gustavmahlerboard.com
General Category => Gustav Mahler and Related Discussions => Topic started by: sperlsco on August 05, 2008, 06:21:56 PM
-
...potentially sooner if ordered from the SFSO site:
http://www.shopsfsymphony.org/shop/product.php?productid=1206&cat=22&page=1 (http://www.shopsfsymphony.org/shop/product.php?productid=1206&cat=22&page=1)
I am very excited about this release. There is a real lack of DLvdE released in the SACD format, with Sieghart being the only satisfactory one (in terms of new recordings that is -- so I am excluding the Lennie/IPO one). I am also thrilled that this one has two male soloists, as I am a big fan of Hampson.
-
Count me out. I'm not crazy about employing a baritone, and Hampson - while possessing a superb vocal instrument - over interprets everything; seldom allowing the music and text to just speak for itself. Hopefully, I'll be proved very wrong.
I just feel that you need the women's voice to float on top of Mahler's dark and knarly orchestral sounds. A baritone voice just grovels amongst the dark muck that already exists. Anyway, that's my take on it. Maybe it's just that Fischer-Dieskau turned me off to the range of possibilities that might truly exist when employing a baritone. I don't know - you get it and tell me how it is. I'm not pinning my hopes on this; I think it could be yet another slow and long haul.
Barry
-
There is a real lack of DLvdE released in the SACD format, with Sieghart being the only satisfactory one...
What's wrong with the Boulez/VPO one? I think it's good to very good in all departments, though of course not everyone likes their Mahler done in a manner as clear-headed and composed as with Boulez every time.
PT
-
I gave the Boulez "DLvdE" several hearings before deciding that the problem wasn't me. Urmana is a decent Verdi soprano. And as such, I just find her voice too powerful, in an operatic sense, with too big of a vibrato for this particular work. She was also recorded too closely, which compounds that impression. I find it interesting that in "der Abschied", Mahler does not write a single forte or fortissimo for the singer (mezzo/baritone) at all. At the onset, he gives the low voice a piano marking, and never modifies that. Instead, there are simply two crescendo markings: One before "trunkne Welt" (before the orchestral funeral procession), and one towards the end. If memory serves - which it might not - all that high business near the end, where the singer is going on about how the world is all beautiful and blue looking, is to be sung piano. It's my belief - and to please David, I'm not trying to be factual here - that Mahler was not looking for an operatic or overly emotional response. I believe that a bit of restraint and repose is called for here.
To me, the tenor is a total non-starter. He's certainly nowhere as good as some of the "golden oldies" of the past (Wunderlich tops the list for me). In fact, I found this particular tenor no joy to listen to.
On top of that, I found Boulez's approach somewhat colorless in this particular work. For me, the worst spot was the one in the fourth movement, where the young studs come bursting upon the pagoda scene, riding their trusty steeds (where's Brunhilde in all this?). He truly fails to whip up the tempo or dynamics here, and I think it's badly needed at this juncture.
Perhaps hearing this recording on the SACD layer would alter these impressions. I know that balances can sometimes be radically different on the SACD side of things. But for the Vienna Phil. - and in spite of my preference for a mezzo - I would stick to either either the Bernstein one (which has great orchestral detail), or the expensive Orfeo release of Giulini doing it at the Salzburg Festival, along with the identical cast that he had for his DG studio recording from Berlin (Araiza/Fassbinder). In my estimation, that one is truly great (the set is waaaay too expensive though).
I also rather like the 1936 VPO one with Kerstin Thorborg - more than the highly celebrated one with Ferrier, at any rate.
-
Barry:
I totally agree with you about the Boulez/DG--a snooze, with very mediocre singing and not very good sonics. Regarding the end of Abschied--I agree with you there too. I would just LOVE to hear it sung as Mahler wrote it--ppp until that one big crescendo. No one pays any attention to the notated dynamics (least of all Boulez!), and singers particularly can't resist the opportunity to create a big, swooning climax where Mahler clearly intended a mostly hushed sort of intensity. It would be fascinating to hear it done that way.
Dave H
-
I actually really like this Boulez/DG DLVdE...haven't heard this on SACD yet. It was my top choice for awhile, replaced by Kubelik's live account w/ Janet Baker on Audite.
The Boulez has an articifial quality, or "absract" quality I feel works well with this music...far removed from warmth or emotion, as if this music was filmed with a telephoto lens (which flattens the picture).
