# Reviews



## Quartetfore

Following the advice of an esteemed member of this forum I downloaded a recording of the 3rd String Quartet of Guy Ropartz, and found it a very fine work indeed. For me, the brilliant Scherzo was the highlight of work. Just for the fun of it, I then read a review of the music on a well respected Review Site. Was this the same music I just played a few minutes ago? The Scherzo was called "sinister". My question is how do you approach reviews? Do they guide you in selecting a recording of a work you don`t know, or do you take the plunge and buy because you are interested in music new to you, or a preformance of a work you do know.


----------



## Weston

It depends on the source of the review. If I read a review of new music I am usually just looking for a description of the piece. I am seldom interested in what the reviewer thinks of the performance or the composition. I realized a long time ago if a reviewer speaks of a performer's masterful violin interpretation, it will likely sound like so much squeaky-squawking to me. I must not have very refined tastes then, but I am too old to care about that. 

I tend to get a better idea of how much I may enjoy a piece by reading descriptions or recommendations here than from reading reviews. 

I do enjoy reading annotations of a piece though, such as those found in liner notes or on allmusic.com. That gives me better insight into what is going on than my ears alone might discern. But often those seem way off too, as you describe. This isn't quite the same as a review I guess.


----------



## Delicious Manager

One has to remember that ALL reviews, no matter how objective they might try to be (and many don't even try), will be one person's opinion. This opinion will be borne out of that person's background, experience, education and many other circumstances that are all unique to that person. That's why no two people will hear a piece of music in exactly the same way. The use of words like "sinister" don't help at all. One person's "sinister" might be another's "tranquil" or "agitated" or, indeed, almost anything else.

I do reviews for _MusicWeb International_. I try to be objective, but I am opinionated and judgemental by nature, so I will often fail, I'm sure. Where I feel it might be helpful, I often give reference to other composers and/or works (eg "if you appreciate the music of [insert composer here], then you will probably find much to enjoy in the work on this CD" or words to that effect). I find context and reference points can be very useful.

I am hooked on CD reviews. I subscribe to _BBC Music Magazine_ and _The Gramophone_ here in the UK, am always poring over the _MusicWeb_ reviews by my colleagues and love my occasional dip into the _AllMusic_ website and that fine American magazine _Fanfare_. How much notice I take depends on the work or composer in question (and how interested I might be in it) and who is writing the review (one soon gets a feeling for 'kindred spirits').

Ultimately, though, it's only by trial and error that you discover the gems that really appeal to you. I find that a great deal of music I am interested in exploring can be found on YouTube or as tantalising 30-second extracts on sites such as Amazon or Naxos. I have 'errored' a few times, but, I am pleased to say, have succeeded far many more times.


----------



## Quartetfore

`Though it leans toward British composers, I do think that Music Web International is the best review site in English on the Web. I don`t think think that I missed a day in the past eight years. If your German is good, WWW.Klassic.com is outstanding--the English translation is poor. As to the review of the Ropartz Quartet, it did appear on Music Web International


----------



## haydnguy

I have a subscription to Fanfare. I think if you read the same publication regularly you'll find the reviewers that generally share your taste and you learn to judge when you are likely to agree with their review.


----------



## Head_case

> My question is how do you approach reviews? Do they guide you in selecting a recording of a work you don`t know, or do you take the plunge and buy because you are interested in music new to you, or a preformance of a work you do know.


That's a pretty good question. I've always found it a challenge, partly because of the kind of repertoire I listen to, it's not always possible to listen to it before buying a LP or CD....and it certainly isn't possible to find the musical score either to check it out.

There are a few reviewers who feature again and again for me. Jonathan Woolf - is one of my favourite reviewers. He is magisterial in his command of squeezing every nuance out of the English language, in order to describe a musical soundscape conveyed through artistic endeavour. He also has a rather esoteric, if not arcane music taste, which is derived from the high era of string quartet performance, rather than the modern substitution of technically dazzling virtuosity, without emotional comprehension of a piece.

Take for example, Shostakovich's string quartets. Woolf is practically the lone wolf, praising the Taneyev String Quartet's masterpiece box set which is near unobtainium in the rare earth series. Every other conventional reviewer, goes for the portly and sedately romantic Borodin Quartet readings, or one of the less fiery and haunting recordings as representative of the best of their generation.

On the other hand, a popular reviewer, like David Fanning kind of bores me, but he is populist and well-respected - however I don't care for much of the music he listens to, so anything he raves about, I am more likely to avoid like the plague.

I'd agree with you, that 'sinister' as a description of the Guy Ropartz string quartets was completely off the mark. It's a very poor use of language, particularly for a modern world culture which is polarised by the concept of sin, either being indifferent to and denying its existence, or taking complete offence at its mere mention.

I'd agree the Music-web International site is great for reviews, but there is a huge variation in the calibre of reviews. What they do offer, which is very useful, is the 'cross-review', where some albums, are reviewed by two different reviewers. This is by far, my favourite approach, for grasping whether I am going to buy an album, by a reviewer(s) whom I have never heard of. It offers a better reference point for deciding, at least for me.

