Andre did you just buy an Andre Rieu recording? I think the world just ended! :D
Quote from: haydnfan on May 19, 2011, 06:21:45 AM
Andre did you just buy an Andre Rieu recording? I think the world just ended! :D
Yes, I think so, the world has ended, I would not like to be caught dead with a recording from that drivel musician. ;D
Quote from: Harry IIyich Tchaikovsky on May 19, 2011, 07:11:31 AM
Yes, I think so, the world has ended, I would not like to be caught dead with a recording from that drivel musician. ;D
Sid must have needed a coaster! ;D
Quote from: haydnfan on May 19, 2011, 07:15:49 AM
Sid must have needed a coaster! ;D
I'm worried about Sid. He's now crossed over to the world of Kenny G and Yanni. What next? John Tesh? ??? ;)
Quote from: Harry IIyich Tchaikovsky on May 19, 2011, 07:11:31 AM
Yes, I think so, the world has ended, I would not like to be caught dead with a recording from that drivel musician. ;D
Yeah, I wouldn't be caught dead even looking at a recording with that pathetic excuse for a musician.
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 19, 2011, 07:39:00 AM
Yeah, I wouldn't be caught dead even looking at a recording with that pathetic excuse for a musician.
Well,
duh, you can't look when you're dead. ::)
:P
Stop bashing,
start continue purchasing.
Quote from: Opus106 on May 19, 2011, 07:43:24 AM
Well, duh, you can't look when you're dead. ::)
:P
Stop bashing, start continue purchasing.
:D Sorry, but I can't help
not to bash these musicians who have fooled people into thinking they're world-class.
Quote from: haydnfan on May 19, 2011, 06:21:45 AM
Andre did you just buy an Andre Rieu recording? I think the world just ended! :D
;D I thought that might raise some "controversy" around here, but I wasn't trolling. Well I only paid $3 for the Rieu album, as well as all those other discs. I couldn't afford to buy any of Rieu's albums brand new, nor would I want to. Don't worry MI, this is just a diversion for me, I was interested in hearing some of his music for myself after recently reading his biography. But I wouldn't judge Rieu, his late father was one of the top conductors of the Netherlands, and Andre played for about 20 years under him in the Limburgh Symphony Orchestra, accompanying some of the world's top musicians in concert. The renowned conductor Franz Bruggen had heard Rieu play as a boy and encouraged him to study music at the Netherlands conservatory, which he went on to do. Rieu started his own quintet in the 1970's, playing light salon music on the side, but it wasn't until the early 1990's that he gave up his day job with the Limburghs and put everything into establishing his own orchestra. Reading his story, I do admire his work in unearthing previously lost repertoire which before him was only heard on 48 & 78 rpm records. He has also done a fair deal of good charity work (which he only mentions in the book to get people to donate to his causes).
I just heard the Rieu disc last night, and it's not bad for what it's worth. I think he plays very well, even though he's a bit more restrained than I would like. He doesn't hog the limelight and many of the tracks are purely orchestral or feature other musicians in his 42 piece orchestra doing solos. There are even 2 tracks with choir. My only quibble (& it's probably a major one) is that Rieu's arrangments cut the pieces considerably. Eg. my favourite track on the disc, Beethoven's Romance in F which Rieu plays very well, is just under 5 minutes, whereas the orignal is probably more than double that. The disc has 18 tracks, but I would have done with half that amount, it probably would have been better if he'd just played the originals. The recording was done in his own studio, and the acoustic is very rich, it sounds like it was done in a cathedral.
But I'm definitely not as highbrow as some people seem to be around here. I basically listen to all kinds of classical music, apart from opera. & like many here, I listen to a fair amount of non-classical stuff as well. I like the variety. I even have some Mantovani in my collection. I don't think that the classical musicians playing the lighter repertoire are any worse than those who play the "serious" stuff...
Quote from: Sid on May 19, 2011, 05:59:57 PMBut I'm definitely not as highbrow as some people seem to be around here. I basically listen to all kinds of classical music, apart from opera. & like many here, I listen to a fair amount of non-classical stuff as well. I like the variety. I even have some Mantovani in my collection. I don't think that the classical musicians playing the lighter repertoire are any worse than those who play the "serious" stuff...
Perhaps your standards just aren't that high? Rieu is a joke. In fact, he's worse than a joke at least a joke has some substance. There's a difference between playing music you love and playing music to make a quick buck. The only problem is serious musicians won't take you that seriously. Now, there's no harm in a musician who is talented making it big and selling out concerts, but we're not talking about a good musician when we're talking about Rieu. Miles Davis played the music he wanted to play and people still flocked to his concerts, so it's a tricky thing for sure, but if you're in it for the love of the music and to bear your soul to the world, then that's what is important. Rieu doesn't have anything interesting to say with music, because he's not a creative musician. It's that simple.
