André Rieu

[Opus106]

Rieu has a very intelligent wife. That's all I'm saying.

CHA CHING

Yeah, and I'm sure all the TRUE artists only perform for charity and live in a modest flat. Top conductors get paid in the millions for waving their hands about!

[Que]

Rieu has a very intelligent wife. That's all I'm saying.

CHA CHING

Rieu's company was close to bankruptcy a few years ago due to his Australia tour:

http://andrerieufan.com/2010/02/22/andre-rieu--the-year-that-almost-changed-his-life.aspx?ref=rss

Q

[Mirror Image]

Yeah, and I'm sure all the TRUE artists only perform for charity and live in a modest flat. Top conductors get paid in the millions for waving their hands about!

Yes, but conductors jobs are important. Are they worth the millions you allege they get? I don't know but they're musicians. Not many orchestras can perform without one.

[DavidW]

Yes, but conductors jobs are important. Are they worth the millions you allege they get? I don't know but they're musicians. Not many orchestras can perform without one.

I think that conductors are paid and recognized out of proportion with orchestras.  Somehow the most important figure has been elevated to the only one recognized.  Certainly the orchestra needs the conductor, and it is the conductor's vision... but without the orchestra there is no music period.  And their music making is the product of how talented they are, how much practice they get, how well they work together and work with the conductor, and not simply the conductor's interpretation.  So yes damnit!  they're not worth the millions they get... share the wealth a little.

Alright rant over.

[Sid]

Yeah, and I'm sure all the TRUE artists only perform for charity and live in a modest flat. Top conductors get paid in the millions for waving their hands about!

This is true. As with MI's bitter criticism of Andre Rieu today in 2011, may people where suspicious of the great Liszt in his time (eg. that he was too rich). I'm not elevating or comparing what Mr Rieu does to that of Liszt, who was not only a showman of great skill, but also a great innovator and musical polymath. But they have one big thing in common - they never forgot their humble roots. Liszt gave benefit concerts for many great causes, one in particular I can think of was for the flooding of the Tisza in his native Hungary in the mid c19th. Whole towns were totally destroyed and had to be rebuilt, including the beautiful Szeged. Similarly, Andre Rieu has put his money where is mouth is but he's not bragged about it. A cause dear to his heart was halting the spread of the desert in West Africa's Sahel region. Over the past 20 years, the charity that he and a Dutch biologist set up has been responsible for the planting of thousands of trees in the region. "From little things big things grow" as the song goes.

I'd just recommend anyone here to read Andre Rieu's biography, written by his wife Marjorie Rieu, called "My music, my life." Although he has won the admiration of many people, Rieu avoids name-dropping or self-agrandising. He's probably less arrogant and more likeable than some other "serious" musicians - Pierre Boulez comes to mind, a genius of a musician, but a guy who's probably said alot of nasty things about other mmusicians in the past 50 years that he's probably regretted. Whatever their acheivements, Boulez comes across as an arrogant nobhead & Rieu by comparison is a gentleman...

[Mirror Image]

This is true. As with MI's bitter criticism of Andre Rieu today in 2011, may people where suspicious of the great Liszt in his time (eg. that he was too rich). I'm not elevating or comparing what Mr Rieu does to that of Liszt, who was not only a showman of great skill, but also a great innovator and musical polymath. But they have one big thing in common - they never forgot their humble roots. Liszt gave benefit concerts for many great causes, one in particular I can think of was for the flooding of the Tisza in his native Hungary in the mid c19th. Whole towns were totally destroyed and had to be rebuilt, including the beautiful Szeged. Similarly, Andre Rieu has put his money where is mouth is but he's not bragged about it. A cause dear to his heart was halting the spread of the desert in West Africa's Sahel region. Over the past 20 years, the charity that he and a Dutch biologist set up has been responsible for the planting of thousands of trees in the region. "From little things big things grow" as the song goes.

I'd just recommend anyone here to read Andre Rieu's biography, written by his wife Marjorie Rieu, called "My music, my life." Although he has won the admiration of many people, Rieu avoids name-dropping or self-agrandising. He's probably less arrogant and more likeable than some other "serious" musicians - Pierre Boulez comes to mind, a genius of a musician, but a guy who's probably said alot of nasty things about other mmusicians in the past 50 years that he's probably regretted. Whatever their acheivements, Boulez comes across as an arrogant nobhead & Rieu by comparison is a gentleman...

