The insanity of abundance!

[Madiel]

I am sick and tired of hearing how the performances I have are always the wrong ones

On this forum it is completely inevitable.

[Jo498]

Why are you offended? You write that you are happy with the Haydn discs you have and you are not sufficiently interested in the music to get more recordings anyway.
Why does it spoil your fun if someone points out that there are recordings out there they prefer? And I don't even know the particular Naxos discs you have, maybe the rather relaxed approach of the Kodaly works well there. If you compare them to the Mosaiques I think you will find that the latter are "more involved" and offer less generic interpretations (I think this should be noticeable even when listening to different pieces). And why did you get the premium prices Mosaiques instead of more Kodaly? NB: As the Mosaiques has almost only friends at this forum your claim that you always have the wrong recordings is also false.

I don't think that Penguin was bribed. I think they seriously wanted to support Naxos offering cheap and good (although often not great) quality recordings and I suspect they did not sufficiently care about Haydn to listen to all (or a large subset of) available recordings. And they probably were surprised that at Naxos prices the Kodaly recordings were as good as they are. I think this is a failure of such a guide book but of course it is impossible for only three authors to listen to everything.

I have also had the experience that some listeners have no problem to shell out for a dozen alternative recordings of a Mahler symphony but are unwilling to pay more than Naxos price for Haydn quartets. While I cannot quibble with such a preference, I think it is not an acceptable stance for a guide book because these pieces are to other listeners as important as Mahler symphonies and  these listeners deserve a considered recommendation, not a pointer to a cheap and good enough recording (I don't need a guidebook for that!)

Still, it is not 1996 anymore and e.g. Kodaly's Haydn is not the cheapest out there anymore (that would be Buchberger) and I think that those of us who have heard a lot of different Haydn recordings should have the right to inform the rest of the world that the Kodaly Haydn recordings not particularly great. (I think both Ken and I agreed that they are serviceable.)

[arpeggio]

^^^^
71 dB and Florestan, I think you are both right.

As a person who has been accused of overreacting I can sympathize with 71dB's frustrations.

But Florestan is correct in that sometimes the best way to react to a troublesome post is to ignore it.

One problem that I have is that I do a poor job of expressing myself.

[71 dB]

Relax, man! You take things much too seriously and personally. Nobody forces you to buy, or throw away, anything. Why would your fun be ruined because somebody, somewhere dislikes what you like? Do you really need your taste to be validated by others? Do you enjoy Leaper's Nielsen less because Mirror Image dissed it? You like what you like, they like what they like, period. Why all the fuss about it?

It's my weakness, my self-esteem is fragile and I do take things too seriously and personally. I often have a pararoid feel that people on this forum take a lot of time to almost scientifically prove how badly I have done in my life. Especially my affection to Naxos label (who doesn't have their favorite label?) is often criticised. I don't expect other people to praise Naxos. I am just surprised how much effort people see to demonstrate how bad or mediocre Naxos is. How on Earth can Naxos be so big today, if it was so crappy? Because Klaus Heymann bribed everyone?

Even I have problems with Naxos. More often than not they concentrate on stuff I am not that interested of. Naxos' releases of Bach's cantatas for example are surprisingly few compared to the fanatism they show to Sor's guitar music. Too much competition? It took Naxos so long to start with Fauré's chamber music, and I want the Keith Burstein release on CD!!

[CRCulver]

Naxos' releases of Bach's cantatas for example are surprisingly few compared to the fanatism they show to Sor's guitar music.

Doesn't Naxos have so many guitar CDs because guitarists pay themselves the costs of recording a release on Naxos for publicity purposes? Anything that gets played a lot by solo guitarists or flautists might therefore be more widely represented on Naxos than larger ensemble projects.

[71 dB]

Why are you offended?

I am not offended.

You write that you are happy with the Haydn discs you have and you are not sufficiently interested in the music to get more recordings anyway.

Yes, this is true.

Why does it spoil your fun if someone points out that there are recordings out there they prefer?

I hope it doesn't spoil my fun and probably it doesn't.

And I don't even know the particular Naxos discs you have, maybe the rather relaxed approach of the Kodaly works well there. If you compare them to the Mosaiques I think you will find that the latter are "more involved" and offer less generic interpretations (I think this should be noticeable even when listening to different pieces). And why did you get the premium prices Mosaiques instead of more Kodaly? NB: As the Mosaiques has almost only friends at this forum your claim that you always have the wrong recordings is also false.

What's wrong with relaxed approach?

In fact to my surprise I may prefer Kodaly, the sound is more pleasing. 

I bought Mosaiques used and it was pretty cheap I guess... ...of course it is supported, because it was recommended to me.

[71 dB]

Doesn't Naxos have so many guitar CDs because guitarists pay themselves the costs of recording a release on Naxos for publicity purposes? Anything that gets played a lot by solo guitarists or flautists might therefore be more widely represented on Naxos than larger ensemble projects.

I don't know about these things, but this would definitely explain the abundance of guitar music in Naxos Catalogue.

[Parsifal]

I am sick and tired of hearing how the performances I have are always the wrong ones (I'm still pissed off about the Nielsen Leaper thing). Wrong ones to you perhaps, but I don't know Angeles or Buchberger so I can still appreciate Kodaly.