Haha you two (Sid and MI) remind me of Siskel and Ebert! :D
Well cool Sid, the way you put it, that cd doesn't sound like a total waste after all. :)
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 19, 2011, 06:28:40 PM
Perhaps your standards just aren't that high?
Well maybe I don't have any "standards!" :o When listening to music, I mainly care about engagement. As the great Otto Klemperer said, comparing himself to Bruno Walter - "He's a moralist, I'm an immoralist!" Mind you, I'd like to think that I have a wide range - I listen to virtually everything in the classical realm written between the Middle Ages & the present. I'm definitely not stuck in a niche. As I said, I especially admire Rieu for reviving muc of the light pre-WW2 repertoire that had been gathering dust in archives - salon, dance and operetta music. I like them too, and I think it's good that he's been getting this stuff out there for the past 20-30 years.
QuoteRieu is a joke. In fact, he's worse than a joke at least a joke has some substance. There's a difference between playing music you love and playing music to make a quick buck.
Wrong, wrong, wrong!!! Rieu never aimed "to make a quick buck." His early career path was the same as any other "serious" musician. He took lessons in a number of instruments from an early age, finally deciding to major in the violin when he did his degree at the Netherlands Conservatory. Then he played for about 20 years in the Limburgh Symphony Orchestra, one of the top orchestras in the country, under the baton of his late father. He only started playing light salon music on the side in the 1970's, forming his own quintet called the "Maastricht Salon Orchestra." He played for years without getting much financial return out of this, his orchestra job was how he paid the bills and supported his family. It was not until the early 1990's when light music had gained some traction, that Rieu decided to throw in his day job and put all of his money and strength behind forming his own orchestra. You wouldn't believe, but it was actually VERY HARD for him to get a major label behind recording his first album. But that first album topped the charts in the Netherlands, and the rest is history. He is successful and rich now, touring the world etc., but his beginnings weren't very different from that of other "serious" musicians, and he has always put music first and foremost. Actually, he says that his wife Marjorie is the "business brains" part of the partnership...
QuoteThe only problem is serious musicians won't take you that seriously.
Wrong again, my friend. Even the great Riccardo Chailly is an admirer of Rieu. When Rieu was in the audience at a concert conducted by Chailly, the Italian played him a compliment playing one of Rieu's arrangements as an encore. & it was after a Mahler symphony!!! The audience loved it. If the audience at the Concergebouw hall - where Rieu has played, btw - can lighten up & enjoy something like that in that "serious" context, why is this a problem for you?
Quote from: haydnfan on May 19, 2011, 06:42:37 PM
Well cool Sid, the way you put it, that cd doesn't sound like a total waste after all. :)
Yes, it's not too bad. Not part of my main diet, as you would say, but it's well crafted and enjoyable for what it's worth...
Quote from: Sid on May 19, 2011, 05:59:57 PM
My only quibble (& it's probably a major one) is that Rieu's arrangments cut the pieces considerably. Eg. my favourite track on the disc, Beethoven's Romance in F which Rieu plays very well, is just under 5 minutes, whereas the orignal is probably more than double that. The disc has 18 tracks, but I would have done with half that amount, it probably would have been better if he'd just played the originals....
Sounds like he would have fitted well into the 19th c. concertising scene.
Quote from: Sid on May 19, 2011, 05:59:57 PMBut I'm definitely not as highbrow as some people seem to be around here. I basically listen to all kinds of classical music, apart from opera. & like many here, I listen to a fair amount of non-classical stuff as well. I like the variety. I even have some Mantovani in my collection. I don't think that the classical musicians playing the lighter repertoire are any worse than those who play the "serious" stuff...
From what I've read, great composers and musicians tend to have broader tastes than the purists who follow them. Louis Armstrong liked Mantovani (he thought the sound of the strings was amazing), and Charlie Parker liked both Varese and country music. Brahms dug those "common" Hungarian dances and admired J Strauss II. Mahler collected "Hooked on Klezmer" LPs.
That said, when I see those eleventydozen Rieu DVDs in the store, racked up into something resembling the 2001 monolith, I avert my gaze.