--Todd
-
My response to the Boulez is very similar to Barry and Dave's -- the singers do not have the right type of voices (or I just don't like their voices) and the performance is stuck in neutral. As such, I never upgraded to the SACD version from the CD version.
Barry, your comments on the vocal dynamics in Der Abscheid are interesting. Although I am not looking for a solist to blast out their vocals, I wonder if I would criticize a "correct" performance as being dull and under-sung? Are there any performances that seem to adhere to these dynamic markings (how about Baker or Ludwig)?
-
I don't know of any performances that adhere to the indicated dynamics. It's just too tempting to make a big crescendo on "Die liebe Erde" and take off from there. There are a few that attempt a diminuendo for a few bars, but that's about it. I do think that we need to keep in mind that Mahler never heard the work and would doubtless have adjusted the dynamics after some practical experience in performance. It's just that he's so emphatic with the "ppp NO CRESCENDO!!!" indication--but it would have to be prepared very carefully. In particular, the crescendo in the violins leading into this final section would have to be much less prominent than it's usually played in order to maintain continuity and not have the voice compete--with a big, loud "Die" followed by a sudden drop to nothing on "Liebe," which would just sound silly. Perhaps it would make more sense to do the violins' crescendo as a hairpin, so they could get out of the way just as the voice enters. I think the whole point of this passage is that is should be entirely without strain--effortless, and floating.
Dave H
P.S. Todd--I'm with you on the Kubelik/Baker--sensational performance. The Guilini/Orfeo that Barry mentioned is also very good, but Fassbender's rhythm problems in Abschied dampen my enthusiasm somewhat and the playing isn't quite as great as it should be.
-
My memory - faulty though it may be - tells me that Michelle De Young comes closest to the ideal that we're discussing (Reference Recording). Boy, is Dave ever right about the big crescendo in the upper strings, just before the low voice enters with "die liebe". I've never thought about that, but it does seem odd to expect the vocalist to start out softly, if the violins are doing some huge crescendo before hand. Weird. I also think that it's just sort of difficult for many singers to merely float all those high tones softly, after they've already been singing for a good 25 minutes or so (not to mention the previous movements). I'm sure that singing loudly gives them a bit more security up high.
Barry
-
I'm basically away again, but I got this inspiration to serialize my replies from DH's star pursuit, so please excuse the mere hint for now (with the bottom line a little later):
SO FAR my question "What's wrong with the Boulez/VPO issue?" has received two kinds of answer:
1) "I just don't like it"/too "boring." (But didn't someone just stress the need to separate mere subjective opining and personal preference from the more factual reasonings?)
2) What we hold against Boulez is that he doesn't follow the apparently dubious dynamic markings where no one else sees any reason to do that, either. (Great...)
So we are to conclude that there appears to be nothing wrong with this recording. That's right; if anything, we should declare the objections faulty :D. And very good reason for actually proclaiming it as a reference recording is contained in Todd's incisive characterization of the performance captured. That it "has an artificial quality, or 'absract' quality [he feels] works well with this music," basically gives away why the Boulez should earn the Cream of the Crop designation, but in about a week I'd like to elaborate more on this.
But are we even talking about the same recording: I think one would be really hard pressed to characterize Urmana as a voice too big and operatic here (her singing is really remarkably well controlled and intertwined within the rest of the score), and the recording perspective, I think, compliments the great job she's doing like few others I've heard. As a one-liner I'd just put it forward for now that the singing is a major strength of this recording and the sonics are very good indeed.
But if you allow me I'll write a bit more about this next week. In the meantime I suggest you guys borrow a pair of good earphones, preferably of the non-open type that filter out the white noise in the big cities, letting one hear all the nuances and balances; there's a lot that's key acccomplishment in this recording that I don't think you guys haven't paid any attention to at all. :)
Greetings from up the coastline! More hot creatures have showed up leaving us salivating by the seashore.
(http://k43.pbase.com/g6/23/159323/2/76381865.Upwih8fq.jpg)
-PT
-
Herr Polarius,
I have a pair of Bose noise cancellation headphones. They cost me a good chunk of money too.
By and large, both David and myself have been pretty supportive of Boulez's Mahler. I like most of them. I had some real issues with the DG studio release of M2, but I felt that the "live" performance issued on DVD addressed all those issues (especially the organ). David was probably the first critic to be supportive of his M4 with Cleveland, which was - up to then - receiving luke warm reviews at best. Now everyone seems to think that it's pretty good. I've always been a big fan of his M6 from Vienna.
