Happy to sense that the "blandness" that I felt was not necessarily entirely my fault. Sounds like this might have been one of those gigs where you need the money the band brings with it, so that's the band you hire.

I will say this, on a positive note - the bassoonist (Lawrence O'Donnell) and the clarinetist (Timothy Orpen) were both young-ish and played with what seemed to be a lot of attempted verve. Not idea what that scene is like, maybe this is the gig for the rest of your life, but if I saw them in a different band and/or a different program, I would gladly give it a shot. The other folks, maybe not so much.

Larry, who would you call on for the Schubert? Like I said, I heard interesting music not being particularly interesting. Different interpretations seriously being sought.

Scott, if you're interested, here's a possible chance to play contrast and compare for maybe not a whole lot of money. You can get many great used classical CDs for almost literally next to nothing on Amazon.

I see now that the Octet recording I have is indeed this one by clarinetist Michael Collins and friends:

http://www.amazon.com/Schubert-Octet-Shepherd-Rock-Franz/dp/B000VXW4T6/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1444620974&sr=1-1&keywords=schubert+octet+collins

Edited October 12, 2015 by Larry Kart

[Larry Kart]

Second thoughts about Schubert Octet recordings. Today, as fate would have it, I saw at a library sale a copy of the much praised one with Gidon Kremer and friends, which is quite different from the Michael Collins-led one that I already had. The Collins I would characterize as serenade-like, with a dance-like "schwung" and relatively direct (as in, not extravagantly shaded in terms of dynamics and picked-out textural details), and with the clarinet a bit prominent at times, Collins being a clarinetist. The Kremer sounds "conducted," is full of shadings of dynamics and picked-out textural details, but at this point I don't find them extravagant or distortions but revelations (in the ordinary sense of that word) of what's in the score. OTOH, there are times  -- say the string tremolos in the Andante molto portion of the last movement -- where the playing is so pianissimo that one wonders whether those figures could be heard in live performance. BTW, I can't be sure, but the Kremer ensemble's recording was made "on tour," which suggests that it might have been  recordedin concert. If so, the sonic detail achieved by the players and captured by the mikes is exceptional. One caveat -- the Allegro of the final movement is taken more slowly than usual. I can live with it; others might not be able to.

[JSngry]

Is this it, Larry? http://www.amazon.com/Schubert-Geringas-Thunemann-Vlatkovic-Zimmerman/dp/B003V4VYEI/ref=tmm_msc_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1444969813&sr=8-1

[Peter Friedman]

While reading this thread I kept thinking of the diversity of opinions, especially among serious classical music listeners. And some of those opinions are very very strong ones. Some are highly enthusiastic about a conductor, or soloist, or style of performance, while others hold  highly negative views.

I often read the opinions of the posters on the Talk Classical site and also the opinions of  classical recordings on Amazon. Many who would seem to be longtime classical music fans get into serious debates.

It strikes me as even more argumentative than the discussions on jazz. It is almost unheard of to read someone expressing negative opinions about Zoot Sims or Clifford Brown, but whether it is Heifetz, Rubinstein or pretty much any other classical music "star", both very positive and very negative views are expressed.

So I expect that there are "serious" classical music listeners who will disagree with Jim's opinions about the performance he attended. 

[Larry Kart]

Is this it, Larry? http://www.amazon.com/Schubert-Geringas-Thunemann-Vlatkovic-Zimmerman/dp/B003V4VYEI/ref=tmm_msc_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1444969813&sr=8-1

Yes

[papsrus]

While reading this thread I kept thinking of the diversity of opinions, especially among serious classical music listeners. And some of those opinions are very very strong ones. Some are highly enthusiastic about a conductor, or soloist, or style of performance, while others hold  highly negative views.

I often read the opinions of the posters on the Talk Classical site and also the opinions of  classical recordings on Amazon. Many who would seem to be longtime classical music fans get into serious debates.