Surely, you're not comparing Rieu with Liszt? I mean are you insane, Sid? Liszt was an incredible musician who, if alive today, would be a concert pianist of Martha Argerich or Richter status and maybe even greater. Rieu probably could barely even make it through the first bars of Tchaikovsky's Violin Concerto.

[Opus106]

Surely, you're not comparing Rieu with Liszt?

Surely, you didn't read what Sid said, did you?

[Mirror Image]

Surely, you didn't read what Sid said, did you?

Doesn't matter if he did or not, he put Rieu in the same sentence as Liszt and that's a sin as far as I'm concerned.

[Opus106]

Doesn't matter if I did or not, he put Rieu in the same sentence as Liszt and that's a sin as far as I'm concerned.

*Waits for the winking emoticon to load*

[Coopmv]

I was not and still am not familiar with Andre Rieu.  After having googled him a little, it looks like he is a purveyor of bubble-gum classical music, sort of like the Boston/Cincinnati Pops ...

[Sid]

Surely, you're not comparing Rieu with Liszt? I mean are you insane, Sid? Liszt was an incredible musician who, if alive today, would be a concert pianist of Martha Argerich or Richter status and maybe even greater.

You criticised Rieu for being rich, that's what I was replying to with regards to the great Liszt - people in the c19th were suspicious of his for the same reason you criticised Rieu. It wasn't based on music at all, but superficial judgements. Member opus196 above was right in correcting you - you didn't get the gist of my argument. It was that both Liszt & Rieu contributed greatly to music in their respective realms/areas. Go back & read my post - I said Liszt was an innovator & musical polymath, I didn't describe Rieu in that way at all. Who would? But both men put their money where their mouth is & didn't brag about it. Liszt put a lot of his money into charitable causes, as has Rieu.

I'll repeat this again, although you'll probably refute my facts with another side issue or not very strong counter argument. Rieu has been playing since he was 6 & has a degree in music. He was encouraged to go on to become a professional musician by the likes of Franz Bruggen. Rieu played as an orchestral & chamber musician in many ensembles in the Netherlands for 20 years. He has a solid grounding in "serious" classical music. He founded his own quintet playing light salon music & then went on to set up his own orchestra (at the age of 40). His arrangements have been admired by the likes of Riccardo Chailly.

Why do we have to argue about this? Quite a few people here don't seem to be going along with your tirades. I listened to the chansons of c15th composers Dufay last night, as well as some of Edith Piaf's stuff. I basically put them on the same level. Dufay was a great composer of chansons in his time, as was Piaf - who not only composed, but also performed as a singer (one of the most distinctive voices of the c20th, as recognisable as Caruso or Pavorotti), and also an excellent arranger. Are you going to bring me to task for this as well?

Rieu probably could barely even make it through the first bars of Tchaikovsky's Violin Concerto.

You're talking utter nonsense. It's in Rieu's book. He studied a music degree majoring in string playing. So do you know that all students have to play major concertos as well as solo and chamber pieces throughout and particularly towards the end of their degree? You can't hold a music degree without playing this type of music & know the scores intimately. I don't hold a music degree, but I have friends who have, and I can tell you that 4 years of study at that level is no walk in the park. I respect your knowledge & passion for music as well as that of any other forum member's here, but it seems you don't understand the high level of training that classical musicians go to at conservatory level. Rieu is no exception. In his earlier life playing "serious" classical music, Rieu was as able an chamber or orchestral player as any "serious" classical musician in his league. Rieu mentions that he particularly enjoyed playing Bartok's string quartets, for the challenges they presented on many levels. I don't have time to argue any more, in any case my facts aren't making any impact on you. You just go on being prejudiced and bitter if you like, I'm not like that, I like to be positive and appreciative of what all of our great musicians do...

I was not and still am not familiar with Andre Rieu.  After having googled him a little, it looks like he is a purveyor of bubble-gum classical music, sort of like the Boston/Cincinnati Pops ...

