Havergal Brian.

[Scarpia]

I don't think Colin is saying that. What I think he is bewailing is the fact - as he sees it - that people aren't adventurous enough, missing a lot of good, yes, sometimes even great music in the process.

Maybe he doesn't mean that, but that's what he said.

[Dundonnell]

 

NO...it is NOT what I said, meant, intended or implied

I am not sure that I would go even so far as Johan states as "bewailing the fact". I regret that those who-for whatever reason-prefer to stick with what they know so well rather than listen to what they may be unfamiliar with can miss out on some great music BUT I can respect that position.

AND...as AGAIN I stated quite explicitly, I have tremendous admiration and am in frequent awe of the deep knowledge of compositional techniques and interpretative nuances which allows them to make the comparisons I cannot.

Can I be any clearer

[Sergeant Rock]

From my experience both inside and outside of music forums I have come to the conclusion that the classical listening world divides into those who prefer to stick mainly to composers they know-Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Berlioz, Brahms, Wagner, Dvorak, Tchaikovsky, Bruckner, Mahler, Sibelius et al- are perfectly happy to amass collections of multiple copies of these composers' music(including some obvious duds) and compare and contrast interpretations, tempi etc etc etc at great and, undoubtedly, well-informed depth for hours, days........

and those who prefer to have one, two or, at the very most, three versions of the same piece, bought, probably, on the recommendation of a writer/critic they have come to trust and respect, and spend the rest of their time exploring the byways of musical composition, investigating composers who have been neglected or ignored previously.

There's a third type, of which there are many here at GMG: in a word, the insane   Those who not only collect multiple copies of their favorite works but who avidly explore outside the usual suspects. I'm one of those crazies: for example, I own 35 Mahler Firsts (over 350 Mahler recordings in total); 14 Rings, 20 Brahms Fourths, 23 Bruckner Ninths, etc, etc. But there are also close to 400 composers in my collection, including (to cite your example) Arnell's Symphonies 2, 3, 4, 5 and the Piano Concerto; every Havergal Brian recording; many obscure Austro-German Romantics and Post Romantics. Over 10, 000 CDs and LPs total. Spread out over a lifetime, it's perfectly feasible to have breadth and depth in ones collection.

Sarge

[Dundonnell]

....and THAT-IF you can afford it IS  the ideal combination

But if it has worked for you then I applaud your energy, enthusiasm and commitment

[Sergeant Rock]

....and THAT-IF you can afford it

Yes, I should have called this third type: the insane and fiscally irresponsible 

Sarge

[Dundonnell]

My apologies

Re-reading my post I should, of course, have said "Is the ideal combination" rather than "may be"

[cilgwyn]

Actually,it's just cost & available room that really stops me. I DO have multiple recordings of the Enigma Variations (well,the most significant ones),for example,due to my interest in British Music & because of the Enigma Variations obvious historical significance & it's unusually,for a British composition (English,if you like) extensive recording history,from the acoustic era........well,you all know,don't you! But it's interesting isn't? The other week I played recordings by Monteux,Elgar himself,Boult,Barbirolli,Dutoit,Hamilton Harty,Henry Wood............and it's interesting,isn't it? Well,I thought so!
And of course,it's just lovely music!

[cilgwyn]

Lack of room is an issue,quite frankly,when it comes to multiple copies! Maybe a Heath Robinson arrangement,with my settee,tv set hanging from the ceiling & the cds filling the floor,might help?! As it stands.they're presumably getting used to seeing Gerr Tveitt & Villa Lobos in between the Cliff Richard & Abba cds,down at the YMCA! Mind you when I dumped another load in there the other week,I remember being rather suprised to see an X Files VHS Season Box set on the counter!!!

[Scarpia]

NO...it is NOT what I said, meant, intended or implied

I am not sure that I would go even so far as Johan states as "bewailing the fact". I regret that those who-for whatever reason-prefer to stick with what they know so well rather than listen to what they may be unfamiliar with can miss out on some great music BUT I can respect that position.

AND...as AGAIN I stated quite explicitly, I have tremendous admiration and am in frequent awe of the deep knowledge of compositional techniques and interpretative nuances which allows them to make the comparisons I cannot.

Can I be any clearer

Please.

From my experience both inside and outside of music forums I have come to the conclusion that the classical listening world divides into those who prefer to stick mainly to composers they know-Beethoven, Schubert, Schumann, Berlioz, Brahms, Wagner, Dvorak, Tchaikovsky, Bruckner, Mahler, Sibelius et al- are perfectly happy to amass collections of multiple copies of these composers' music(including some obvious duds) and compare and contrast interpretations, tempi etc etc etc at great and, undoubtedly, well-informed depth for hours, days........

and those who prefer to have one, two or, at the very most, three versions of the same piece, bought, probably, on the recommendation of a writer/critic they have come to trust and respect, and spend the rest of their time exploring the byways of musical composition, investigating composers who have been neglected or ignored previously.

You divided classical listeners into two catagories and allow that those "who prefer to have one, to or at the very most three versions of the same piece" "spend the rest of their time exploring the byways of musical composition."   As Sarge has pointed out, there is nothing in being interested in multiple performances which excludes being interested in a broad range of composers, off the beaten trail.

You can divide the world into people who like cheese and people who don't like cheese.  That is fine, although of limited interest.  But when you divide the world into those who like cheese and those who like broccoli, you make a hash of it, since the two are not exclusive.  There are lots of people who like both, or like neither.  That's what you have done.   Your statement isn't offensive, it's simply jibberish.