It strikes me as even more argumentative than the discussions on jazz. It is almost unheard of to read someone expressing negative opinions about Zoot Sims or Clifford Brown, but whether it is Heifetz, Rubinstein or pretty much any other classical music "star", both very positive and very negative views are expressed.

So I expect that there are "serious" classical music listeners who will disagree with Jim's opinions about the performance he attended. 

Agreed. I get the sense one proves his or her classical bonafides these days by leveling harsh judgments in the most severe terms whenever the opportunity presents itself. And I find myself thinking, what right does a listener have to attack a trained professional in such a way?

Being the relative classical neophyte I am, I tend to try to take the music on its own terms. Preferences emerge over time, and criticism is always welcome, but the level of flat out vitriol directed at clearly talented and dedicated musicians tends to be absurd at times -- especially among certain cognizenti over at amazon. I like to peruse the negative reviews first, just to get a sense of the possible shortcomings in a recording. Things often devolve rapidly.

Not sure if criticism of classical music has always been this way, or if this is just an outgrowth of the internet, where people feel free to level the harshest sort of criticism cloaked in relative anonymity. 

 

 

[A Lark Ascending]

So I set out on my coach tour of the Lake District. Sat there admiring the view, checking what I saw with my books and an OS map. Looked forward to popping into some museums, maybe catch a concert, certainly enjoy some interesting local cooking.

And then I noticed there were little squabbles going on amongst some of the other passengers. So I earwigged to find up what was putting them out of sorts. I could hear snatches of '...but the bus doesn't hold the corners like last year...' and  '..well, I disagree, this bus driver is infinitely superior to the one we had in 2012...' And in time it became clear that there was a general preference for the coaches taken in 1967, 1978 and 1993 over more recent ones. 

I kept my eye on the scenery. The bus and the coach driver can certainly make or break a holiday - if they are poor you just can't focus on the things you've come so see. But I'd say the mark of an excellent bus and a great coach driver is when you don't even know they are there, thereby ensuring that all your attention is on the Lake District. 

[HutchFan]

So I set out on my coach tour of the Lake District. Sat there admiring the view, checking what I saw with my books and an OS map. Looked forward to popping into some museums, maybe catch a concert, certainly enjoy some interesting local cooking.

And then I noticed there were little squabbles going on amongst some of the other passengers. So I earwigged to find up what was putting them out of sorts. I could hear snatches of '...but the bus doesn't hold the corners like last year...' and  '..well, I disagree, this bus driver is infinitely superior to the one we had in 2012...' And in time it became clear that there was a general preference for the coaches taken in 1967, 1978 and 1993 over more recent ones. 

I kept my eye on the scenery. The bus and the coach driver can certainly make or break a holiday - if they are poor you just can't focus on the things you've come so see. But I'd say the mark of an excellent bus and a great coach driver is when you don't even know they are there, thereby ensuring that all your attention is on the Lake District. 

Bev, I agree with your "Parable of the Bus Driver"... to a point.  

Booster-ism for (or criticism of) any given performer or conductor -- especially when it's taken to extremes -- can get ridiculous.

But I would also say that I've heard many, many recordings of classical works that struck me as lifeless and flat. Then, subsequently, I've heard the same work performed by a different ensemble/performer and found myself thunderstruck.

I would suggest that classical music performance is analogous to drama, the process of staging a play. If you see "Hamlet" performed by a high school drama club, you have certain expectations -- especially compared to what you might see from, say, the Royal Shakespeare Company.

But you also might find profound differences in interpretation between two different RSC productions of the same play. Even though the exact same words are spoken, there are different actors, different directors, different lighting, different staging, and on and on. So the overall effect can be vastly different.

Or not. It just depends.

 

Edited October 19, 2015 by HutchFan

[A Lark Ascending]

While reading this thread I kept thinking of the diversity of opinions, especially among serious classical music listeners. And some of those opinions are very very strong ones. Some are highly enthusiastic about a conductor, or soloist, or style of performance, while others hold  highly negative views.

