On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 3:44:52 PM UTC-5, Dan Koren wrote:
> On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 2:43:50 PM UTC-5, Owen wrote:
> > On 1/15/22 5:18 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
> > > On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 4:59:27 PM UTC-5, Todd M. McComb wrote:
> > >> In article <96b8b7f6-95f2-461c...@googlegroups.com>,
> > >> Dan Koren <dan....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> You missed the point. Describing
> > >>> one's opinions as "historically
> > >>> informed" is an attempt to
> > >>> objectivize and legitimize
> > >>> them.
> > >>
> > >> That's certainly possible, but in
> > >> this group, the term is used only
> > >> by people who dislike "historically
> > >> informed" performances. I missed
> > >> no points regarding your rage
> > >> against nothing.
> > >
> > > ?!? "Rage" ?!? I don't give a damn.
> > >
> > > You seem to assume criticizing
> > > something implies an emotional
> > > stake. It doesn't. Partly because
> > > of my physicist background, and
> > > partly because of my natural
> > > disposition, I criticize everything
> > > in sight, as well as everything out
> > > of sight. I can argue every side of
> > > every case, including sides no one
> > > else can see or imagine. Call it a
> > > habit. And lighten up! ;-)
> >
> > Interesting...I'd love to hear your
> > argument why H.J. Lim is not a
> > good pianist.
> >
> Oscar Wilde had once bragged at a
> dinner party that he could speak on
> any subject without preparation.
> Someone challenged him to speak
> about the Queen. He retorted "Sir,
> the Queen is not a subject!".
>
> HJ Lim is not a subject! ;-)

Haeun Jang is now a subject:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hte20E74Ikc

dk

Op woensdag 19 januari 2022 om 23:41:57 UTC+1 schreef dan....@gmail.com:
> On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 3:44:52 PM UTC-5, Dan Koren wrote:
> > On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 2:43:50 PM UTC-5, Owen wrote:
> > > On 1/15/22 5:18 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 4:59:27 PM UTC-5, Todd M. McComb wrote:
> > > >> In article <96b8b7f6-95f2-461c...@googlegroups.com>,
> > > >> Dan Koren <dan....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> You missed the point. Describing
> > > >>> one's opinions as "historically
> > > >>> informed" is an attempt to
> > > >>> objectivize and legitimize
> > > >>> them.
> > > >>
> > > >> That's certainly possible, but in
> > > >> this group, the term is used only
> > > >> by people who dislike "historically
> > > >> informed" performances. I missed
> > > >> no points regarding your rage
> > > >> against nothing.
> > > >
> > > > ?!? "Rage" ?!? I don't give a damn.
> > > >
> > > > You seem to assume criticizing
> > > > something implies an emotional
> > > > stake. It doesn't. Partly because
> > > > of my physicist background, and
> > > > partly because of my natural
> > > > disposition, I criticize everything
> > > > in sight, as well as everything out
> > > > of sight. I can argue every side of
> > > > every case, including sides no one
> > > > else can see or imagine. Call it a
> > > > habit. And lighten up! ;-)
> > >
> > > Interesting...I'd love to hear your
> > > argument why H.J. Lim is not a
> > > good pianist.
> > >
> > Oscar Wilde had once bragged at a
> > dinner party that he could speak on
> > any subject without preparation.
> > Someone challenged him to speak
> > about the Queen. He retorted "Sir,
> > the Queen is not a subject!".
> >
> > HJ Lim is not a subject! ;-)
> Haeun Jang is now a subject:
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hte20E74Ikc
>
> dk

An exceptional performance! The music sounds far better on guitar than on violin and piano.

Henk

On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 5:47:51 PM UTC-5, hvt...@xs4all.nl wrote:
> Op woensdag 19 januari 2022 om 23:41:57 UTC+1 schreef dan....@gmail.com:
> > On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 3:44:52 PM UTC-5, Dan Koren wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, January 19, 2022 at 2:43:50 PM UTC-5, Owen wrote:
> > > > On 1/15/22 5:18 PM, Dan Koren wrote:
> > > > > On Saturday, January 15, 2022 at 4:59:27 PM UTC-5, Todd M. McComb wrote:
> > > > >> In article <96b8b7f6-95f2-461c...@googlegroups.com>,
> > > > >> Dan Koren <dan....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> You missed the point. Describing
> > > > >>> one's opinions as "historically
> > > > >>> informed" is an attempt to
> > > > >>> objectivize and legitimize
> > > > >>> them.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> That's certainly possible, but in
> > > > >> this group, the term is used only
> > > > >> by people who dislike "historically
> > > > >> informed" performances. I missed
> > > > >> no points regarding your rage
> > > > >> against nothing.
> > > > >
> > > > > ?!? "Rage" ?!? I don't give a damn.
> > > > >
> > > > > You seem to assume criticizing
> > > > > something implies an emotional
> > > > > stake. It doesn't. Partly because
> > > > > of my physicist background, and
> > > > > partly because of my natural
> > > > > disposition, I criticize everything
> > > > > in sight, as well as everything out
> > > > > of sight. I can argue every side of
> > > > > every case, including sides no one
> > > > > else can see or imagine. Call it a
> > > > > habit. And lighten up! ;-)
> > > >
> > > > Interesting...I'd love to hear your
> > > > argument why H.J. Lim is not a
> > > > good pianist.
> > > >
> > > Oscar Wilde had once bragged at a
> > > dinner party that he could speak on
> > > any subject without preparation.
> > > Someone challenged him to speak
> > > about the Queen. He retorted "Sir,
> > > the Queen is not a subject!".
> > >
> > > HJ Lim is not a subject! ;-)
> > Haeun Jang is now a subject:
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hte20E74Ikc
>
> An exceptional performance! The music
> sounds far better on guitar than on violin
> and piano.

Listening with one's eyes? ;-) As our friend
Arminius might complain?

Does this one also sound better than on a
piano?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPLLTspB_-M

dk

> Listening with one's eyes? ;-) As our friend
> Arminius might complain?
>
> Does this one also sound better than on a
> piano?
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPLLTspB_-M

Nothing wrong with the video or the appearance of the performer. The emphasis on the music rather than the virtuosity benefited Paganini's Caprice.

The same cannot be said of the Liszt. The guitar is too limited an instrument for the 'héroïde et élégiaque' disposition of his rhapsodies.

Henk

On Thursday, January 13, 2022 at 11:39:45 PM UTC-8, gggg gggg wrote:
> On Saturday, December 13, 2014 at 4:14:07 AM UTC-10, William Sommerwerck wrote:
> > I'm fussy about word usage. I'm increasingly annoyed by narrators saying
> > "recorded history".
> >
> > "Recorded history" is a tautology. The word "history" implies something for
> > which there's a written or visual record. * This is why dinosaurs are called
> > pre-historic creatures.
> >
> > "Historically informed" performance practices have to be based on a reliable
> > record of how music was actually performed -- not on what we think or assume
> > performance practices were.
> >
> > I'm curious... Which HIPs have genuinely historical evidence supporting them?
> >
> > * Fossils don't count. We're talking rock carvings, cave paintings, etc..
> (Recent Y. upload):
>
> Music Chat: Period Performance Practice Is Killing The Classics

Doesn't what Hurwitz said in that recent Y. upload contradict this Wikipedia article on Furtwangler?:

- ...The critic David Hurwitz, a spokesman for modern literalism and precision, sharply criticizes what he terms "the Furtwängler wackos" who "will forgive him virtually any lapse, no matter how severe", and characterizes the conductor himself as "occasionally incandescent but criminally sloppy"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Furtw%C3%A4ngler#Conducting_style