Quote from: Sid on May 19, 2011, 07:12:32 PM
Well maybe I don't have any "standards!" :o When listening to music, I mainly care about engagement. As the great Otto Klemperer said, comparing himself to Bruno Walter - "He's a moralist, I'm an immoralist!" Mind you, I'd like to think that I have a wide range - I listen to virtually everything in the classical realm written between the Middle Ages & the present. I'm definitely not stuck in a niche. As I said, I especially admire Rieu for reviving muc of the light pre-WW2 repertoire that had been gathering dust in archives - salon, dance and operetta music. I like them too, and I think it's good that he's been getting this stuff out there for the past 20-30 years.
Good for you, Sid. I'm glad to see you expand your horizons. We all enjoy what we enjoy in the end. You can listen to Alvin and the Chipmunks sing Christmas carols it wouldn't make a bit of difference in how I view music. You spend your time listening to what you enjoy and I'll do the same.
Quote from: Sid on May 19, 2011, 07:12:32 PMWrong, wrong, wrong!!! Rieu never aimed "to make a quick buck." His early career path was the same as any other "serious" musician. He took lessons in a number of instruments from an early age, finally deciding to major in the violin when he did his degree at the Netherlands Conservatory. Then he played for about 20 years in the Limburgh Symphony Orchestra, one of the top orchestras in the country, under the baton of his late father. He only started playing light salon music on the side in the 1970's, forming his own quintet called the "Maastricht Salon Orchestra." He played for years without getting much financial return out of this, his orchestra job was how he paid the bills and supported his family. It was not until the early 1990's when light music had gained some traction, that Rieu decided to throw in his day job and put all of his money and strength behind forming his own orchestra. You wouldn't believe, but it was actually VERY HARD for him to get a major label behind recording his first album. But that first album topped the charts in the Netherlands, and the rest is history. He is successful and rich now, touring the world etc., but his beginnings weren't very different from that of other "serious" musicians, and he has always put music first and foremost. Actually, he says that his wife Marjorie is the "business brains" part of the partnership...
He may have never sat out to make a quick buck, but he is now and he's apart of the same group as Kenny G and Yanni. I'm sorry I will forever be in full disagreement with your views of Rieu. If he was a serious musician, he wouldn't be doing what he's doing now.
Quote from: Sid on May 19, 2011, 07:12:32 PMWrong again, my friend. Even the great Riccardo Chailly is an admirer of Rieu. When Rieu was in the audience at a concert conducted by Chailly, the Italian played him a compliment playing one of Rieu's arrangements as an encore. & it was after a Mahler symphony!!! The audience loved it. If the audience at the Concergebouw hall - where Rieu has played, btw - can lighten up & enjoy something like that in that "serious" context, why is this a problem for you?
I did not know this, but, then again, I'm not apart of the classical mainstream concert goers either, so it's not surprising. It's not a problem for me, but apparently it's a problem for you that you can't accept that I think Rieu is a mediocre musician? I was scrolling through the channels one night and saw him play on PBS and it about made me laugh. It was just that pathetic. The way he smiled at the audience made me almost vomit.
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 19, 2011, 07:31:11 PM
...If he was a serious musician, he wouldn't be doing what he's doing now...it's a problem for you that you can't accept that I think Rieu is a mediocre musician?
You seem to think that just because someone plays light classical music, they are not as professional as someone who does. I disagree with that strongly. I mean there were quite a few great violinists of the past who made many recordings of encores, show tunes and salon pieces, eg. Fritz Kreisler (who even composed a few of these "lollipops" himself) & Yehudi Menuhin are two I can think of (doubtless there are many more, but I'm not an expert in the violin repertoire). Light does not necessarily mean lightweight. Andre Rieu is a professionally skilled musician, just as experienced in playing "serious" orchestral and chamber music as any other musician around. No wonder, they all need this solid background as a foundation to whatever they do.
Quote...I was scrolling through the channels one night and saw him play on PBS and it about made me laugh. It was just that pathetic. The way he smiled at the audience made me almost vomit.
Just because he likes to build rapport with his audience, tell a few anecdotes, etc. is no reason to say that. He just wants people to have a good time. Is there anything wrong or amiss about that? He's not advertising a performance of Beethoven's Violin Concerto and then playing the Minuet in G. The way you put it, it's like Rieu is not delivering the goods in some way, and I'd say he does what he does with commitment and professionalism. Even people like Riccardo Chailly are of that opinion...
Quote from: Il Barone Scarpia on May 19, 2011, 09:17:25 PM
I don't have any Rieu records and don't expect to get any, but I don't see what there is to get worked up over. He hires an orchestra and performs his arrangements of Strauss Waltzes. What's the big deal?