You seem to keep coming on to this notion of European vs. American critics (maybe it's just David you're after). Well, let me make a generalization that seems to apply to many critics in general, regardless of where they come from. Many critics say that such-and-such artist is great; therefore, everything that he or she have recorded must also be great. Both David and myself attempt to evaluate every recording on its on merits, regardless of who the performers are. You may not get that impression, but take a look at some of the reviews that David has written for Boulez's Mahler cycle - most of them are quite positive.
As for myself, I believe that I addressed your question as objectively as I can, without repurchasing the Boulez "DLvdE" (no way is that happening) to comb through it point by point. You asked the question, I provided my answer. It would be an adaquate "DLvdE", if we lived in a world of few choices. But as with all of the works by Mahler these days, there are tons of choices to comb through. I'm wondering if you're familiar with Bertini's "DLvdE" (?).
To me, Bertini's "DLvdE" is very controlled and very careful - somewhat like the Boulez (I think the big, single F horns that the VPO use aren't the best for this particular work though), but receives far better vocal contributions from Marjana Lipovsek and Ben Heppner. Michael Schade is just a complete non-starter in my book. So, if I wanted a more up-to-date, detailed, controlled, subtle, "German" (and frankly, I don't care where it comes from) performance of "DLvdE", I'd probably reach for the Bertini. I think that Karajan and Giulini are remarkably good as well. Singers do matter in this work, and I feel that "der Abschied" should not be treated as an extended operatic aria. The question as to whether Urmana is the right kind of voice for "der Abschied" or not, is greatly compounded by her having been recorded too closely. I find it uncomfortable to listen to, and that has nothing to do with which speakers, or which headphones I'm using. Once again, I could live with it, if there weren't tons of other recordings already available. Others have brought up Baker/Kubelik on Audite, and that's a very musical place far anyone to start.
Anway, now I have to run.
-
Polarius:
Another vote for Bertini as well, a conductor who "out Boulezes Boulez." So, for that matter, does Esa Pekka-Salonen on Sony. The fact that we may be speaking in generalizations, as you well know, does not mean that there is not substance to back them up if necessary, and it is this that distinguishes fact from opionon. Echoing another sentiment of Barry's I would ask the question more directly than he did: Which recordings of this work do you actually own, or have listened to recently? What are your bases for comparison? Barry and I (and others here) have noted numerous versions for purposes of drawing points of contrast. If you want to avoid generalities and stick to facts (and I'm all for that), then let us at least put our cards on the table and speak from the actual experience of listening extensively and comparatively.
Dave H
-
Good news. I've missed the fabulous playing on the old Ormandy "DLvdE" so much, that I just bought a used copy, very reasonably priced, through Amazon. Chookasian isn't the greatest mezzo in the universe either, but at least she's not recorded close up. The playing is amazing though.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/516vGJ8UojL._SL500_AA240_.jpg)
-
Polarius,
Oh boy, that picture must have been taken at a Korean reasturant, wan't it? :o
John,
-
Good news. I've missed the fabulous playing on the old Ormandy "DLvdE" so much, that I just bought a used copy, very reasonably priced, through Amazon. Chookasian isn't the greatest mezzo in the universe either, but at least she's not recorded close up. The playing is amazing though.
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/516vGJ8UojL._SL500_AA240_.jpg)
Barry, I lucked out and found this cheap at a used store some time ago...I haven't heard it yet, but it's good to hear good things about it.
--Todd
-
I'll take the other point of view and state that I particularly like the baritone in this piece.
Also, in regards to good versions of this work on SACD it appears we are forgetting Reiner's RCA, which, IMO, is more than "satisfactory", and also has the soprano that so many here seem to prefer.
Cheers,
Woz
-
I completely agree with that (Reiner's "DLvdE"). Although, I haven't tried the SACD layer on it. Hurwitz gave it a very good review at Classicstoday, so it certainly has his endorsement.
Barry
-
SO FAR my question "What's wrong with the Boulez/VPO issue?" has received two kinds of answer:
1) "I just don't like it"/too "boring." (But didn't someone just stress the need to separate mere subjective opining and personal preference from the more factual reasonings?)
