|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
180.200.144.87
In Reply to: RE: Frans Brüggen has passed away… posted by C.B. on August 13, 2014 at 09:02:10
I particularly liked his commitment to recording live.
His Haydn is among the best I've heard.
Warmest
Tim Bailey
Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger
Follow Ups:
I was certain that you are the one person on this forum who would appreciate Brüggen's importance and contribution.
-
"You weren't afraid of being born--why would you be afraid of dying?" Alan Watts
Bruggens seem to be more coherent musically although there's more hall and audience noise.
Haydn is at least as important a composer as M and B. I get gripped by Mozart's impulsive waywardness, by Beethoven's directness almost in your face, and then there's mr balance. I think Mozart may have had ADHD or similar.
{:~)}
JBTW do you find that being able to read / follow a score - being educated in music - enhances your response to music. I can't tell but I am aware that very few people I know care as deeply about it as I do.
Even around here ;-)!
Warmest
Tim Bailey
Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger
with a certain Severius.
I feel strongly that being able to read a score and recognise *some* of what the composer put into the music is crucial to understanding the importance and magnitude of the piece.
But many music listeners, including a few on this forum, feel that analysis lessens one's immediate enjoyment. You know, the immediate satisfaction that comes with a visceral, non-thinking sort of response. "It's got a beat and I can dance to it". (Typical pop-music sort of mindset).
When I was a teenager (about a half-century ago), I had an argument with my next-door neighbour, who had a big stereo system and loved the 'big gesture' of Beethoven. He thought Mozart and Bach were 'trite'. I didn't have the ammo then to demolish him and his cretinism, although I know now exactly what I'd say if I saw him again.
With the advent of hip-hop and the desecration of music education in the schools (at least in the U.S.), the sort of musical understanding that comes with analysis and historical awareness is receding even further in the rear-view mirror. Most people in my area who go to symphony concerts do so for social (business expense?) reasons, not for edification.
-
"You weren't afraid of being born--why would you be afraid of dying?" Alan Watts
It just is NOT possible to separate my 'logical and educated' (?) - sight-reading, key recognition, ...... responses to music from my emotional responses.Just because people have been educated to think that it is possible doesn't make it so.
Here's a quote from an article I've posted here at AA lots of times.
"To assume that the heart and the head can be separated is like assuming that the head and tale of a coin can be separated because they can be discussed or looked at separately."
For those who find that difficult here's the article. Just because it is focussed on management science does not reduced its total generality and truth.
""32OBJECTIVITY?
Objectivity is a scientific ideal particularly sought by management scientists. Although its meaning is not clear, objectivity? is generally believed to be what Winnie the Pooh called a "GOOD THING". It is also believed to require the exclusion of ethical and moral judgements from inquiry and decision making.
Objectivity so conceived is not possible.
Most, if not all, scientific inquiry involves testing hypotheses or estimating the values of variables. These procedures necessarily entail balancing two types of error. In testing hypotheses these errors are{;) rejecting hypotheses when they are true{,} and accepting them when they are false.
Naturally we would like to minimise the probability of making them but unfortunately minimising one maximises the other. Therefore, setting these probabilities requires a judgement of the relative seriousness, hence value, of the two types of error. Researchers seldom make this judgement consciously; they usually set the probabilities at levels dictated by scientific convention. This attests not to their objectivity, but to their ignorance.
The choice of a way of estimating the value of a variable requires the evaluation of the relative importance, hence values, of underestimates and overestimates of the variable. Each estimating procedure contains a (usually implicit) judgement of the seriousness of the two possible types of error. Therefore, estimates cannot be made without a value judgement, however concealed it may be.
The most commonly used estimating procedures are said to be "unbiassed". The estimates they yield, however, are best only when errors of the same magnitude but of opposite sign are equally serious. This is a condition that I have virtually never found in the real world.
In testing hypotheses and estimating the values of variables, science equate unconsciously equates objectivity with unconsciousness of the value judgements.
The prevailing concept of objectivity is based on a distinction between ethical-moral man – who is believed to be emotional, involved and biassed – and scientific man – who is believed to be unemotional, uninvolved, and unbiassed. Objective decision-makers are expected to take their heads - not their hearts - into the workplace.
To assume that the heart and the head can be separated is like assuming that the head and tale of a coin can be separated because they can be discussed or looked at separately.
Objectivity does not consist of making only value-free judgements in conducting inquiries and making decisions. It consists of making only value-full judgements; the more extensive the values, the more objective the results. A determination is objective only if it holds for any values that those who can use it may have. For this reason objectivity is an ideal that can never be attained but can be continuously approached.
Objectivity cannot be approximated by an individual investigator or decision maker; it can be approached only by groups of individuals with diverse values. It is a property that cannot be approximated by individual scientists but can be by science taken as a system.
All this has an important implication for management. The values of all those affected by a decision, its stakeholders, should be taken into account in making that decision, but this cannot be done without involving them in the decision-making process. To deprive them of opportunities to participate in making decisions that affect them is to devalue them, and this, it seems to me, is immoral.{sic - amoral too}
Managers have a moral obligation to all who can be affected by their decisions, not merely to those who pay for their services.
From - PP 123 – 125 of ‘Management in Small Doses' _ Russel L. Ackoff.
Wiley and Sons NY 1986
ISBN 0-471-84822-0 or
0-471-61765-2 (paperback)"It is manifest to me that the implications for much of what passes for thinking around here at AA are deep, and will be ignored.
Warmest
Tim Bailey
Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger
Edits: 08/16/14
"To assume that the heart and head can be separated..."
"What twaddle..!", says she.
Timbo, those whose hearts and heads are truly separated do not *try* to keep them so - they just ARE. The coin gets thrown on the table, it stops, and... "Tails it is!"
That table is bit sticky, too, for some strange reason...
I made my living as a systems analyst and management scientist, advising government and as a change agent.
Reductive thinking is meat and drink to most people, and suits the powerful very well.
Plato (and his classes) has a lot to answer for.
Warmest
Tim Bailey
Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger
"Yes, dear. Coming to bed soon?"
Am I surprised? no.
Warmest
Tim Bailey
Skeptical Measurer & Audio Scrounger
"Honey I love you..."
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: