Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
Composer Discussion / Re: Mahler Mania, Rebooted
« Last post by Jo498 on Today at 06:08:55 AM »
I thought it was noteworthy mainly from the standpoint of hearing the orchestral songs stripped down to string quartet.  But maybe I am alone in being interested in that kind of thing.  I would like to hear more recordings with different singers.
While there is nothing wrong with SQ arrangements, it is hardly a totally new perspective because all these songs so exist in "officially stripped down" (or rather often original) versions for piano and singer. For a bunch there are also chamber arrangements by prominent musicians from the Schoenberg circle.
You keep the downloads stored on a harddrive which has got a "packaging" too.  ;)

Perhaps we should go back then to only attending live concerts and not collect any recordings period?  ;)

Thank you for the further info (and for the bad/good play on words too!).  I haven't tried digitizing any LPs before (save a few 78's done years ago onto a cassette--a parent's special Christmas LPs), but do have a RCM which I've used to clean up some LPs when needed.   :)

Enjoy your douzaine of the doyenne Doyen!

Composer Discussion / Re: Frederick Delius
« Last post by Biffo on Today at 05:34:49 AM »
Well, he was entitled to his opinion. He was an artist, not a journalist, and I’d expect strong opinions from him, and not necessarily judiciously expressed, especially in a private communication. I’d only fault him if he went so far as to try to thwart another composer’s career

RVW was also scathing about Richard Strauss (Liszt plus one) and Gustav Mahler (a tolerable imitation of a composer). He was very supportive of numerous young composers.

Must listen to North Country Sketches again soon.
Great Recordings and Reviews / Re: New Releases
« Last post by Mandryka on Today at 05:29:51 AM »
Cover art is kind of crappy...  :-X

Elgar would have loved it. Is he wearing anything to hide is willie?
Great Recordings and Reviews / Re: New Releases
« Last post by Mandryka on Today at 05:29:08 AM »
Yes!  :)

The contents can already be seen on (well, kinda, as in their usual bizarre style, they mention induvidual movements, not works as such). AFAIK, the set includes a real rarity: Loriod’s recordings of Mozart’s first four piano concertos, conducted by Boulez (which were only fleetingly available in CD as a complement to the French magazine CLASSICA some years ago).

Somewhat more informative tracklisting for the Yvonne Loriod box:

I'm listening to the Chopin etudes now and I must say, I think it's not bad at all.
Composer Discussion / Re: Mahler Mania, Rebooted
« Last post by Biffo on Today at 05:25:21 AM »
I thought it was noteworthy mainly from the standpoint of hearing the orchestral songs stripped down to string quartet.  But maybe I am alone in being interested in that kind of thing.  I would like to hear more recordings with different singers.

Mahler composed versions with piano accompaniment for all the songs in this album. They are available from various singers.
The Diner / Re: What are you currently reading?
« Last post by San Antone on Today at 05:22:20 AM »

I first read this shortly after it came out in the '70s but lost that copy.  I recently bought the Kindle edition and began it again.  Excellent read for anyone interested in early New Orleans jazz.

Giuliani’s walkback: No collusion. Well, maybe some collusion.
Giuliani's new defense for Trump: Even if it's true, it's not a crime
President Trump's lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani is now arguing that even if the president colluded with Russia or directed hush-money payments, it is not a crime. (JM Rieger/The Washington Post)

By Jennifer Rubin
Opinion writer
January 17 at 11:46 AM
The Post reports:

Rudolph W. Giuliani claimed Wednesday night that he “never said there was no collusion” between President Trump’s campaign and Russia leading up to the 2016 presidential election.

In a remarkable, at times contentious, interview with CNN’s Chris Cuomo, the president’s lawyer was accused of contradicting his own past statements about collusion as well as what Trump and his supporters have repeatedly asserted. On Twitter, Trump has used the phrase “no collusion” dozens of times, and a number of those instances were direct denials that his campaign was involved with the Russian government. ...

As recently as July, Giuliani was asked by Fox News contributor Guy Benson, “Regardless of whether collusion would be a crime, is it still the position of you and your client that there was no collusion with the Russians whatsoever on behalf of the Trump campaign?”

“Correct,” Giuliani responded at the time.

No, you’ve not lost your mind; Trump really has, more than a dozen times in tweets, denied that his campaign colluded with the Russians.

 Embedded video

New Day

 Rudy Giuliani says President Trump didn't collude with Russia but can't say if campaign aides did.

Trump himself has tweeted at least 13 times directly saying there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

6:24 AM - Jan 17, 2019
126 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Now, we already knew “no collusion” was false. Trump’s campaign chairman Paul Manafort, son and son-in-law met with Russians in Trump Tower to get “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. Manafort gave polling data to Kremlin-connected Konstantin Kilimnik. Trump publicly called for the Russians to go find Clinton’s emails.

Nevertheless, to hear Trump’s own attorney suggest Trump has been lying — or in the best case, was utterly oblivious to the circle of Kremlin-connected hires on his campaign — shocks even the most cynical Trump watchers.

Keep Reading

Giuliani clearly is wrong on one point: He claims Trump can be guilty of a crime only if he conspired to hack Clinton’s emails. That is patently false. If Trump conspired to break campaign finance laws, schemed to cover up the Trump Tower meeting, dangled pardons in front of witnesses or otherwise urged them not to cooperate, leaned on former FBI director James B. Comey to go easy on Michael Flynn or lied in answers to written questions under oath, a variety of legal causes of action might arise, ranging from obstruction of justice, to conspiracy to violate campaign laws, to conspiracy to commit fraud.

“Once you join a criminal conspiracy, you’re all in and you are responsible for the acts of your co-conspirators that are reasonably foreseeable to you,” says former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti. “If you’re in for a dime, you’re in for a dollar, so to speak.”

Former prosecutor Mimi Rocah concurs. “If he was aware of the general goals of the other actors and did something that helped facilitate those goals either before, after, or during, he has joined the conspiracy and/or is aiding and abetting. Same thing as being the principal actor.”

Giuliani either was confused (even by his standards) or trying to distance the president from the possible criminality of others. As a legal matter, the latter likely will fail. For a man who insists he knows everything about everything, it’s inconceivable that so many people were conspiring with the Russians without his knowledge and/or approval. Even on its own terms, Giuliani’s defense is politically disastrous, however. It paints Trump as a dupe, led astray by what former New Jersey governor Chris Christie called an “evolving door of deeply flawed individuals — amateurs, grifters, weaklings, convicted and unconvicted felons." He doesn’t hire the best people; he hires the worst and cannot keep track of what they are up to, if Giuliani’s “hear nothing, see nothing” theory is true.

The remarkable progression from no collusion/no contacts to “I didn’t know about the meetings” to “Collusion isn’t a crime” to “Well, others might have colluded but Trump was clueless” suggests three things. First, the White House knows of serious criminal charges in the works against one or more associates. Second, we know a sliver of what Robert S. Mueller III knows, and Trump and his legal team don’t know much more. Third, Republicans who parroted his “no collusion” and “witch hunt” claims look foolish, if not duplicitous. They now have to decide to continue blindly following Trump or to finally cut him loose, start looking for a 2020 challenger, and hope voters forget that Republicans aided and abetted Trump every step of the way.

And a reminder that all the enablers are part of the cesspool
Composer Discussion / Re: Mahler Mania, Rebooted
« Last post by Papy Oli on Today at 05:21:34 AM »
I'll throw in Ancerl for the 9th and Reiner for the 4th   8)
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]