The BBC Classics site is rather useless, in that it only gives 8/10 or similar scores for recordings and performance, however being rather useless is better than being completely useless, which it is not, since the technical scoring of 6/10 or 8/10 is useful, for picking out a select recording, based on its technical merits. I am appalled that a magazine can resort to such reductionistic approaches, however they are probably just trying to use a short-hand to convey information about record reviews, and don't intentionally mean to upset an artist to the point of making them commit suicide over a 1/10 rating for artistic performance.

The Strad Magazine has some reviews, and I am partial to those, only because they tend to major on string instruments whereas commercial kitchen sink classical magazines like Gramaphone; Classics Today; What Hi-Fi etc, are all too superficial to even go beyond the surface layers of a classical album, like a string quartet. I'm sure they are very good for painting good snapshots more popular classical music forms, like orchestrated music or choral music, or on the opposite extreme, the solo instrument.

I like reviews: they provide information, and more often than not - information about the reviewer's relationship to the music he is reviewing. So if you get to 'know' the reviewer through reading his works regularly, choosing music based on the reviewer becomes an easier task, than just reading reviews indiscriminately. The latter is probably the reason why many of us get so disappointed, or discouraged and turned off by reviews. I'm not sure why people don't like reviews, however I do have some music colleagues who refuse to heed to a single word any reviewer might utter.


----------



## Quartetfore

I guess if you take the "reviews" with a shaker of salt they do provide on occasion some interesting information. I agree about Jonathan Woolf, he is one of the best. I like to read concert reviews, so I find the site MusicalCriticism.com worth while. I noticed in another thread you brought up some fine names. I had a chance to hear the Skampa Quartet this past Saturday. A very fine concert with Dvorak Op 106 as the feature work.


----------



## Head_case

Yay! Another Jonathan Woolf fan 

I'll try Musicalcriticism.com - it didn't look very easy to navigate the first time I tried so I've not bothered with the site for many years. 

Well I've resolved to get to more concerts next year. The Hagen Quartet are coming to town. Yay!

The Op 106 is a glorious piece of work. I like the Josef Vlach, Vlach Quartet version on LP best. I think the Prazak/Kocian Quartet version is the most stunning recording I've come across though. The Naxos' New Vlach Quartet version is lovely, as is the Talich Quartet version. There are so many fine versions of this piece of work. The Skampa Quartet are first class too - shame their marketing leaves them behind the major western European quartets.

Be careful about my recommendations though! I do like the experimental and hard to get modern stuff! 

Have you found a copy of the Bonnal Quartets yet? These are on rotation here. Simply sunny and sunnier than Debussy glorious French string quartet music.


----------



## Quartetfore

The Bonnal Quartets are now available to download (Amazon USA), so that they are on the "list" for Dec.


----------



## Head_case

The CD and liner notes of the Bonnal CD are very good. Sonically, I'm not satisfied with digital downloads yet. I'd rather have the CD, tha hard-drive failures! My hi-fi is also wired up for CD or LP - I'm not sure how I would get a FLAC format onto the analogue hi-fi system, without huge trailing wires from the computer.

What would happen if you pay to download? Would they send you the artwork and liner notes too? 

Have you got the Duchasse; Magnard; Goue' string quartets yet? These are very much in the same high end of the romantic/impressionist vein as the Jongen, Ropartz and Bonnal string quartets, and not as controversial or as tediously recycled as the brilliant D'Indy or Franck quartets. 

I'm pretty satisfied with my French string quartet collection now (Belgians can be counted here too). I wouldn't have said so 8 months ago


----------



## Quartetfore

Its been quite a long time since I bought a cd. I like to download because it gives me the chance to sample before making an investment in a cd. I think that iTunes lets you download notes and cover art. I don`t use that service to often, so I have not tried to do it. As to Magnard, Goue, Roger Duchasse --next year. I see that the Debussy Quartet (Bonnal) has just recorded the the quartet of Lekeu to at least on very fine review. It looks like they are now with Timpani and might be back in the recording studio. By the way, when I download I burn to a cd with to my aging ears sound alright.


----------



## Head_case

I'm not so sure about the Lekeu work. 

He did pop it young, and his work is a little callow to my ears. The Petersen Quartet do a competent version of his works. Whether it is the limitation of the writing, or the playing, I can't tell. Well I think I can.......! 

Timpani are cool all so cool. They are one of those little labels that can and do! The do very well


----------



## Quartetfore

For interest sake, I typed in Timpani in the Amazon MP3 site and they have some very interesting works indeed.


----------



## Head_case

Not many string quartets though!


----------



## Quartetfore

Now that the Quatuor Debussy is recording for them, there maybe some new quartet recordings on the way. Perhaps Florent Schmitt or Louis Durey. I don`t see any thing that they play that would fit the companys program at this point, but one never knows.


----------



## Quartetfore

I should add that Timpani has recorded the very long Piano Quintet of Florent Schmitt--the second movement is beautiful.


----------



## Head_case

Florent Schimitt's work is indeed beautiful! Well done Timpani!


----------