I think people are misreading my opinions on Rieu, as member opus106 has pointed out above. I'm not saying he's anything else but a highly skilled and competent musician in the realm of light classical music. So your analogy with the pops orchestras is apt, Rieu is a bit like a modern Mantovani (whom I also have much respect for, but I won't go into that). I like some of Rieu's arrangements, some I don't like. Some things he changes a lot, other things he virtually leaves as they are, maybe adding a thing here or there. If anything, a lot of his arrangments show quite a bit of restraint, often he's not as schmaltzy as you'd expect. I'm not saying his arrangments are better than the originals, and he doesn't say that either. But I enjoy Liszt's orchestration of Schubert's great Wanderer Fantasy just as much as the original, & it's often the same with Andre's arrangements. Enjoyment and engagement in the musicality and craftsmanship is what I probably like the most in all music, be it of any genre or spectrum...

[Mirror Image]

You criticised Rieu for being rich, that's what I was replying to with regards to the great Liszt - people in the c19th were suspicious of his for the same reason you criticised Rieu. It wasn't based on music at all, but superficial judgements. Member opus196 above was right in correcting you - you didn't get the gist of my argument. It was that both Liszt & Rieu contributed greatly to music in their respective realms/areas. Go back & read my post - I said Liszt was an innovator & musical polymath, I didn't describe Rieu in that way at all. Who would? But both men put their money where their mouth is & didn't brag about it. Liszt put a lot of his money into charitable causes, as has Rieu.

I'll repeat this again, although you'll probably refute my facts with another side issue or not very strong counter argument. Rieu has been playing since he was 6 & has a degree in music. He was encouraged to go on to become a professional musician by the likes of Franz Bruggen. Rieu played as an orchestral & chamber musician in many ensembles in the Netherlands for 20 years. He has a solid grounding in "serious" classical music. He founded his own quintet playing light salon music & then went on to set up his own orchestra (at the age of 40). His arrangements have been admired by the likes of Riccardo Chailly.

Why do we have to argue about this? Quite a few people here don't seem to be going along with your tirades. I listened to the chansons of c15th composers Dufay last night, as well as some of Edith Piaf's stuff. I basically put them on the same level. Dufay was a great composer of chansons in his time, as was Piaf - who not only composed, but also performed as a singer (one of the most distinctive voices of the c20th, as recognisable as Caruso or Pavorotti), and also an excellent arranger. Are you going to bring me to task for this as well?

You're talking utter nonsense. It's in Rieu's book. He studied a music degree majoring in string playing. So do you know that all students have to play major concertos as well as solo and chamber pieces throughout and particularly towards the end of their degree? You can't hold a music degree without playing this type of music & know the scores intimately. I don't hold a music degree, but I have friends who have, and I can tell you that 4 years of study at that level is no walk in the park. I respect your knowledge & passion for music as well as that of any other forum member's here, but it seems you don't understand the high level of training that classical musicians go to at conservatory level. Rieu is no exception. In his earlier life playing "serious" classical music, Rieu was as able an chamber or orchestral player as any "serious" classical musician in his league. Rieu mentions that he particularly enjoyed playing Bartok's string quartets, for the challenges they presented on many levels. I don't have time to argue any more, in any case my facts aren't making any impact on you. You just go on being prejudiced and bitter if you like, I'm not like that, I like to be positive and appreciative of what all of our great musicians do...

I haven't disputed his level of training, Sid, what I don't care for is what he's using that training for, which is making a lot of money playing fun little ditties that the audience can clap along with. I like all kinds of music too Sid, but even I can tell the difference between somebody who's fooling people and somebody who's impressing people with their talent. Liszt impressed, no, dazzled people with his virtuosity. The same with Saint-Saens, who Liszt commented that he's one of the best organists he ever heard, or Jean Sibelius who I heard was no slouch on the violin, but knew he wasn't good enough to be a concert violinist and gave his life to composition. So I'm well aware that people make choices during their lives that affect them forever and Rieu is no exception to this, but I certainly can't get on board with his brand of corporate "light" music.