2) What we hold against Boulez is that he doesn't follow the apparently dubious dynamic markings where no one else sees any reason to do that, either. (Great...)
So we are to conclude that there appears to be nothing wrong with this recording.
-PT
Well, I don't believe that anyone needs to write (or re-write) a full review of the Boulez DLvdE in this thread. You can visit Classics Today to read Dave's review. Also, you can probably find some other impressions (both positive and negative) in the archives of this site. Finally, BG provides an example of a section that he feels is not done well by Boulez. Please feel free to post what you like about it and move on. I fully expect that there will be others that like the Boulez recording. Let's please try not to insult people, though.
-
Well, I lied. All this chit-chat has primed me for the upcoming MTT/SFSO/Hampson "DLvdE". I look forward to it with bated breath (what the heck is a bated breath anyway?), and predict that it'll be the greatest thing ever to have arrived in our own lifetimes. As they say in hyphy culture, "bring it on".
-
Herr Polarius,
Barry, I'm not German, as you know. Strictly speaking I'm not even Indo-European.
By and large, both David and myself have been pretty supportive of Boulez's Mahler. I like most of them. I had some real issues with the DG studio release of M2, but I felt that the "live" performance issued on DVD addressed all those issues (especially the organ). David was probably the first critic to be supportive of his M4 with Cleveland, which was - up to then - receiving luke warm reviews at best. Now everyone seems to think that it's pretty good. I've always been a big fan of his M6 from Vienna.
That's all fine and dandy; but I thought we were talking about DLvdE in general and then I was referring to Boulez' recording of it.
You seem to keep coming on to this notion of European vs. American critics (maybe it's just David you're after).
Sorry, what?? I was not, nor am interested in, talking about anything else here except DLvdE as a composition, and by extension the Boulez recording of it. I think you may have misattributed an earlier post by DH where he brought up this issue of how "Europeans" this and "Europeans" that, in a discussion on Abbado IIRC.
Well, let me make a generalization that seems to apply to many critics in general, regardless of where they come from. Many critics say that such-and-such artist is great; therefore, everything that he or she have recorded must also be great. Both David and myself attempt to evaluate every recording on its on merits, regardless of who the performers are. You may not get that impression, but take a look at some of the reviews that David has written for Boulez's Mahler cycle - most of them are quite positive.
Again, that's really great if it really works that way, and likewise if people get something out of Boulez' Mahler, but I'm not sure what the specific issue is that you have in mind here.
My aim was to try and start talking about the peculiar nature of this very composition and the kind of expectations it sets for the performers and especially the conductor. Those two only; not what DH may have written about Mahler elsewhere (it's really irrelevant for me). I think it's useful to start from the nature of the work itself when assessing the different interpretations. It's also a more constructive approach than the "bores me to death"/"not exciting enough" type of dismissals made when we feel jaded and something doesn't conform to preformed expectation patterns: one is then forced to focus more on the "meaning" of the work and people's successes in letting that meaning or significance come through, in contrast to mere lists of whom one does and doesn't like in a long list of CD titles (which can of course also be fine and is certainly always fun, but then let's keep the rhetorics clear about that, too). I like the way many people here post in precisely this fashion, "positively" so to speak, as for instance Todd above who made what I thought was a valid and illuminating point, something worth elaborating on in my view.
As for myself, I believe that I addressed your question as objectively as I can, without repurchasing the Boulez "DLvdE" (no way is that happening) to comb through it point by point. You asked the question, I provided my answer. It would be an adaquate "DLvdE", if we lived in a world of few choices. But as with all of the works by Mahler these days, there are tons of choices to comb through. I'm wondering if you're familiar with Bertini's "DLvdE" (?)...
That's fine, and I didn't mean by "objections are faulty, not the performance" point be meant to be taken without a little smile. I do disagree, there's nothing wrong in that, right?
I haven't heard the Bertini yet. I'm piqued to hear him but am hesitating a bit due to the feedback he's gotten in some (wow, got to use that suspect word) European press; there is simply so much good music left that I haven't gotten time to focus on but is more than worth exploring, and I'm no longer unconditionally willing to invest my time and effort in listening to everything out there any more. That said, I think I'd hear the Bertini if I had a chance. Here's a suggestion: I'm perfectly willing to swap the Klemp B8 that you "owe" me to the Bertini DLvdE, if you think it's more worth hearing.
