|
Grex > Music1 > #72: A Recommended Service - Copied from mnet | |
|
| Author |
Message |
md
|
|
A Recommended Service - Copied from mnet
| 
Mar 17 14:25 UTC 1993 |
Item 247 entered Mon, Mar 15, 1993 (10:44) by Michael Delizia (md)
How Can They Do It?
I saw an advertisement in the New York Review of Books for something
called "BBC Music". The pitch was, if you signed up right now and
became a Charter Member, you would receive each month a glossy
magazine and a CD with an hour of classical music on it for only
$2.98. I didn't see how they could get away with something like
that, but I figured what the heck and sent the Charter Member
form in.
Sure enough, on Saturday I got my first mailing: A beautiful magazine
filled with interviews, essays, recording reviews an concert schedules
(all UK); and a CD with recordings of Rachmininov's
"Isle of the Dead" and Stravinsky's "Petrouchka" - about an hour's
worth of music. The bill was $2.98. The CD is quite good - It's
a live performance by the BBC Scottish Symphony Orchestra conducted
by some Slav. The sound is very good, and the performances are good.
The magazine is big and glossy, well-written with lots of color photo's.
If you ever see an ad for this service, and if you can spare $2.98 per
month, go for it.
8 responses total.
#1 MaryEllen Wessels (mew) Mon, Mar 15, 1993 (12:06):
Perhaps you can post the sign up info or address or something?
Thanks! :-)
#2 Christopher L. Goosman (goose) Mon, Mar 15, 1993 (12:17):
CD's only cost pennies (i.e. less than $1.00) when produced in quantities
of 10,000 or more. Amazing how it costs less to produce CD's than Vinyl
yet CD's are $3-4 higher than records. Hmmmm.........
#3 confused (modeus) Mon, Mar 15, 1993 (14:01):
Please post the info for curious listeners, would be apreceiated.
#4 Ken Josenhans (krj) Tue, Mar 16, 1993 (01:31):
The BBC magazine is advertising in lots of upscale magazines like
Harpers and The New Republic. If I see the ad before md I'll key in
the info.
The performances are things which have been recorded for BBC broadcast
and the contracts probably specify that no additional royalties are
due.
#5 Michael Delizia (md) Tue, Mar 16, 1993 (09:11):
I'd appreciate it, Ken. I went through the magazine last night
and there's nothing in it about the charter membership deal.
In fact, it looks like the regular rate is $10.00 per issue,
not including the CD!
#6 Ken Josenhans (krj) Wed, Mar 17, 1993 (08:21):
The BBC Music ad appears in the February 1 1993 issue of The New Republic.
It says to call 1-800-257-1100 and quote department KA. There's also a
little circle with a "G1" in it on the reply card. The ad's between
pages 20 and 21. As a charter subscriber you are never supposed to be
charged more than $2.98 a month plus shipping and handling, blah blah.
#7 Ken Josenhans (krj) Wed, Mar 17, 1993 (08:25):
Um, that should be department "KA5" above, line noise ate the digit.
#8 Michael Delizia (md) Wed, Mar 17, 1993 (09:05):
[Actually, it's $0.00 per month. The $2.98 *is* the shipping
and handling. I still don't know how they can do this. The
only thing I can think of is that they're counting on lots of
subscribers to order additional CDs at full price. There's a
list included with the magazine.
Thanks for entering the info, Ken.]
Respond or pass?
|
| 31 responses total. |
danr
|
|
response 1 of 31:
|
Mar 18 12:51 UTC 1993 |
I've signed up for this, too. I got my first CD last week.