I often read the opinions of the posters on the Talk Classical site and also the opinions of  classical recordings on Amazon. Many who would seem to be longtime classical music fans get into serious debates.

It strikes me as even more argumentative than the discussions on jazz. It is almost unheard of to read someone expressing negative opinions about Zoot Sims or Clifford Brown, but whether it is Heifetz, Rubinstein or pretty much any other classical music "star", both very positive and very negative views are expressed.

So I expect that there are "serious" classical music listeners who will disagree with Jim's opinions about the performance he attended. 

Agreed. I get the sense one proves his or her classical bonafides these days by leveling harsh judgments in the most severe terms whenever the opportunity presents itself. And I find myself thinking, what right does a listener have to attack a trained professional in such a way?

Being the relative classical neophyte I am, I tend to try to take the music on its own terms. Preferences emerge over time, and criticism is always welcome, but the level of flat out vitriol directed at clearly talented and dedicated musicians tends to be absurd at times -- especially among certain cognizenti over at amazon. I like to peruse the negative reviews first, just to get a sense of the possible shortcomings in a recording. Things often devolve rapidly.

Not sure if criticism of classical music has always been this way, or if this is just an outgrowth of the internet, where people feel free to level the harshest sort of criticism cloaked in relative anonymity. 

 

 

It's rooted in class. One of the ways the 'better sort of person' kept his or her distinction from the riff-raff was by having superior taste. Once the common herd started to think they 'appreciated' classical music it became imperative to find ways to reassert one's finer discrimination. So taking a conductor or ensemble or composer who is well known and widely appreciated and dismissing them in favour of a lesser known conductor or ensemble or composer is a way of redrawing boundaries with yourself very much within the exclusive, gated community of those who properly 'appreciate'.

There are differences in performance, interpretation etc quite obviously. But I'd say these get hugely exaggerated by those playing connoisseur games. People who have studied classical music, listened for years or who are musicians themselves will probably have a sense of interpretative difference and will be more sensitive to these things. But I'm always amazed by how many people start listening to classical music and immediately start passing comment on the quality of the conductor or ensemble. Sadly, they usually give themselves away by parroting received opinion. It's usually the standard approved and validated dead maestros who they go into raptures about. (*)

And that's before we begin to bring the record companies into the equation who have a vested interest in convincing us that we need ten interpretations of Beethoven 5 or Mahler 2.  

Few things make me sadder than seeing a multi-box set with the name of the 'maestro' in bigger letters than the composer. 

 (*) This is often not their fault - it's presented as what you do with 'classical' music...go into raptures about Glenn Gould or Furtwangler or whoever. For goodness sake, spend many years enjoying and getting to know the music. And then, if it interests you, worry about the interpretations. 

Edited October 19, 2015 by A Lark Ascending

[JSngry]

Well, let's see...

Fact = neither my wife or myself liked the gig. No disagreement allowed there, what, you're going to try to tell us that we did? I don't think so. No, we both left out of there pretty pissed off, actually, and although you might expect that out of me, you'd never expect it out of her, she's one of these people who doesn't analyze music at all, she just knows when it sounds good and/or feels good to her. This was not a complicated program, and she did NOT feel it at all, and if you want to try to convince her that she did, go ahead, and may god have mercy on your soul.

Why we didn't like it has already been explained. That's an opinion, and, ok, others sometimes/often will like what we don't. I'd hardly expect it to be otherwise. Hell, we don't always like the same thing ourselves, last year, "Perrot Lunaire " had me pumped, it had her ready to leave, like 5 minutes into it. Don't ask me what she felt by the time it was over...

So, opinions, hell yeah. Mine is that if it doesn't connect, it doesn't matter how perfectly is played. And for those for whom this type of playing connects, enjoy the hell out if, pelase do, and I'll let you know next time the band comes to down, I will get you some tickets, you can have ours for that matter!