Exactly. It seems that there are too many highbrows on this forum. You simply can't win around here. Member John of Glasgow said he didn't like Schoenberg or Stockhausen a few days ago & got pounded. Now I try to give Andre Rieu a go and get a right royal hammering. I mean, what's the deal? Can't people be honest about their tastes without getting hammered? I mean, I have a wide taste in classical, and I'm sure John of Glasgow is the same. A lot of people around here seem to be welded onto music of the period c.1850-1950. Some people dismiss major figures in classical music who came before or after that period with the drop of a hat. May I be so bold enough as (gasp!) to think that that kind of dismissive/judgemental opinion is more a case for concern than someone who doesn't like Stockhausen or Schoenberg or someone who dares to appreciate Andre Rieu?...
Quote from: Sid on May 19, 2011, 05:59:57 PM
. But I wouldn't judge Rieu, his late father was one of the top conductors of the Netherlands,
No he wasn't, just a provincial conductor, not good not bad.
Quote from: Harry IIyich Tchaikovsky on May 19, 2011, 11:06:50 PM
No he wasn't, just a provincial conductor, not good not bad.
Well, I think many conductors would be glad to be "provincial" in that way, if they could conduct their orchestras accompanying the likes of Menuhin, Oistrakh, Kogan and Grumiaux to name four with whom Rieu's father worked regularly back in the mid c20th. These guys obviously had a lot of respect for him, as well as his family, they came as guests with him for dinner when they were performing with him and others in the Netherlands.
All I'm saying is that from a young age, Andre Rieu was just as steeped in music as others of his generation who went on to do different things, such as Itzakh Perlman. People might disdain Rieu for being too much of an entertainer, but the truth is that he is just as much a professional as any other "serious" classical musician on the world stage today...
Quote from: Sid on May 19, 2011, 09:50:32 PM
A lot of people around here seem to be welded onto music of the period c.1850-1950. Some people dismiss major figures in classical music who came before or after that period with the drop of a hat. May I be so bold enough as (gasp!) to think that that kind of dismissive/judgemental opinion is more a case for concern than someone who doesn't like Stockhausen or Schoenberg or someone who dares to appreciate Andre Rieu?...
Well said, Sid! I'm in total agreement.
I haven't heard / seen Rieu, but comments like "he's too popular", "he makes big buck", "he caters to the low tastes of his audience", "he paraphrases and condenses larger works" reminds me of Paganini and Liszt. I'll certainly give him a try. :D
Quote from: Sid on May 19, 2011, 09:50:32 PMYou seem to think that just because someone plays light classical music, they are not as professional as someone who does. I disagree with that strongly. I mean there were quite a few great violinists of the past who made many recordings of encores, show tunes and salon pieces, eg. Fritz Kreisler (who even composed a few of these "lollipops" himself) & Yehudi Menuhin are two I can think of (doubtless there are many more, but I'm not an expert in the violin repertoire). Light does not necessarily mean lightweight. Andre Rieu is a professionally skilled musician, just as experienced in playing "serious" orchestral and chamber music as any other musician around. No wonder, they all need this solid background as a foundation to whatever they do.
Rieu is a sell-out. Accept my opinion or don't. If he was a highly skilled musician, then he would be playing concerti of composers instead of playing the bubble gum arranged pop he plays now.
Quote from: Sid on May 19, 2011, 09:50:32 PMJust because he likes to build rapport with his audience, tell a few anecdotes, etc. is no reason to say that. He just wants people to have a good time. Is there anything wrong or amiss about that? He's not advertising a performance of Beethoven's Violin Concerto and then playing the Minuet in G. The way you put it, it's like Rieu is not delivering the goods in some way, and I'd say he does what he does with commitment and professionalism. Even people like Riccardo Chailly are of that opinion...
I don't care what he does, I don't listen to his or Yanni's muzak, so it doesn't matter to me if people enjoy him or not in the end. It's your time, not mine.
Quote from: Sid on May 19, 2011, 09:50:32 PMExactly. It seems that there are too many highbrows on this forum. You simply can't win around here. Member John of Glasgow said he didn't like Schoenberg or Stockhausen a few days ago & got pounded. Now I try to give Andre Rieu a go and get a right royal hammering. I mean, what's the deal? Can't people be honest about their tastes without getting hammered? I mean, I have a wide taste in classical, and I'm sure John of Glasgow is the same. A lot of people around here seem to be welded onto music of the period c.1850-1950. Some people dismiss major figures in classical music who came before or after that period with the drop of a hat. May I be so bold enough as (gasp!) to think that that kind of dismissive/judgemental opinion is more a case for concern than someone who doesn't like Stockhausen or Schoenberg or someone who dares to appreciate Andre Rieu?...