I figure it is an inexpensive way to build up a classical CD collection
and learn more about classical music in the process.
|
steve
|
|
response 2 of 31:
|
Apr 3 21:58 UTC 1993 |
Do they produce a new CD each month?
|
danr
|
|
response 3 of 31:
|
Apr 5 11:29 UTC 1993 |
I think so, although I'm still waiting for my April CD/magazine.
|
polygon
|
|
response 4 of 31:
|
Apr 6 13:47 UTC 1993 |
We've signed up for this as well.
|
keats
|
|
response 5 of 31:
|
Apr 7 17:07 UTC 1993 |
as have i, but i haven't heard (literally or figuratively) anything yet.
|
md
|
|
response 6 of 31:
|
Apr 19 19:08 UTC 1993 |
I got the April one from the Post Office today. We had them holding
our mail while we were on vacation, so it must've arrived some time
last week. Anybody else get one yet?
|
danr
|
|
response 7 of 31:
|
Apr 19 19:10 UTC 1993 |
I got mine Wednesday or Thursday.
|
keats
|
|
response 8 of 31:
|
May 1 17:13 UTC 1993 |
got mine. cd was nice, and one or two of the articles were interesting.
i haven't had a chance to sit down and listen carefully to the cd while
reading the associated feature--so i don't know if i'm being educated
yet.
|
md
|
|
response 9 of 31:
|
May 13 17:17 UTC 1993 |
Got the new one a couple of days ago. Mahler's 5th. I made myself
listen to it all the way through twice already, and I paid attention
and everything, and I *still* don't get it. Music that lurches about
and gestures wildly and generally makes much ado about practically
nothing. It reminds of Ives a bit, only without Ives's sense of
humor and the Americanness that makes Ives [barely] listenable.
It's like being seated at a wake next to a very long-winded and very
self-absorbed person who, you gradually come to understand, is not
quite right in the head. (Boring, in a word - but it's more fun to
flame on Mahler at greater length. I realize that about 50 squillion
Mahler fans can't be wrong, which makes flaming him all the more fun.)
|
chelsea
|
|
response 10 of 31:
|
May 14 23:11 UTC 1993 |
Ahem, I'm one of those fans. In fact, listening to Mahler's 9th is
as close to religion as this woman has ever been.
So there.
|
power
|
|
response 11 of 31:
|
May 17 02:11 UTC 1993 |
To appreciate contemporary music, you have to listen to it more than twice!
When I first got a copy of <some Hindemith tape>, I didn't really like it all
that much... but as I listened to it a couple times over (knowing that I
really liked some stuff I played that was by Hindemith), I really came to
appreciate it... you're just used to classical music (in the sense of
strictly defined tonality, etc)... contemporary music often uses an entirely
foreign tonality, which takes a little bit of time to come to appreciate.
|
md
|
|
response 12 of 31:
|
May 17 13:39 UTC 1993 |
It's not that. Mahler doesn't sound "contemporary" to my ears, in any
sense of the word. In fact, his music sounds quite old-fashioned and
*un*-"contemporary", considering when it was written.
|
power
|
|
response 13 of 31:
|
May 19 21:56 UTC 1993 |
Really? I haven't listened to much, if any Mahler, but it seems that I've
seen him lumped with Schoenberg, etc... hmmm...
|
danr
|
|
response 14 of 31:
|
May 31 22:26 UTC 1993 |
I was waiting to comment on this until I received my May issue, but it
never came. I'm going to have to call them tomorrow.
|
embu
|
|
response 15 of 31:
|
Jun 9 00:21 UTC 1993 |
The best music, it seems, has to be listened to several times before it can
be really appreciated. I've actually found that the music I hate and don't
get the first time I listen to it is the music that I love most later, 'cause
you're constantly noticing new things about it that are really great that
you hadn't seen before. Any improvement on Mahler?
|
aa8ij
|
|
response 16 of 31:
|
Jun 9 05:13 UTC 1993 |
Personally, I am a Bach, Chopin and Mozart fan. I like the symetry (sp) of
Bach and Chopin. Mozart's abilty to jump from a simple tune to a major
crescendo is just stupendous.