Singers do matter in this work, and I feel that "der Abschied" should not be treated as an extended operatic aria.
That's of course all true; and nor should the composition as a whole be treated as a series of ballads or as orchestral Lieder.
The question as to whether Urmana is the right kind of voice for "der Abschied" or not, is greatly compounded by her having been recorded too closely. I find it uncomfortable to listen to, and that has nothing to do with which speakers, or which headphones I'm using.
I can't put my finger on this since we hear her pretty differently here. Could it be her clearer-than-normal phrasing (combined with clearer-than-normal articulation of the rest of the score) that gives the impression of the voice's being "too close for comfort"?
-PT
-
The fact that we may be speaking in generalizations, as you well know, does not mean that there is not substance to back them up if necessary, and it is this that distinguishes fact from opionon.
Sure, it just wasn't there above, and that's all I was referring to. You keep saying that I just have to take you by your word, but I don't want to get into a broader debate here; all I said was that in the foregoing there was no answer given to my question of what's wrong with that one performance if anything. (That Boulez is not doing what no one else is not doing either, regarding the indicated dynamics that you yourself say are moreover ambiguous at the very least, would not qualify as a dismissal, obviously; and if you feel he is a bore would not really, either.) A more valid response would have to state how he distorts the spirit of the work or something along those lines.
Echoing another sentiment of Barry's I would ask the question more directly than he did: Which recordings of this work do you actually own, or have listened to recently? What are your bases for comparison?
As I meant to say above I'm not really interested in giving scores to different performances as if they were athletic performances (this is definitely a 10/10, that gets no more than 2/5 from me and for sure isn't threatening the position of the former that's still in the lead, etc.), but more in looking about performances through what I think is the prism of the composition itself (not always the same thing as the printed score, however: in addition to the more "empirical" listening, checking on whether the performance is accurately organized in terms of the aural reproduction of the written notes, there is also the more "philosophical" listening that tries to focus more on the "spiritual" purport or profile of the work -- what makes it living art for us). But if a list of names is what you think is of interest, here's what I try to bear in mind when thinking of "Das Lied":
Boulez obviously
Sinopoli
Walter with Miller and Haefliger
Walter with Ferrier and Patzak
Klemperer with Ludwig and Wunderlich
Levine with Norman and Jerusalem
Haitink with Baker and King
Giulini with Fassbaender and Araiza
Karajan with Ludwig and Kollo
Bernstein with Fischer-Dieskau and King
Kubelik on Audite (talking about a "bore," I thought...)
Davis with Norman and Vickers
Fassbaender and Moser with Katsaris on the piano
I may have owned or thematically listened to others too which I don't remember now, whatever that might say about those particular recordings. (I've gotten rid of a lot of CDs over the years and still have some stored away.) It also depends on what "recently" means for you. And I don't mean to have ordered them in any particular way.
Now are you guys thinking of posting your own "lists" for viewing or something?
-PT
-
Polarius,
Oh boy, that picture must have been taken at a Korean reasturant, wan't it? :o
John,
Good spotting, John; you may be right. I did think that that might have been a dollop of kimchee or something right there in the background.
It's not my own photo, and I couldn't find what I was looking for: what frequents on my grill is what in these parts they call spirrmakrill: it's a bit smaller and I think fattier specimen (not the same as the big mackerel) that wanders to the territorial waters here (up to the river mouth not far from where I live in fact) during June and July, tastes really wonderful done in almost any imaginable way (though I have a few nice recipes in case cooking's your pastime, too), and looks something like this:
(http://www.aldaweb.net/webbalbum/sommar2004/IMG_0352.jpg)
I just wanted to get some outdoors grill feeling into the image I used, for realism...
-PT
-
Well, I don't believe that anyone needs to write (or re-write) a full review of the Boulez DLvdE in this thread. You can visit Classics Today to read Dave's review. Also, you can probably find some other impressions (both positive and negative) in the archives of this site. Finally, BG provides an example of a section that he feels is not done well by Boulez. Please feel free to post what you like about it and move on. I fully expect that there will be others that like the Boulez recording. Let's please try not to insult people, though.