Bev, your bus analogy only holds up so far as the bus has windows from out of which you see the areas through which you're navigating in a vivid and lifelike manner. Out of the windows of this bus, all we could see was a picture of the bus going through wherever it was going through. It went through a lot of places, but they all looked the same,  you'd not really know what they were. All you could really see was the damn bus rolling right along. Smooth ride, sure, but the hell if I know where it was going. My map said it was going one place, my ears just said "bus".

My preference is for the bus to drop you off to explore things yourself. I don't give a damn about the bus itself, I care about what's there after the bus gets there.

Anyway, I've gotten in four copies of the Schubert based on recs here (there will be five when the Kremer arrives), because I know there has to be more music there than what they played. Or if you prefer, there has to be more music there that I'll respond to when played differently than they played it. So, thanks to all for their recs, and I have to assume that they were made in part because there's other bands that play the piece differently than these guys did.

(and yeah, I'm gonna say "band(s)" going forth, screw it. a band is a band is a band is a noun is a band, and "band" is a word which I can easily type w/o error.)

[papsrus]

JSngry -- I wasn't thinking of your comments at all on the concert that you and your wife attended, which were sincere and well appreciated. My comments, and I assume Bev's, were more directed at Peter's observations about the sometimes extreme level of criticism elsewhere (amazon, etc.) of this or that recording / performance. 

 

 

[JSngry]

Also, with the exception of the DSO, pretty much evry "classical" concert we go to is a performer we're seeing for the first time, and even when the repertoire is familiar (which is only sometimes), it's usually my (and pretty much always her) first time to hear it live. So, we go in there, hoping to enjoy it, wanting to enjoy it. This one was no different, in fact, expectations were that we were going to be knocked out by it. Reputation, high. Hype, high. Crowd excitement, high.

It just didn't happen.

I have no stakes in the "class" business or bonafide-proving business. I got nothing to prove to nobody about that. I'm just a guy who's begun enjoying hearing "classical" music more than I have in the past, and who has good opportunities to catch some of it played live. And although relatively small sample size, this is the first, and so far only, time that my wife and I have both left as bored, as irritatingly and angrily bored, as this.

I thought I'd ask around here to see if it was just us (and even if it was, that would just have to be ok, because, you know, no rewind buttons for real time), and it turns out,no, maybe not just us. So, ok. But all this other baggage, class warfare, snootytooty elitism, jaded bonafiders, whatever, wherever that lives, it ain't here. All we want is to leave the gig feeling like it was better to have been there than to have spent the night at home. That's it, really, that's all the is to it, we are so damn easy about this.

[A Lark Ascending]

Bev, your bus analogy only holds up so far as the bus has windows from out of which you see the areas through which you're navigating in a vivid and lifelike manner. Out of the windows of this bus, all we could see was a picture of the bus going through wherever it was going through. It went through a lot of places, but they all looked the same,  you'd not really know what they were. All you could really see was the damn bus rolling right along. Smooth ride, sure, but the hell if I know where it was going. My map said it was going one place, my ears just said "bus".

My preference is for the bus to drop you off to explore things yourself. I don't give a damn about the bus itself, I care about what's there after the bus gets there.

Mine too. But if the trip you are on is 'Beethoven's 5th' then there's a route the bus has to take, give or take a few minor diversions based on what version of the score is being used, what instrumentation etc...but the journey is more or less set. 

Anyway, I've gotten in four copies of the Schubert based on recs here (there will be five when the Kremer arrives), because I know there has to be more music there than what they played. Or if you prefer, there has to be more music there that I'll respond to when played differently than they played it. So, thanks to all for their recs, and I have to assume that they were made in part because there's other bands that play the piece differently than these guys did.

Yes, I'm sure we've all been there - that performance or that recording didn't connect but I'm sure there's more to the music.