I don't have time to argue with you either, Sid, but I think you're going to have to learn how to deal with people who don't see things the same way you do. I simply made some comments about Rieu, and yes they were insults, but you shouldn't take it to heart so quickly. If you and I were face-to-face I would tell you the same thing I am now. I don't sugarcoat things and I certainly won't when it comes to somebody like Rieu who could never hold a candle to Hilary Hahn or Gil Shaham or David Oistrakh or Anne Sophie Mutter...need I go on?

When I listen to music, I listen to get something out of it. I look for deeper meanings. Rieu is an entertainer, not a musician just like Yanni or Kenny G. The only difference between these guys is what they choose to play, but it's still presented the same way: clap-along concert with nice little ditties.

The end.

[eyeresist]

an entertainer, not a musician

Nonsense.

[Mirror Image]

Nonsense.

Really? If Rieu is such an excellent classical musician as Andre says he is let's see him play Shostakovich's Violin Concerto No. 1. Surely somebody who enjoys the spotlight as much as Rieu could play this concerto? My point is that if Rieu wants to impress people why don't he play some difficult music instead of churning out the same old pap recording after recording, concert after concert?

[Sid]

Really? If Rieu is such an excellent classical musician as Andre says he is let's see him play Shostakovich's Violin Concerto No. 1. Surely somebody who enjoys the spotlight as much as Rieu could play this concerto?

I'm sorry, MI, you are just getting worse by the minute. Better if you quit.

Maybe you should come back & criticise when you get to Rieu's level - eg. get a music degree (Four years of solid demanding study & practice), hold down a full time job in a symphony orchestra for 20 years, play both orchestral and chamber repertoire, set up your own quintet while you're doing that, and then finally form your own orchestra! Voila!!! That's most of a lifetime's work. Easy to talk the talk, but you haven't walked the walk...

My point is that if Rieu wants to impress people why don't he play some difficult music instead of churning out the same old pap recording after recording, concert after concert?

It's not "the same old pap" at all. Some his current repertoire is well known and has been for a long time, that is true. But - & this is a BIG BUT! - over the past 40 years, Rieu has unearthed many lesser known pieces from yesteryear, from light classical, to salon, operetta, show & movie tunes, etc. In the early years of his salon quintet in the Netherlands, he appealed to readers in the newspaper to go down to their basements and get out old recordings and sheet music of stuff from the pre-war era. His opinion was that the more obscure the better, he didn't only want to play the evergreens that people already knew. He got a massive response. He's also unearthed these kinds of things from archives, that have been gathering dust for decades. Many of his albums contain these rarities alongside the famous stuff. He was the first to arrange, play and record many pieces and composers whose tunes had not been hear since the era of wax, shellac and 48 & 78 RPM records. Other musicians have played a part in this revival, but Rieu has played a major part in unearthing this previously forgotten repertoire.

So basically he is doing the same thing in the lighter music realm as others in "serious" music. People like Jordi Savall and Philippe Herrewegge have done the same thing for ancient classical music - unearthing previously lost or forgotten repertoire. Reiu has been doing the same thing, but with light music from late c19th to mid c20th. Whether it's a previously unheard medieval mass or a Romantic operetta song, it's all part of the musical heritage of humanity. Isn't this kind of thing just as interesting or musically valuable as yet another recording of something that's been done a hundred times. like Shostakovich's Violin Concerto?...

I'm intersted in the WHOLE history of music, from ancient times until now. It's just as much enjoyable for me to hear the operetta tunes or the tunes that people were dancing to in 1900 as it is hearing a "serious" work by any major classical composer. Some people around here just seem to be glued to a particular niche which can be limiting and stifling. Good luck to them, they can do what they want, but they won't really get the "big picture" of what has gone on in music of centuries past...