As I said, you can listen to what you want to, Sid. It doesn't matter to me, but this is a forum where opinions are expressed, so why can't you deal with someone who dislikes what you like? I mean don't you have a thicker skin than that? My opinions are attacked all the time, especially if it's a negative one against a composer who somebody else likes, but you don't see me making a big deal about it. If you like Rieu then that's great, but there are people who don't and don't like what he's "selling," so why can't you accept that?
Quote from: Florestan on May 20, 2011, 01:08:51 AM
Well said, Sid! I'm in total agreement.
I haven't heard / seen Rieu, but comments like "he's too popular", "he makes big buck", "he caters to the low tastes of his audience", "he paraphrases and condenses larger works" reminds me of Paganini and Liszt. I'll certainly give him a try. :D
Well, some of his arrangements do kind of "condense" the originals, some don't. Depends on the piece & the album. But arrangements are exactly that, arrangements. It's rare if an arrangement is better than an original. All I'm saying is that the music of Rieu that I have heard definitely shows that he knows what he's doing and that he can play his instrument and direct his ensemble just like any other classical musician out there. The musicality, the professionalism, the standard is there, but the genre is different - it's light classical, not "serious" classical...
Quote from: Sid on May 20, 2011, 09:58:52 PMAll I'm saying is that the music of Rieu that I have heard definitely shows that he knows what he's doing
Rieu has a very intelligent wife. That's all I'm saying. ;)
CHA CHING(http://www.stopcorruption-nigeria.com/custom/Fotolia_pile%20of%20money.jpg)
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 20, 2011, 10:03:39 PM
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!
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 20, 2011, 10:03:39 PM
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
Quote from: Opus106 on May 20, 2011, 11:59:30 PM
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.
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 21, 2011, 07:04:28 AM
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. ;D
Quote from: Opus106 on May 20, 2011, 11:59:30 PM
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...
Quote from: Sid on May 21, 2011, 05:30:47 PM
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.
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 22, 2011, 06:19:15 AM
Surely, you're not comparing Rieu with Liszt?
Surely, you didn't read what Sid said, did you?
Quote from: Opus106 on May 22, 2011, 06:29:11 AM
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.
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 22, 2011, 06:30:48 AM
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*
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 ...
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 22, 2011, 06:19:15 AM
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?
QuoteRieu 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...
Quote from: Coopmv on May 22, 2011, 08:24:24 AM
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...
Quote from: Sid on May 22, 2011, 05:51:20 PM
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.
Quote from: eyeresist on May 22, 2011, 06:28:08 PM
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?
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 22, 2011, 06:33:41 PM
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...
QuoteMy 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...
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 :)
Quote from: Lethe Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on May 22, 2011, 07:03:13 PM
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)...
Quote from: Sid on May 22, 2011, 06:54:22 PM
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.
@ 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...
Quote from: Sid on May 22, 2011, 07:32:58 PM
@ 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.
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 22, 2011, 07:48:28 PM
All of this said, I think you're a good guy Sid and I know you mean well...
Well thanks & that's okay, the way you put it there.
Maybe I reacted so strongly to your criticism not so much as to what you said, but I was just trying to express my positive appreciation of the life's work that many of our favourite composers and musicians have given (& continue to give) us. I'm very impressed with not only thier talent, skill and dedication, but also the pleasure that music brings to our lives - whatever type it is.
I know I have been critical & negative of some composers before on this forum. I'm as guilty as anyone else. But I'm over that negativity because it just doesn't make sense to me now. I think it's wrong to dismiss someone who has been immersed in music since they could pick up an instrument. I basically respect what they do, even though I like some things much more than others (all of us have our favourites). I especially respect members on this forum who are professional musicians, like Mr Henning. I also know that many other members here like yourself are very passionate & committed listeners, & their opinions are no less valid. But opinion has to be based on some kind of experience (knowledge is also handy, but it's not the "be all & end all).
The way I try to describe my experience with the music, I try to get something out of it (even if it's just tiny) rather than dismissing the whole box and dice. I try to steer myself away from gut reactions, although sometimes I do slip into making them - after all, I'm only human! :) ...
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 22, 2011, 07:13:40 PM
If Rieu moves you and sends you into deep thought
Still haven't heard Rieu, but... the idea that music which doesn't send one into deep thought is not worth hearing is one of the most pernicious and persistent Romantic myths. "Deep thought" is not the only human reality; "deep feeling", "deep joy", "deep enjoyment" and good ol' "deep fun" are also human.
Well, Mr Rieu now has his own thread! I suppose it's warranted since a lot of debate & discussion has happened about his music on the other thread.