I hate to think how many copies of the Sibelius symphonies I have. My first love back in the early 70s in cheapo Anthony Collins mono re-issues. When I could afford to buy more records I started to replace them with more recent recordings. But, something was missing...my idea of Sibelius had been set by Collins and everything else seemed faintly wrong. Nothing more so than the Third where everyone played the middle movement too slow.

Except...

I now know that it was Collins playing the middle movement too fast! And when I bought a CD of the Collins recordings they didn't sound at all like I remembered them...in fact I get the impression his interpretations were highly idiosyncratic.

Classical music is often presented as this ocean of music in which there are shinning nuggets performed by great maestros whose genius just leaps out at you over the also rans. And having been told we're going to hear genius, we hear genius and the myth rolls on. 

As always, I think context is all. Maybe the ASMF were too polished when you heard them....or, maybe the context you were listening from just did not connect with what they were doing. 

I have never got Verdi. It just sounds like everything I find off-putting in opera. Does that mean there is something wrong with Verdi? Or something wrong with me? Given the huge pleasure Verdi has given over the years to millions it can't be the former yet my dislike is quite genuine. So I'd put it down to a failure of two different worlds to connect (so far...I have track record of Damascan conversions!). I'm never going to try and convince the world that Verdi is rubbish.   

Edited October 19, 2015 by A Lark Ascending

[JSngry]

Bev, your bus analogy only holds up so far as the bus has windows from out of which you see the areas through which you're navigating in a vivid and lifelike manner. Out of the windows of this bus, all we could see was a picture of the bus going through wherever it was going through. It went through a lot of places, but they all looked the same,  you'd not really know what they were. All you could really see was the damn bus rolling right along. Smooth ride, sure, but the hell if I know where it was going. My map said it was going one place, my ears just said "bus".

My preference is for the bus to drop you off to explore things yourself. I don't give a damn about the bus itself, I care about what's there after the bus gets there.

Mine too. But if the trip you are on is 'Beethoven's 5th' then there's a route the bus has to take, give or take a few minor diversions based on what version of the score is being used, what instrumentation etc...but the journey is more or less set. 

Anyway, I've gotten in four copies of the Schubert based on recs here (there will be five when the Kremer arrives), because I know there has to be more music there than what they played. Or if you prefer, there has to be more music there that I'll respond to when played differently than they played it. So, thanks to all for their recs, and I have to assume that they were made in part because there's other bands that play the piece differently than these guys did.

Yes, I'm sure we've all been there - that performance or that recording didn't connect but I'm sure there's more to the music.

I hate to think how many copies of the Sibelius symphonies I have. My first love back in the early 70s in cheapo Anthony Collins mono re-issues. When I could afford to buy more records I started to replace them with more recent recordings. But, something was missing...my idea of Sibelius had been set by Collins and everything else seemed faintly wrong. Nothing more so than the Third where everyone played the middle movement too slow.

Except...

I now know that it was Collins playing the middle movement too fast! And when I bought a CD of the Collins recordings they didn't sound at all like I remembered them...in fact I get the impression his interpretations were highly idiosyncratic.

Classical music is often presented as this ocean of music in which there are shinning nuggets performed by great maestros whose genius just leaps out at you over the also rans. And having been told we're going to hear genius, we hear genius and the myth rolls on. 

As always, I think context is all. Maybe the ASMF were too polished when you heard them....or, maybe the context you were listening from just did not connect with what they were doing. 

I have never got Verdi. It just sounds like everything I find off-putting in opera. Does that mean there is something wrong with Verdi? Or something wrong with me? Given the huge pleasure Verdi has given over the years to millions it can't be the former yet my dislike is quite genuine. So I'd put it down to a failure of two different worlds to connect (so far...I have track record of Damascan conversions!). I'm never going to try and convince the world that Verdi is rubbish.   