I think I wasn't addressing my comments to anyone in particular, only summing up a general pattern emerging from all the posts above. So I'lll not go spend time there on CT if I may. And I can understand if the feeling is that further discussion about the Boulez recording of it, even if strictly in the context of the very work itself, might be off the original topic (Tilson Thomas), so I'll post separately about that shortly in a new thread. (Though I'm not really interested in any full "reviews" of any particular recordings, really.) Or do you mean only posts about newly issued recordings (or their reviews on CT) are encouraged? I think it's fine to have more general discussions about specific works and how they ought to be performed.
-PT
-
Just to get the facts straight, there is an extensive review of the Boulez Das Lied on CT.com, but it was not written by me. I only covered the multi-channel version in a breif couple of paragraphs. We do have about a dozen writers (including one BG, on occasion!), and Victor Carr covered the Boulez. Actually, Victor liked Urmana (as did I in Der Abschied), but agreed that Boulez's contribution was distinctly sub-par. Certainly you are not obligated to read anything on CT.com, and I don't think anyone said you should, except to the extent that you are making claims (concerning my work, for example) the untruth of which is a matter of public record should you care to investigate.
I think the broader point is that folks here tend to operate from a certain base of shared knowledge that makes discussion more efficient, productive, and interesting. Obviously this varies widely from person to person. It includes reading books, reviews (whether mine or anyone else's) as well as a very broad experience of recordings. I can't speak for anyone else, but for me it is the depth and breadth of this knowledge, and the enthusiasm with which it is shared, that makes this group unique.
I think Barry was gently suggesting, as was I when I asked which recordings of Das Lied you used as your basis of comparison to Boulez, that it would be nice to know what, if any, Mahlerian substance supports your verbal rhetoric.
Dave H
-
Just to get the facts straight, there is an extensive review of the Boulez Das Lied on CT.com, but it was not written by me. I only covered the multi-channel version in a breif couple of paragraphs. We do have about a dozen writers (including one BG, on occasion!), and Victor Carr covered the Boulez. Actually, Victor liked Urmana (as did I in Der Abschied), but agreed that Boulez's contribution was distinctly sub-par. Certainly you are not obligated to read anything on CT.com, and I don't think anyone said you should, except to the extent that you are making claims (concerning my work, for example) the untruth of which is a matter of public record should you care to investigate.
I think the broader point is that folks here tend to operate from a certain base of shared knowledge that makes discussion more efficient, productive, and interesting. Obviously this varies widely from person to person. It includes reading books, reviews (whether mine or anyone else's) as well as a very broad experience of recordings. I can't speak for anyone else, but for me it is the depth and breadth of this knowledge, and the enthusiasm with which it is shared, that makes this group unique.
I think Barry was gently suggesting, as was I when I asked which recordings of Das Lied you used as your basis of comparison to Boulez, that it would be nice to know what, if any, Mahlerian substance supports your verbal rhetoric.
Dave H
Right, and you may note that I have not once talked about your opinions about "Das Lied," to get more facts straight (except anonymously as part of a summary characterization of a broader set of responses), so I've hardly been able to make any claims about them, either. I only noted your criticism made here in this thread that in the Boulez certain dynamic markings aren't observed, which you then admit no one else you know of observes, either.
And thanks for enlightening me (us?) that reading is fundamental (indeed, and also here), as is listening :o. But I guess that will only increase my curiousity as to what, if any, basis you yourself have for discussing Das Lied, to support your own verbal rhetoric, as you put it. May I gently suggest you be a bit more open about that, too? I'm curious to see if my list of names qualifies as "Mahlerian substance," or not really, or sometimes yes, sometimes no, depending, compared to other people's, given this concern for the extent of such lists. Then we can even do the same with the readings if you like! :)
Thanks in advance.
Actually, the kind of "ranking list" type of listening which I think you are after here (with those questions about how many recordings I own, etc.) and in which a massive number of different recordings are juxtaposed to one another and put in one relatively straightforward order with the help of some singular, arbitrary scoring mechanism (a bit like what Robert Parker has done in quantifying wine taste) is not at all the only valid one. In fact I think it's at best supplementary to a type of listening that proceeds from the analysis of the work's character to discussing the more and less truthful ways of making a rendition of it, as quite commonly practiced, for instance, by professional concert critics trained in the art.
-PT
-
Okay, I think that this discussion has played itself out -- and unfortunately seems to be escalating on all sides. As such, I am locking this thread.
To all, let's continue to have healthy discussions. It is fine to challenge other's opinions, but let's please stop well short of dismissing them outright. Everyone's opinions are both valid and welcomed on the Board!