Quote from: Florestan on May 23, 2011, 01:50:25 AM
Still haven't heard Rieu, but... the idea that music which doesn't send one into deep thought is not worth hearing is one of the most pernicious and persistent Romantic myths. "Deep thought" is not the only human reality; "deep feeling", "deep joy", "deep enjoyment" and good ol' "deep fun" are also human.
I think I agree with you there 110 per cent. I mean the first time that real fear was expressed in music was the final section in Mozart's
Don Giovanni where the Don is sent to hell. I remember seeing a television doco about Mozart and someone notable stated this assessment, and it sounds true to me (even though my knowledge of pre-Classical era music is not as great as some of you here, but I am beginning to explore some of the great works of earlier periods). Many works before
Don Giovanni had drama and passion in spades, much of it could raise one to great heights and express the subtlest of emotions. But in this work, which many consider to be Mozart's finest opera, fear came into the picture & it was "in your face." I only saw that scene once in my life on that tv doco, but it's ingrained in my memory, much more than any of the smattering of great operas I've seen.
So you're right. That kind of deep darkness that Mozart expressed in that work kind of laid down the template for future generations. & other geniuses of the time, whose music was lighter (such as Boccherini) were neglected and virtually thrown into the trash bin until just recently, when musicians, scholars and audiences have developed a more fuller picture of what is valuable in music. I basically value it all across the spectrum to the more lighter things. I mean, wasn't Offenbach, the master of French operetta and burlesque, called "The Mozart of the Champs Elysses in his time?" I'm sure that comparison wasn't made lightly back then, nor is it now. Mozart's lighter music is much more valued today than it was say a hundred years ago, as is Boccherini's or Offenbach's. We now have a more balanced view of musical history - it has come to include all things of a certain quality. Not only "greatness" or "depth" - yes, they are very loaded terms - but also lightness, elegance, grace, charm and craftsmanship. Of course, these two things aren't mutually exclusive. I'm kind of simplifying things here.
As I've said 100 times before above, I admire Andre's professionalism, passion for music and craftsmanship just as I admire that of other musicians who've basically stayed in the "serious" realm. He is a trained classical musician who has worked as both a "serious" orchestral and chamber musician for two decades, before going on to set up his own ensembles to play his own arrangements of many types of light music, from the classical realm, to movie themes, show tunes, and even some rare and neglected repertoire in these areas which he has unearthed and recorded for the first time since the 1940's. He has the greatest respect of a number of big names in the classical music industry, and he also respects them back.
As to accusations to Rieu "selling out" - what a joke. A lot of classical musicians crossed over to the lighter side of things - were they sell-outs too? Sir Yehudi Menuhin played the same repertoire as Rieu in a couple of albums with jazz violinist Stephane Grapelli. The three tenors - Domingo, Carreras, Pavorotti - sung a lot of lighter music in their now legendary concerts together. I even remember Pavorotti cutting a few albums with rock musicians. Snobbism and elitism is a thing that holds great artists back, whatever genre they are in. The great jazz pianist Art Tatum actually scored some of his "improvisations" and arrangements of non-jazz things, but they never saw the light of day until the great classical pianist of our times, Marc Andre Hamelin, recorded them and performed them live for the first time many decades after Tatum's passing. Hamelin has commented that these works by Tatum are as advanced and imaginative as those of any other classical composer during Tatum's time. Tatum actually did record them, but under a false name. He was worried of criticism of bigwigs in the jazz world, who would give him grief if they knew that he was stepping outside of the then strictly defined jazz "box." The same thing happened to Stravinsky. When he crossed over into the neo-classical style, he got a lot of crap from the Modernists and avant-gardists all sitting on their hobby horses. Then these people, who said he had "sold out," turned around and hailed him as a genius when he got into serialism later on in his career. This said more about these critics preferences and biases and very little about the actual quality of Stravinsky's music, whether it was in the Neo-classical or serial styles.
I could go on and on with many more examples, but I don't have the time. Basically we shouldn't stereotype musicians and put them in boxes. We should judge them on the merits of what they do. Andre Rieu has done some interesting things in his own realm, the area of light classical, as have the many "serious" classical musicians that we all appreciate...
Ok lecture over, I think I'll go and try to "get a life"... ;D
Quote from: Sid on May 22, 2011, 05:51:20 PM
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.
Rieu certainly has musical talent, which he has cultivated responsibly. Even if one largely disagree with the use to which he has put his talents.
Quote from: Florestan on May 23, 2011, 01:50:25 AM
Still haven't heard Rieu, but... the idea that music which doesn't send one into deep thought is not worth hearing is one of the most pernicious and persistent Romantic myths. "Deep thought" is not the only human reality; "deep feeling", "deep joy", "deep enjoyment" and good ol' "deep fun" are also human.
