|
Grex > Music > #41: The death of the classical music recording industry |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 77 responses total. |
mary
|
|
response 10 of 77:
|
May 2 13:44 UTC 2007 |
From my own experience I find that once I have one good recording of a
piece of classical music I hardly, if ever, seek out a newer version.
That's a huge hurdle facing the classical recording industry. It's the
same music, to a large extent, being done over and over and over.
|
richard
|
|
response 11 of 77:
|
May 2 14:02 UTC 2007 |
re #10 In fact one issue is that after the cd boom came, far too much
of the standard classical catalogue was recorded again and again and
again, with the emphasis being on grinding out mass quantities of cds
cheaply to make money. You'd see Beethoven symphonies and Mozart this
or that put out done by obscure symphonies and conductors you never
heard of in small towns and cities all over europe. The idea being
that many casual listeners just want a passable copy of Beethoven's
fifth for instance, and would be more than willing to buy it done by
the east polovchak orchestra for a fourth of the price of versions by
the Berlin Philarmonic or the Vienna Philharmonic.
There became so much quantity out there that it obscured the quality.
It became too hard to find the really good recordings in the swarms of
bad, pedestrian recordings put out cheaply and stuffed in the music
bins to make a fast buck. Its like if you sold real Rolexes in the
same display cases as a thousand fake Rolexes, and so many people
bought the fakes and had them break down that they got turned off on
the brand altogether.
|
mary
|
|
response 12 of 77:
|
May 2 14:44 UTC 2007 |
Oh, I don't know. Sometime those no-name-brand orchestras are pretty darn
good. And they even include female musicians! ;-) And not everyone can
afford the BIS imports. Instead they find the $5.00 Fifths a great fit.
You don't have to be a rich snob to enjoy classical music. But don't tell
the rich snobs that - they won't understand.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 13 of 77:
|
May 2 15:39 UTC 2007 |
LOL!
|
edina
|
|
response 14 of 77:
|
May 2 15:57 UTC 2007 |
Re 10 Wow - that's an excellent point. I'm not a huge classical
connosieur, but I have the soundtrack to "Immortal Beloved" which has
an AMAZING recording of Beethoven's Ninth by the Chicago Philharmonic
under Sir Georg Solti. Why would I look for another version?
|
richard
|
|
response 15 of 77:
|
May 2 16:09 UTC 2007 |
re #14 The reason is that each performance is an interpretation.
Years ago I saw Dustin Hoffman's broadway performance as Willie Loman
in Death of a Salesman. It was brilliant. Years later it was revived
with Brian Dennehy as Willie and I saw it again. I had seen Death of a
Salesman. Was it worth it to see it again? It was absolutely worth
it, because Dennehy's interpretation was far different than Hoffman's.
As times change, interpretations change. Approaches can change. Great
works of art are living things that change and take on different
meanings with different performers. Playing a great classical piece
isn't like connect-the-dots, such that if you have someone playing all
the notes right then thats all the work is or can be. If you are
satisfied with just one version, as if there is only one
interpretation/one perfection, and that once it is acheived, the work
has reached its limit, then you will be forever satisfied with just
that version. But if you believe great works are living things, and
that the music has limitless potential, you must be receptive to new
versions.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 16 of 77:
|
May 2 16:28 UTC 2007 |
So why copy paintings? Just have newer generations of artists repaint
them with their own interpretations.
|
richard
|
|
response 17 of 77:
|
May 2 17:54 UTC 2007 |
re #16 bad analogy. Composers write music for others to perform.
They expect their works to be reinterpreted. Painters do not do
paintings expecting others to re-paint the same works.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 18 of 77:
|
May 2 18:17 UTC 2007 |
Why not?
|
keesan
|
|
response 19 of 77:
|
May 2 18:23 UTC 2007 |
I have at least five different versions of some pieces (at about 10 cents
each).
|
richard
|
|
response 20 of 77:
|
May 2 18:41 UTC 2007 |
re #18 because music HAS to be played by others. When many of these
composers wrote music, it was before recording had been invented.
Music was meant to be passed down and reinterpreted. Tolstoy on the
other hand did not write War and Peace with the intent that sixteen
thousand people would re-write the story. He wanted his version to be
the definitive and only version of War and Peace. Every time the book
was re-typed by someone, and re-printed, it was the same book.
Reading a book or painting is a direct relationship between the
reader/viewer and author/painter. With music, a third person or party
has to be involved, i.e. the performer. Unless the performer is a
robot, you expect the work to be interpreted.
Mozart wrote Don Giovanni so others could perform it and make their
own interpretations. Tolstoy wrote War and Peace expecting to be the
only one who would ever "perform" (in this case write) it.
|
marcvh
|
|
response 21 of 77:
|
May 2 18:49 UTC 2007 |
Of course, when you read War and Peace, you're likely reading a
reinterpretation of it in English rather than reading the original
Russian. Plus you're not reading it in Tolstoy's handwriting but rather
a professionally typeset version which probably uses a different font.
The difference is merely one of degree, but pretty much any successful
book is going to be translated, adapted into a made-for-tv-movie, or
reinterpreted based on what Oprah tells people to think about it.
|
mary
|
|
response 22 of 77:
|
May 2 18:58 UTC 2007 |
Again, Richard, you are looking at it from the point of view of a
connoisseur willing and able to purchase the latest high-priced release.