[Lethevich]

I can't claim to have ever had the urge to listen to Rieu (or that he was even on my radar), but that has gradually been changing over the past few pages of this thread

[Sid]

I can't claim to have ever had the urge to listen to Rieu (or that he was even on my radar), but that has gradually been changing over the past few pages of this thread

Well, if you're interested in the light songs and dances from late c19th to mid 20th then you'll probably enjoy at least some of what he has to offer. Of course, some if it is just the same old evergreens, but as I said a number of his albums have lesser known pieces that he has recorded for the first time since the end of the second world war. With the advent of rock'n roll, much of the ealier repertoire was devalued. Some of it is now lost forever, and was sadly relegated to the waste basket. But Rieu has resurrected that era in fine arrangements and modern stereo sound. In his hands, something like Toselli's Serenade comes to life, it's no longer on an old mono recording that sounds boring. Just like with any other music, if you're interested in what he does with the more obscure repertoire, have a look at the track on his albums. I've only heard two of his albums so far, so I'm no expert, I can't really advise you in any detailed way. The reason I got into his music was because I read his biography. Naturally after having done that, I wanted to hear him in action so to speak.

I basically think he's done some good things for music. Of course, he plays a lot of "warhorses" as well, but so don't our "serious" musicians as well (indeed, some people around here have a distaste for even the greatest masterpieces just because they are popular and liked by the masses - how sad)...

[Mirror Image]

I'm sorry, MI, you are just getting worse by the minute. Better if you quit.

Maybe you should come back & criticise when you get to Rieu's level - eg. get a music degree (Four years of solid demanding study & practice), hold down a full time job in a symphony orchestra for 20 years, play both orchestral and chamber repertoire, set up your own quintet while you're doing that, and then finally form your own orchestra! Voila!!! That's most of a lifetime's work. Easy to talk the talk, but you haven't walked the walk...

It's not "the same old pap" at all. Some his current repertoire is well known and has been for a long time, that is true. But - & this is a BIG BUT! - over the past 40 years, Rieu has unearthed many lesser known pieces from yesteryear, from light classical, to salon, operetta, show & movie tunes, etc. In the early years of his salon quintet in the Netherlands, he appealed to readers in the newspaper to go down to their basements and get out old recordings and sheet music of stuff from the pre-war era. His opinion was that the more obscure the better, he didn't only want to play the evergreens that people already knew. He got a massive response. He's also unearthed these kinds of things from archives, that have been gathering dust for decades. Many of his albums contain these rarities alongside the famous stuff. He was the first to arrange, play and record many pieces and composers whose tunes had not been hear since the era of wax, shellac and 48 & 78 RPM records. Other musicians have played a part in this revival, but Rieu has played a major part in unearthing this previously forgotten repertoire.

So basically he is doing the same thing in the lighter music realm as others in "serious" music. People like Jordi Savall and Philippe Herrewegge have done the same thing for ancient classical music - unearthing previously lost or forgotten repertoire. Reiu has been doing the same thing, but with light music from late c19th to mid c20th. Whether it's a previously unheard medieval mass or a Romantic operetta song, it's all part of the musical heritage of humanity. Isn't this kind of thing just as interesting or musically valuable as yet another recording of something that's been done a hundred times. like Shostakovich's Violin Concerto?...

I'm intersted in the WHOLE history of music, from ancient times until now. It's just as much enjoyable for me to hear the operetta tunes or the tunes that people were dancing to in 1900 as it is hearing a "serious" work by any major classical composer. Some people around here just seem to be glued to a particular niche which can be limiting and stifling. Good luck to them, they can do what they want, but they won't really get the "big picture" of what has gone on in music of centuries past...

You're missing the whole point of my argument, which is simple: Rieu is an entertainer, not a serious-minded musician. He plays little ditties for people who don't know any better. I thought I made this clear in my last post?

Anyway, I could spend a lifetime absorbing all the music I've heard thus far. You listen for enjoyment Sid and I do too, but, man, you need to really lighten up. I mean you're taking all of this to heart. I'm just sharing my thoughts with you. That's all.

I was never after popular opinion and I'm glad I've had a chance to share my feelings about people like Rieu. Like I said, I listen to music that moves me. If Rieu moves you and sends you into deep thought, then by all means enjoy, Sid, but I'm just saying he lacks the talent and solid musicianship to be taken seriously by someone like myself.

P.S. I'm not the only one on this forum who feels this way, Sid. Just go to search and type in "Rieu" and you can see some very negative reactions to his brand of muzak.