Excellent point, and one which bears repeating.
I'll third that, good post Florestan. I also thought it was amusing that MI brought up the DSCH concerto because it made me think... there are serious musicians that would never perform that work because they don't specialize in that era. Take the ones that stick to baroque era, or perhaps dabble in classical era. They might never conductor or perform a Shostakovich work... but are still serious. I suppose if you specialize in divertimenti like Rieu does, you might not play that work either but if you do nothing but practice and perform music, you are still a serious musician. Whatever you play. :)
Quote from: Sid on May 23, 2011, 02:33:28 AM
I think I agree with you there 110 per cent.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 23, 2011, 03:15:20 AM
Excellent point, and one which bears repeating.
Quote from: Mn Dave on May 23, 2011, 03:46:56 AM
Indeed.
Quote from: haydnfan on May 23, 2011, 04:48:20 AM
I'll third that, good post Florestan.
(blushing) :)
Quote from: haydnfan on May 23, 2011, 04:48:20 AM
I also thought it was amusing that MI brought up the DSCH concerto because it made me think... there are serious musicians that would never perform that work because they don't specialize in that era. Take the ones that stick to baroque era, or perhaps dabble in classical era. They might never conductor or perform a Shostakovich work... but are still serious. I suppose if you specialize in divertimenti like Rieu does, you might not play that work either but if you do nothing but practice and perform music, you are still a serious musician. Whatever you play. :)
That's a point worth stressing as well.
Quote from: Sid on May 23, 2011, 02:33:28 AM
Not only "greatness" or "depth" - yes, they are very loaded terms - but also lightness, elegance, grace, charm and craftsmanship. Of course, these two things aren't mutually exclusive. I'm kind of simplifying things here.
Actually, I'm very suspicious of music which is purposefully made for "deep thought" --- because oftenly I found the border between "deep thought" and "deep sleep" to be very thin. ;D
Interestingly enough, Schopenhauer, whose middle name was "deep thought", rejected Wagner (dismissing the Ring libretto exactly by thinking deeply about it :D ) and sang the praises of Mozart and Rossini. :)
Now, TBH, this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX1fiE0U1qA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX1fiE0U1qA)
is a perfect illustration of that socialist realism which Shostakovich mocked so brilliantly.
It reminded me of the old Soviet movie "Everybody laughs, sings and dances" and I'm sure the Central Committee of the USSR Communist Party would have been only too happy to hear the waltz performed like that for some Stakhanov-like, five-year-plan-achieved-in four-and-a-half, working class party in the factory's ballroom. ;D
It occurs to me the Willi Boskovsky made a career of conducting and performing all manner of Viennese bon-bons but that didn't prevent him from performing all of the most "deep" music as the principal violinist of the Vienna Philharmonic.
Quote from: Leon on May 23, 2011, 06:39:26 AM
I hope you don't consider his recordings of Johann Strauss II "Viennese bon-bons".
:)
I do, I'm afraid.
Quote from: Leon on May 23, 2011, 06:39:26 AM
I hope you don't consider his recordings of Johann Strauss II "Viennese bon-bons".
:)
Have you ever had a good bon-bon?
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on May 23, 2011, 03:14:02 AM
Rieu certainly has musical talent, which he has cultivated responsibly. Even if one largely disagree with the use to which he has put his talents.
You kind of hit the nail on the head right there. In his biography, Rieu describes how towards the end of his 20 years as a "serious" classical musician, he wasn't enjoying working in the mainstream classical realm as he did when he was young. My feeling is that he wanted a changed, he wanted to be doing something that he enjoyed more. He had previously set up his light salon music quintet, and he said he was enjoying this "side job" more than his "day job" in the Netherlands classical orchestras. So at 40, he took the plunge and invested all of his time and effort into setting up his own orchestra. At first it was very hard, they had to do things like hire a school hall at peppercorn rental for them to rehearse in. It had no internal heating, so they had to use small portable heaters. These conditions were'nt conduicive to rehearse in for hours at a time. A few of the musicians left because of these conditions, but most in the orchestra stayed on. Rieu and the others were dedicated to making this risk actually pay off in as many ways as possible, they wanted it to be a success. I think Rieu is just like any other musician, who are all very emotional people. He wanted to be happy & enjoy what he was doing. That is most people's aim in life, so why blame him for doing that, just like anyone else?
There's quite a long tradition of light classical music, if an audience out there enjoys his music then I think that is all that ultimately matters. Those who don't will just listen to something else. I know my mother likes his music. :D
Quote from: starrynight on May 24, 2011, 07:44:05 AM
. . . if an audience out there enjoys his music then I think that is all that ultimately matters.