CDs last. The music on them easily migrates to newer, lighter, smaller
devices (iPods). I'm happy with my collection. I seldom buy new classical
recordings yet I thoroughly enjoy classical music. I'm the problem, I
guess.
|
richard
|
|
response 23 of 77:
|
May 2 19:13 UTC 2007 |
re #23 Maybe you are part of the problem Mary. You shouldn't just be
satisfied with the old recordings in your collection. You should want
to hear modern musicians new interpretations. Suppose you have the
best cello works ever written, as they were recorded in the seventies,
and feel your collection is complete. So you won't buy any new cello
works. This would mean you have missed out on all the great work Yo
Yo Ma has done re-interpreting the great cello works during the last
decade and a half. It would be a music experience you are depriving
yourself of having.
Now Yo Yo Ma has sold plenty of records by now, but new artists like
him won't have the same chance. The labels aren't putting out nearly
as many records anymore. Because people like Mary won't buy them
anymore.
|
edina
|
|
response 24 of 77:
|
May 2 19:19 UTC 2007 |
You know, I knew that Mary was the catalyst for the breakdown of
polite and cultured society - now it's good to know we have proof.
;-)
|
richard
|
|
response 25 of 77:
|
May 2 19:20 UTC 2007 |
re #23 I mean by some people's attitudes, you'd think they'd tell Yo
Yo Ma he shouldn't even bother re-recording the great Brahms cello
concertos with his nearly three hundred year old Davydov Stradivarius
cello. I mean Brahms has been done before right and people are
satisfied with their collections?
|
cross
|
|
response 26 of 77:
|
May 2 19:29 UTC 2007 |
Can you smell the self-righteousness?
|
richard
|
|
response 27 of 77:
|
May 2 19:35 UTC 2007 |
re #26 what self righteousness? I just think too many people these
days fail to see classical music as an evolving art form. They think
Brahms is Brahms is Brahms. Beethoven is Beethoven is Beethoven. The
classical music recording industry is dying out because too few see
the value of new interpretations anymore. Once they have a catalogue,
thats it.
|
nharmon
|
|
response 28 of 77:
|
May 2 19:40 UTC 2007 |
So, Richard. Do you think artists should be allowed to sue people who
take the music they wrote and "reinterpret" it? Like, say, Weird Al?
|
marcvh
|
|
response 29 of 77:
|
May 2 20:31 UTC 2007 |
Moreover, there aren't enough artists recording standards these days,
or doing covers of Beatles songs. It's a dang shame.
|
anderyn
|
|
response 30 of 77:
|
May 2 20:52 UTC 2007 |
I'm not fond of classical music. It's not what I want to listen to. I do have
a few recordings (well, mp3s, on my iPod) because I got interested in the
particular work, but on the whole, I don't buy it, old, new, reinterpreted,
or whatever. On the OTHER hand, I have several versions of some of my favorite
folk songs, just because I love hearing lots of different voices and different
variants of the lyrics -- though, on the GRIPPING hand, some people ARE the
definitive singers/interpreters of the songs in question, and I wouldn't want
to hear any other versions at all. (Ask me about "Matty Groves" sometime, if
you want to hear why I adore the Fairport Convention version above all others,
and not the one with Sandy Denny singing lead, either. Which makes certain
people (hi, KRJ!) wince, because I'm so so wrong about that.)
|
slynne
|
|
response 31 of 77:
|
May 2 20:55 UTC 2007 |
I can sympathize with richard's frustration about people having
different tastes than he has. I know that I sometimes feel similar
frustration when favorite tv shows are cancelled. But even so, richard,
it is kind of arrogant to call other people's personal tastes "wrong"
or even to imply that their tastes are part of some problem.
|
richard
|
|
response 32 of 77:
|
May 2 20:57 UTC 2007 |
re #29 there are plenty of artists doing beatles covers and other songs
by them. They are next month in fact releasing a heavily hyped new
album of Lennon covers to raise money for Darfur, "Instant Karma: The
Campaign to Save Darfur." REM does John Lennon's #9 Dream, Green Day
does "Working Class Hero", Christina Aguilera does "Mother", the Cure
does "Love", Black Eyed Peas do "Power to the People" and Willie Nelson
does "Imagine" among others.
I mean I suppose if you had the Beatles "With a little help from My
Friends", why would you want Joe Cocker's cover version? A song is a
song right and your collection is complete with just the original? Or
if you have Dylan's "All Along the Watchtower", why bother spending
money on the version Jimi Hendrix put out right?
re #31 I am not in any way calling other people's personal tastes
wrong. It has nothing to do with a particular person's "tastes", it
has to do with persons being unwilling to try new things. The
classical music industry is losing its customer base because its
customers don't want to try the new samples.
|
slynne
|
|
response 33 of 77:
|
May 2 20:59 UTC 2007 |
Oh and I also wanted to comment about things like works of literature
being reinturpreted. It turns out that they often are and if you pay
attention, you might see the same story being told over and over again.
You know Pyramus and Thisbe becomes Romeo and Juliet becomes West Side
Story, etc.
|
richard
|
|
response 34 of 77:
|
May 2 21:13 UTC 2007 |
re #33 yeah but you are talking total re-writes, stories based on other
stories. Much of art is derivative of earlier art. However, West Side
Story doesn't bill itself as Romeo and Juliet.
|