 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
208.58.2.83
In Reply to: Bach's B Minor Mass - Which One? posted by mbmiller@bcpl.net on March 22, 2007 at 17:18:34:
[Excerpt]Now three decades old, this extraordinary performance remains unchallenged as the recording of choice for those who want a "modern" reading of the work that is at the same time mindful of stylistic issues. Richter's charismatic, passionate, incisive, and pulse quireading is the logical extension of the Ramin approach, but it is more polished, less rough hewn. This vividly recorded account remains the paradigm against which all "modern instrument" performances of the Mass in B Minor must be measured.
[This article appeared in 1989.]
Follow Ups:
ugly sounding / bloody awful IMO, I also note that the other version is also widely reviewed as having THE SAME problems - 'Weaknesses among the soloists'!And this issue for me smashed the needed gravitas.
WarmestTimbo in Oz
The Skyptical Mensurer and Audio ScroungerAnd gladly would he learn and gladly teach - Chaucer. ;-)!
'Still not saluting.'
the proper use of "paradigm". Bravo, sir, bravo! Kudos for helping to stem the tide of Philistines (sp? too lazy to get out the dictionary) attempting to destroy the language (and yes, I recognize the natural progression of the language). I refer to its attempted destruction, conscious or unconscious.
I am just curious which uses of 'paradigm' you are upset about. Is it the use that Thomas Kuhn made of the term in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, or are you talking about the forms that the term, (along with 'paradigm shift') has taken as it has seeped into pop culture? Which ones specifically bug you? Which ones seem to be paradigms of cultural decay?
earns you twenty points, along with your excellent use of paradigm in your final sentence. I seem to recall one source noting that paradigm being used in a scientific work started its decline, though some will insist that it was merely a shift. And yes, the forms it has taken in pop culture offend my Websterian sensibilities.No, I don't object to the natural evolution of the language. What I object to is this modern penchant for trying to impress others with one's use of words, the worst kind intellectual pretension. The ruin of "paradigm" illustrates this, along with the abuse "parameter" has taken. Because a couple of decades ago some idiot thought "parameter" sounded like a fancy version of "perimeter", the language and general intellectual atmosphere in the U.S. is now much the poorer.
This current trend of "language by fad", driven by arrogant ignorance, is tiresome and offensive in its own mindless way. There is nothing wrong with clear, simple English. If it was good enough for E.B. White, Hemingway, et al, why isn't it good enough for the rest of us mortals? That isn't meant as a challenge to your post, merely an observation.
The one that bugs me the most is the misuse of the phrase, "That begs the question why..." when what is really meant is "that raises the question..." You hear it from pundits and TV journalists all the time. Apparently "begging the question" sounds more impressive and erudite, but of course question begging is the informal logical fallacy of arguing in a circle.
Have you heard "meta" as a word (rather than a mere prefix) yet?
meta as a word? Is there no end to the corruption? Thanks for the warning. "Back in the day" (keep all firearms and little children out of my reach) such things did not occur, not in such great numbers, at least.And question begging will now join my list. You understand my linguistic distress perfectly. Of course, the current trend of smug, ignorant pseudo-erudition raises the question as to whether I will end up being able to stand listening to anyone. Perhaps a silent retreat to the classics will be the only option one day. Thank heavens audio gear doesn't reflect the grammatical habits of its creators.
One should also note M. Towe (sorry i I don't knpow the gender of the author) has a quite interesting discussion of other recordings, giving high (and deserving) praise to both Klemperer, Shaw and Rifkin. From the web site quoted by Clark, I learned that Shaw recorded it first in 1947, on 78s, apparetnly one of the last big recording projects on 78s. Also, in that 1947 recording, the instrumentalists were of a high caliber, for example Oscar Shumsky playing violin. It reminds me of the famous Scherchen recording of the St. Matthew passion, which featured Walter Barylli on violin.
I lack the discipline to be expert on this piece, when I have listened to it, my choices have been Klemperer or Shaw.
I would certainly agree with the wording of the captioned review if applied to the Richter St.Matthew's (DFD's "Mache dich mein Herze rein" is one of the high points of recorded music ever).But for Richter's B-minor, however great, I am doubtful
L.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]