No matter what recording you mention, a majority of posters here will declare you've made a poor choice. It's simple statistics. I can say I like Karajan's Berlin Philharmonic Recording of Beethoven's 9th, it will start a fight over which of Karajan's recordings of Beethoven's 9th is the worst.   

[Parsifal]

Still, it is not 1996 anymore and e.g. Kodaly's Haydn is not the cheapest out there anymore (that would be Buchberger) and I think that those of us who have heard a lot of different Haydn recordings should have the right to inform the rest of the world that the Kodaly Haydn recordings not particularly great. (I think both Ken and I agreed that they are serviceable.)

There are quite a few works that I first heard in the Kodaly quartet. This thing is, they recorded basically everything (Haydn, Bartok, Beethoven's, Shostakovich) in a relatively short period of time. I've never heard a really bad recording from them, but rarely a superlative recording. In particular, I first heard the Shostakovich Quartets from the Kodaly and loved them. But after listening to other recordings of the Shostakovich quartets and returning to the Kodaly, they seemed quite nondescript by comparison.

[Ken B]

I am sick and tired of hearing how the performances I have are always the wrong ones (I'm still pissed off about the Nielsen Leaper thing). Wrong ones to you perhaps, but I don't know Angeles or Buchberger so I can still appreciate Kodaly.

You don't have the wrong ones! The wrong ones are the Aeolian. That's the only wrong one (but it's spectacularly wrong). The Kodaly is on the list of right ones (just not IMO at the top of the list).

[Todd]

In particular, I first heard the Shostakovich Quartets from the Kodaly and loved them.

What label did they record Shostakovich for?

[Florestan]

You don't have the wrong ones! The wrong ones are the Aeolian. That's the only wrong one (but it's spectacularly wrong).

Except "sound sucks" and "the first violin is wayward", which are both as subjective an opinion as it gets, what is wrong with them in an objectively, empirically verifiable by anyone, way? 

[Parsifal]

What label did they record Shostakovich for?

Gasp, my memory failed again. It was the Eder that recorded the Shostakovich for Naxos!

Nevermind, nothing to see here...

[Jo498]

It is probably the Eder Quartet on Naxos. They are IMO better than the Kodaly. They did a very good Haydn op.76 on Teldec of which unfortunately only half is easy to find, a good Mozart piano quartets with Ranki.

I don't think the Kodaly's Haydn is horrible. But because it was for quite a while by far the cheapest and easiest option (beyond the most famous pieces like op.76) and praised to the skies (which is a clear case of overrating, IMO) by Penguin, so it was probably many listeners first or only encounter with Haydn quartets. And I would not be all that surprised if at least some listeners reacted as "nice but no big deal". Which is of course also a possible reaction to the music. I tend to think that most of it is much better than that and better than the Kodaly play it.

[Todd]

Gasp, my memory failed again. It was the Eder that recorded the Shostakovich for Naxos!

Nevermind, nothing to see here...

I thought I could have missed something since they have recorded for other labels in their now 50+ year career.  Your assessment of the Eder in this rep more or less matches mine. 

I've always viewed the Kodaly as the string quartet equivalent of Jeno Jando: professional, reliable, good, sometimes very good, but almost always bettered by other artists.

[Ken B]

Except "sound sucks" and "the first violin is wayward", which are both as subjective an opinion as it gets, what is wrong with them in an objectively, empirically verifiable by anyone, way? 

I can give you a tip Andrei: ground raw toad is awful. But that's also as subjective an opinion as it gets. If you want to empirically test it though ... 

[71 dB]

No matter what recording you mention, a majority of posters here will declare you've made a poor choice. It's simple statistics. I can say I like Karajan's Berlin Philharmonic Recording of Beethoven's 9th, it will start a fight over which of Karajan's recordings of Beethoven's 9th is the worst. 

Yes, but if you are paranoid you ignore statistics. 

You don't have the wrong ones! The wrong ones are the Aeolian. That's the only wrong one (but it's spectacularly wrong). The Kodaly is on the list of right ones (just not IMO at the top of the list).

Okay, okay. 

[Parsifal]

I've always viewed the Kodaly as the string quartet equivalent of Jeno Jando: professional, reliable, good, sometimes very good, but almost always bettered by other artists.

It almost happened to me again. I was going to note that I liked Jando's recordings of the Bach English Suites and Partitas, but then realized that my brain was just remembering "the Naxos guy." Good thing I checked because this time "the Naxos guy" was Rubsam.

[asin]B000001430[/asin]

[71 dB]

I've always viewed the Kodaly as the string quartet equivalent of Jeno Jando: professional, reliable, good, sometimes very good, but almost always bettered by other artists.

Who the hell has the time to research who bettered Kodaly or Jeno Jando? The thing with Naxos is you buy it and you are happy with it and you save a lot of time, money and effort. Naxos makes life easy. I may want to explore several performances of my favorite composers (Elgar / Bach), but researching the best possible performances of ALL composers and works would be ridiculously time and money consuming! 

Why isn't "professional, reliable, good, sometimes very good" good enough? There will always be a new artists who is better than and earlier ones, so it is endless run for the best.

[Todd]

Who the hell has the time to research who bettered Kodaly or Jeno Jando?

Anyone with an internet connection.

Why isn't "professional, reliable, good, sometimes very good" good enough?

If you think it is, then it is for you.