[Sid]

@ MI -

I've provided all of this evidence & hard facts to you, it's up to you what you think of Rieu. All I'm saying is that I've read the book about his life, and listened to two of his albums, and my overall opinion is favourable. I'm not going to go out & buy all of his albums & become a groupie, but I just give credit where credit is due. I respect his credentials and training - all of the hard hours he's put into his craft since he was six - just as I admire those of other violinists of his generation like Perlman or Mutter.

Your criticisms of Rieu, all of which I have basically refuted in some depth, come across to me as being grounded in negative emotions rather than the facts, which speak plainly for themselves. You are familiar with a number of composers that I'm not much familiar with - eg. Koechlin, Bantock, Havergal Brian, etc. & doubtless I have an interest in much repertoire that you're not into - from Medieval songs, to Renaissance masses, to chamber music, lieder, electronic music, and so on (I'd include Andre Rieu in that mix as well). I know & enjoy these as much as you do your music. Doubtless, some of our areas overlap and differ, as do those of other forum members. I just don't know why you have to bring me to task about music that I enjoy. My enjoyment is no less authentic than yours. If I read a books about Monteverdi's or Andre Rieu's life or listen to their cd's, it's no less valid than you listening to or finding out about composers that I don't like. I have no more need to legitimise what I'm listening to than anyone else here. This is not a courtroom for crying out loud, I don't need hard evidence. All I need to have is an interest and enjoyment in the music I listen to...

[Mirror Image]

@ MI -

I've provided all of this evidence & hard facts to you, it's up to you what you think of Rieu. All I'm saying is that I've read the book about his life, and listened to two of his albums, and my overall opinion is favourable. I'm not going to go out & buy all of his albums & become a groupie, but I just give credit where credit is due. I respect his credentials and training - all of the hard hours he's put into his craft since he was six - just as I admire those of other violinists of his generation like Perlman or Mutter.

Your criticisms of Rieu, all of which I have basically refuted in some depth, come across to me as being grounded in negative emotions rather than the facts, which speak plainly for themselves. You are familiar with a number of composers that I'm not much familiar with - eg. Koechlin, Bantock, Havergal Brian, etc. & doubtless I have an interest in much repertoire that you're not into - from Medieval songs, to Renaissance masses, to chamber music, lieder, electronic music, and so on (I'd include Andre Rieu in that mix as well). I know & enjoy these as much as you do your music. Doubtless, some of our areas overlap and differ, as do those of other forum members. I just don't know why you have to bring me to task about music that I enjoy. My enjoyment is no less authentic than yours. If I read a books about Monteverdi's or Andre Rieu's life or listen to their cd's, it's no less valid than you listening to or finding out about composers that I don't like. I have no more need to legitimise what I'm listening to than anyone else here. This is not a courtroom for crying out loud, I don't need hard evidence. All I need to have is an interest and enjoyment in the music I listen to...

That's why I said enjoy the music you enjoy. My only problem is you seem to not be able to accept that people may not like Rieu. In all honesty, I don't care what kind of training Rieu had nor do I care about what kind of life he's lived. That is totally irrelevant to me and completely beside the point. My argument, which you seem to continue to completely skip over, has to do with what he's doing now. Not what he did 20 years ago, but now --- the present. I accept the facts of his training, but can you accept my opinion? I mean I'm not going to argue with you about a guy like Rieu who I already made my opinion known, because as I said I'm not going to budge on my opinion of him and other people like him (i. e. Kenny G, Yanni, John Tesh) who play muzak for a wide audience of people who don't know any better.

What you enjoy has never been a question, Sid. I don't care what you listen to, but I do think it's odd that each time I say I don't care for somebody you're listening to, you get all bent out of shape and for what? Do I not have a right to share my opinion with other people? I mean it's like I said go to search and type in Rieu and you will come across some negative comments about him. Why don't you go back to those posts by GMG members like Greg and Dancing Divertimentian and defend him? I mean if this is how you're going to react each time somebody has negative opinion then you should definitely look into giving these members a tongue lashing too.

All of this said, I think you're a good guy Sid and I know you mean well, but let's just drop this thing before it gets any worse than it already is, agreed?

P.S. I'm beginning to find a lot of chamber music I enjoy, but I never said that I didn't enjoy this genre either. There's still a lot to explore in this genre.