I don't care for Mahler.
|
md
|
|
response 17 of 31:
|
Jun 9 13:14 UTC 1993 |
Re #15, I've had exactly that experience of not fully appreciating a
piece of music until I've heard it through several times. The stuff
you comprehend on first hearing doesn't always have much depth. On the
other hand, there's no accounting for one's tastes in various types
of music. There are hard-core modernist pieces that sound cacophonous
next to Mahler, but their "sound" tantalizes and pleases me from first
hearing; whereas Mahler's "sound" annoys me no matter how often I hear it.
That is, I took an immediate liking to Carter's string quartets as they
came out, as well as his Double Concerto, his Concerto for Orchestra,
his Piano Concerto, and the other big pieces. Because of that, I was
inclined to keep on listening until I achieved some real understanding
and appreciation. Mahler doesn't improve for me, alas. His sound is
his sound.
|
embu
|
|
response 18 of 31:
|
Jun 9 21:22 UTC 1993 |
I can't really comment on Mahler, not having heard him much, but I'll
just say that most of Bach is rather irritating. I guess I don't
like most Baroque music, just because of all the notes and not enough
thoughtful places. So, I agree with the personal tastes bit. Speaking
of modern music, have you ever heard of the piece(s?) in which there are
no notes on the page of music, but directions to bring a newspaper up to
the stage, and then individual directions for each of the players in the
string quartet, telling the person where to look in the paper and to play
soemthing that expresses how you feel about what you just saw or read?
I haven't actually seen one of these performed, but apparently my father
has. It sounds quite interesting... wonder how much of the audience you'd
lose if you tried _that_ as an encore? :) (Sorry for the confusing
"explanation"...)
|
remmers
|
|
response 19 of 31:
|
Jun 10 11:32 UTC 1993 |
(Interesting how perceptions differ. I generally find Baroque music to
to be quite soulful and expressive, full of emotional content. And much
of it isn't like Bach at all.)
|
embu
|
|
response 20 of 31:
|
Jun 11 00:37 UTC 1993 |
I apologize, then, for stereotyping baroque music by bach. I suppose that I
haven't really been exposed to much other baroque music OTHER than Bach.
I just saw a really neat movie ("Tous Les Matins du Monde") that had a lot
of absolutely fantastic Viomusic. Is the Viol from what is considered the
barouque period?
|
remmers
|
|
response 21 of 31:
|
Jun 11 12:40 UTC 1993 |
Yes indeed. What you heard was music of the French Baroque, rather
different from the German Baroque of which Bach was a part. It had a
free, improvisational quality, to my mind somewhat akin to jazz.
Actually, I suppose Bach was not completely typical of German Baroque
either. He was a numerologist; his works are very mathematically
structured.
|
embu
|
|
response 22 of 31:
|
Jun 12 16:29 UTC 1993 |
Now I feel *very* guilty. I hate it when I find out that I've been believing
something for a long time that was based on ignorance...a mathematician!
No wonder! I think that I'll look at barouque music with a new view now..
The viol music _was_ quite improvisational, and very emotional and beautiful
and just not at all like the idea I had of barouque music. Has anyone seen the
movie, or heard the soundtrack?
|
remmers
|
|
response 23 of 31:
|
Jun 13 11:19 UTC 1993 |
Bach wasn't a mathematician, but a "numerologist", i.e. one who believes
that numbers have an occult meaning and influence upon human life. (e.g.
that "7 is a lucky number", things like that)
Lots of mathematicians are pretty good with music too...
|
md
|
|
response 24 of 31:
|
Jun 14 17:05 UTC 1993 |
Re 18, I've heard a few of the performance pieces you refer to over
the years. Some are nifty, some not, depending on the skill and sense
of humor of the performers. I like well-written music, though, and
some of this stuff is barely written at all.
Apropos de rien, the latest BBC Music magazine and CD arrived last week.
The CD is a collection of arias from Haydn's operas recorded by Antal
Dorati and various soloists in the 1970's. (It's an ADD disk.) Looks
like they're peddling a giant boxed set of Haydn's complete operas by
Dorati that's just been reissued. If I can scrape up the cash, I just
might go for it. I love Haydn but I don't know his operas at all.
This CD is wonderful.
|