Ah, but what if you're on the bus for Beethoven's 5th, and all they really give you is the experience of a bus ride to Beethoven's 5th? They don't actually get there, they just show you what it would be like if they DID take you there!

The context for the ASMF gig was a familiar one, really, the Dallas Chamber Music Society has all of its shows in the same venue. They just did not resonate with me except in a negative way. I can't really call them "too polished", because...what does that mean, really? That you played too well? I don't know that there is such a thing in and of itself. Not really a question of "perfection" either, because A) there is no such thing in music, and B) there IS such a thing in music, but it's what happens, not what exists.

I keep going back to justification...I don't think that "I'm a great player and this is great music" justifies anything, really. no, that's just a set of static preexisting conditions that exist before anything happens, nothing there that guarantees any sort of an outcome, really. Your outcome needs to be that you did play great music, and that you played it like a great play", and what "like" a great player menas...that's where it gets tricky, that's where the buying and selling of image and conferred importance/greatness/whatever start happening.

All I can say about that is that all I ask is that you as a performer engage me in what you are doing at that moment. Give me a reason to leave out of there feeling taht when you played Sonata For Whatever, that we were both IN Sonata For Whatever, not that you were playing it and I was in a seat watching you play it, you know, I really can do that at home.

ASMF, really, all both my wife and myself felt (and it is so rare, I mean, SO reare, that we have the identical reaction, exactly, to anything) is that they could have been playing ANYTHING, Fugue For Greasy Bowels, whatever, and it would have just passed through the air all ladi-dadi, yes, perfectly played, always, but if Fugue For Greasy Bowels and Sonata For Whatever register the exact impression, then...what's the point of playing ANY of it, really, except to be there taking up the space so the money can change hands, all the money at stake, and all the hands there to change it.

So, ok, it's obvious that, other than my money, I am not a good audience for ASMF. Looks like what they do is not what I want to hear. Did not know that going in, know it now. But I will be a good audience for the pieces they played (except Mozart, all rational thinking aside, the only bucket list of mine that includes "finally falling in love with Mozart" is in the bucket that's had the bottom fall out of it, which is not to say that, someday, who knows?, just...you know...I mean, I just bought the Brubeck Columbia Studio box set, and not even three months ago, I'd have drank poison at the notion), so...better to have heard and not enjoyed than never to have heard at all, perhaps.

 I get the sense one proves his or her classical bonafides these days by leveling harsh judgments in the most severe terms whenever the opportunity presents itself. And I find myself thinking, what right does a listener have to attack a trained professional in such a way?

It's one thing to express dislike, informed or otherwise. It's quite another thing to dislike results without respect for the basic ability.

Nobody or no thing is above honest criticism or gut-level dislike. But part of that honesty is respecting the ability to make the damn thing happen in the first place!

[Peter Friedman]

Jim, you have expressed your opinion on that concert quite clearly and indicated the reason.

I respect that as I do many, though by no means all of your opinions. Your words regarding Mozart being a dramatic case where we have a serious disagreement. 

The only point I was attempting to make in my previous post here is that opinions, by knowledgeable

listeners to classical performances (including the ASMF)  are likely to differ. Performance styles vary and the one you heard by the ASMF was not at all to your taste. So be it.

As I indicated, the discussion, which I entered after quite a few posts had been made by others, caused me to recall the many differing opinions i have read on numerous classical recordings. it has been interesting to observe the intensity of many of those "arguments". That was not aimed at what you said, but this discussion brought that  to mind.

[JSngry]

Saul Goode. 

Like many, there's the legacy of   culture-shaming in the classical world, and I'm sensitive to it, because I've ran into a few people who chuckle about a firmly entrenched "jazz guy" like me "going classical on us now, eh?" as a local peer put it, like it's a total starting over in every aspect of music, and I'm like, no not really, expansion, yes, broadening, yes, but all of a sudden I have no idea about music?