[Mirror Image]

There's a third type, of which there are many here at GMG: in a word, the insane   Those who not only collect multiple copies of their favorite works but who avidly explore outside the usual suspects. I'm one of those crazies: for example, I own 35 Mahler Firsts (over 350 Mahler recordings in total); 14 Rings, 20 Brahms Fourths, 23 Bruckner Ninths, etc, etc. But there are also close to 400 composers in my collection, including (to cite your example) Arnell's Symphonies 2, 3, 4, 5 and the Piano Concerto; every Havergal Brian recording; many obscure Austro-German Romantics and Post Romantics. Over 10, 000 CDs and LPs total. Spread out over a lifetime, it's perfectly feasible to have breadth and depth in ones collection.

Sarge

Indeed, Sarge, but then there are types like me who just stick to one century and don't really bother exploring the rest. The 20th Century is my home away from home. Although I do love a lot of Romantic music, especially late-Romantic music.

[cilgwyn]

I must admit,I prefer a corn beef hash myself,but broccoli and cheese would probably be healthier.Also I would personally mix the two together,otherwise it would just be cheese & broccoli,not a hash!
Having said that,each to his own,I say! It's all food for thought,anyway.
(I'm with the cheese camp,personally!)

[cilgwyn]

Anyway,back to Havergal Broccoli!

[Scarpia]

I must admit,I prefer a corn beef hash myself,but broccoli and cheese would probably be healthier.Also I would personally mix the two together,otherwise it would just be cheese & broccoli,not a hash!
Having said that,each to his own,I say! It's all food for thought,anyway.
(I'm with the cheese camp,personally!)

I must say I did not anticipate that my post would facilitate such richly mixed metaphors. 

[Dundonnell]

You divided classical listeners into two catagories and allow that those "who prefer to have one, to or at the very most three versions of the same piece" "spend the rest of their time exploring the byways of musical composition."   As Sarge has pointed out, there is nothing in being interested in multiple performances which excludes being interested in a broad range of composers, off the beaten trail.

You can divide the world into people who like cheese and people who don't like cheese.  That is fine, although of limited interest.  But when you divide the world into those who like cheese and those who like broccoli, you make a hash of it, since the two are not exclusive.  There are lots of people who like both, or like neither.  That's what you have done.   Your statement isn't offensive, it's simply jibberish.

Your first paragraph I accept and can agree with. It is the point made by Sarge and I have already accepted it, although, as I said, such a position does require an additional financial commitment which I certainly could not afford.

Your second paragraph is the sort of gratutitously rude and offensive comment which is one reason why I began to find membership of this forum occasionally an unpleasant experience

I try to be courteous to my fellow members, I concede when I am wrong, I return to apologise if I have unintentionally upset someone and I am treated to abuse of this nature.
And IF you don't think that describing a post as "jibberish" is rude and offensive then you require training in manners

You are blocked

[Scarpia]

You divided classical listeners into two catagories and allow that those "who prefer to have one, to or at the very most three versions of the same piece" "spend the rest of their time exploring the byways of musical composition."   As Sarge has pointed out, there is nothing in being interested in multiple performances which excludes being interested in a broad range of composers, off the beaten trail.

You can divide the world into people who like cheese and people who don't like cheese.  That is fine, although of limited interest.  But when you divide the world into those who like cheese and those who like broccoli, you make a hash of it, since the two are not exclusive.  There are lots of people who like both, or like neither.  That's what you have done.   Your statement isn't offensive, it's simply jibberish.

Your first paragraph I accept and can agree with. It is the point made by Sarge and I have already accepted it, although, as I said, such a position does require an additional financial commitment which I certainly could not afford.

Your second paragraph is the sort of gratutitously rude and offensive comment which is one reason why I began to find membership of this forum occasionally an unpleasant experience

I try to be courteous to my fellow members, I concede when I am wrong, I return to apologise if I have unintentionally upset someone and I am treated to abuse of this nature.
And IF you don't think that describing a post as "jibberish" is rude and offensive then you require training in manners

You are blocked

My intention was not to be rude, sorry if you took it that way.  Perhaps the use of the word jibberish put it over the top.

For what it is worth, I found your post condescending and implicitly insulting.   But now that you are blocking me, I can say whatever I please about you, no?  Excellent outcome! 

[J.Z. Herrenberg]

And now back to HB.

[Scarpia]

And now back to HB.

I'll return after I've somehow disposed of my excess copies of Beethoven's Op 131. 

[Mirror Image]

Don't worry about Scarpia, Colin. His negativity is well-documented. He never apologizes for anything. At least, I have the common decency to apologize to my fellow GMG members if I unintentionally insult them.

[Scarpia]

Don't worry about Scarpia, Colin. His negativity is well-documented. He never apologizes for anything. At least, I have the common decency to apologize to my fellow GMG members if I unintentionally insult them.

Except I explicitly apologized three posts above. 

[Mirror Image]

Except I explicitly apologized three posts above. 

But you countered that 'apology' with this comment:

For what it is worth, I found your post condescending and implicitly insulting. But now that you are blocking me, I can say whatever I please about you, no?  Excellent outcome!

Saying I'm sorry with good intentions and then turning right around and saying something unnecessarily negative again cancels out that apology in my view.