You flatter yorselves, classical snobs, music ends up being music, period. The particulars do variare, hell, that' why it's been fun getting into this. But past that, music is music, playing is playing, and emotion is emotion.

Anyway, thank you for having the sensitivity of your clarification.  Appreciate it!

[Larry Kart]

Jim -- Hoping to cure your aversion to Mozart, here are four of my favorite works:

String Quintets

 

K. 516

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGe4o2jk2-E

 

K. 593

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQEXFnCR5j4

 

k. 614

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9L9IQL4unl8

 

String Trio K. 563

 

[Larry Kart]

Three more:

 

 

Clarinet Concerto

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_gm0NCabPs

 

Clarinet Quintet

 

 

Sinfonia Concertante for Violin and Viola 

 

[JSngry]

It's not an aversion, it's just that, like one of my buddies says, you can almost literally tell what note and what chord is coming next. Not that there's not a lot of music like that, classical or otherwise, it's just that...if the light goes off, it'll go off, and if it doesn't...there's a world of stuff to get to, literally a world of it. Past, present, and future.

I know it's there, it knows I'm here. If we're meant to engage, we will. If not, Mozart will certainly survive without my enthusiasm.

But your concern for finding a cure is very touching...maybe there's a telethon in the works...Mozart Shunning = The New MS, Give Until It Hurts, Do It For Larry's Kids!

 

[Larry Kart]

It's not an aversion, it's just that, like one of my buddies says, you can almost literally tell what note and what chord is coming next. Not that there's not a lot of music like that, classical or otherwise, it's just that...if the light goes off, it'll go off, and if it doesn't...there's a world of stuff to get to, literally a world of it. Past, present, and future.

I know it's there, it knows I'm here. If we're meant to engage, we will. If not, Mozart will certainly survive without my enthusiasm.

But your concern for finding a cure is very touching...maybe there's a telethon in the works...Mozart Shunning = The New MS, Give Until It Hurts, Do It For Larry's Kids!

 

Wow -- you can almost tell what's coming next? I sure as heck, even in works that I know very well,  am almost always ... well, surprised isn't quite the right word (though sometimes it is), but I find that what does happen in Mozart in relation to prior events in the work is almost always a matter of "more" and "other." Likewise, very often, in terms of the relationship between movements e.g. the Sonata for Piano and Violin K. 526. If, listening to first movement of that work, you can anticipate what the second is going to be like, and listening to the second, anticipate the third... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YffZjUz1xU

Edited October 20, 2015 by Larry Kart

[papsrus]

I have seen Mozart's music characterized in terms similar to the way Jim described it: that each note is the only perfect note that could possibly follow the previous one; that there's a certain inevitability to the music; or that you get a sense the music was always there and needed only the genius of Mozart to sort of open the door to reveal it to us, or (to put it more crudely) connect the dots for us. 

And if you accept this idea of perfection and inevitability in Mozart, then maybe Jim's aversion to it is perfectly reasonable, given the premise of this thread (that the concert he heard was played perfectly, but ... )

 

[A Lark Ascending]

1. Beware the Mozart industry - few classical composers have been so romanticised. You are often made to feel wanting if you don't genuflect at his genius. 

2. It took me fifteen years of listening to classical music before I finally started to engage with Mozart. Music does not always click instantly but we're foolish if we think that when music is as highly regarded as Mozart's is, then the problem must be with Mozart. It was the Jupiter Symphony, Don Giovanni and the Serenade No. 10 that finally clicked with me...and watching "Amadeus" (gasps of horror from the cognoscenti). I got so intrigued I ended up doing a WEA evening class on his music during the centenary year (1991), just to get to know it better.

Having said that, even though I accept the general view of people many, many time more knowledgeable about music than I am that Mozart is right up there at the pinnacle when it comes to musical ingenuity, I'd still rather listen to Vaughan Williams. Mozart probably wouldn't make my top 50, let alone my top ten to take to the desert island.