That's what Lady Ga-Ga's manager sez! ; )
I don't know, people whose mode of contact with music is sitting around running the iPod expressing utter contempt for someone who hires and orchestra and plays Strauss Waltzes in sacrilegious non-authentic arrangements. That doesn't sit right with me. Should we have more respect for the guy if he gave up playing and sat around listening to recordings of Schoenberg? Maybe he is listening to Schoenberg backstage before the gig. 0:)
Quote from: Florestan on May 23, 2011, 05:17:10 AMActually, I'm very suspicious of music which is purposefully made for "deep thought" --- because oftenly I found the border between "deep thought" and "deep sleep" to be very thin. ;D
Very often it's about deep problems with the piece of music, deep disagreement in musical understanding, ...
I'd keep calm in case of a phenomen like Rieu. It's a bit annoying he makes people think DSCH is light Waltz composer; but hey, I wouldn't blame him.
A bit worse is the effect that people tend to think classical music (the "serious" one, the bigger arrangements etc.) must be difficult and strange. They do not see it's just music. With different instruments than they're used to, but does that really count? Maybe requires repeated listenings because of complexity, but does that count? Often good and enjoyable music from experts and: rewarding in whatever ways, that's what it has to be.
I my sports club there's a former (good one!) violinist - always busy in inventing new businesses. Next project is making disco music, he already found a female singer ("she's hot"), with one only goal: Earning money. He said "Why not, it's just business" :)
There are probably millions of poor serious classical musicians out there, some who cannot even afford a razor ;) ;D ;D ;D - maybe artists in general. I think it's not easy to earn money in that arts domain...
Quote from: Tapio Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on May 26, 2011, 09:01:20 AM
It's a bit annoying he makes people think DSCH is light Waltz composer;
Could be worse.
Classical Destinations said Vaughan Williams compiled a hymn book and wrote a couple of movie soundtracks.
No, actually that's not worse, is it?
Quote from: eyeresist on May 26, 2011, 05:21:16 PM
Could be worse. Classical Destinations said Vaughan Williams compiled a hymn book and wrote a couple of movie soundtracks.
No, actually that's not worse, is it?
I own & have watched both the Classical Destinations televison series & I think they are excellent. Presenter Simon Callow is no slouch when it comes to classical music, he even co-wrote some of the script. Of course, this is not a scholarly text, it is a television show. If it was more scholarly, it could end up coming across to many people as being kind of dry and boring, so I think they were right to kind of narrow down the biographies of the composers covered to the bare essentials (as well as expertly filming where they lived, worked and hung out). If people new to classical watch this, it might light a spark in them to go out and explore more. A couple of multi compact disc sets were also issued along with the dvd's, and all of the repertoire (& some bonus things) were covered on these, with playing by expert musicians of the calibre of the Australian Chamber Orchestra and others who appeared on the TV show.
All in all, this series had it's pluses and minuses, but overall I think that the positives outweighted the negatives by a very wide margin. The aim is not to present classical music as a kind of museum piece away from the "great unwashed" in the rarified worlds of museums and archives only accessible to scholars. The aim, I think, is to present them as "real" people, as the emotional and passionate men they were. Classical music is a living medium just like all types of music today, it's not something that belongs in a museum or tucked away in an old granny's basement...
Quote from: Sid on May 26, 2011, 06:36:42 PM
I own & have watched both the Classical Destinations televison series & I think they are excellent. Presenter Simon Callow is no slouch when it comes to classical music, he even co-wrote some of the script. Of course, this is not a scholarly text, it is a television show. If it was more scholarly, it could end up coming across to many people as being kind of dry and boring, so I think they were right to kind of narrow down the biographies of the composers covered to the bare essentials (as well as expertly filming where they lived, worked and hung out). If people new to classical watch this, it might light a spark in them to go out and explore more. A couple of multi compact disc sets were also issued along with the dvd's, and all of the repertoire (& some bonus things) were covered on these, with playing by expert musicians of the calibre of the Australian Chamber Orchestra and others who appeared on the TV show.
All in all, this series had it's pluses and minuses, but overall I think that the positives outweighted the negatives by a very wide margin. The aim is not to present classical music as a kind of museum piece away from the "great unwashed" in the rarified worlds of museums and archives only accessible to scholars. The aim, I think, is to present them as "real" people, as the emotional and passionate men they were. Classical music is a living medium just like all types of music today, it's not something that belongs in a museum or tucked away in an old granny's basement...
I really enjoyed the
Classical Destinations series. It was you that introduced me to this series, Andre on the other forum. I think the visual aspect of this program is wonderful as it takes you to the composer's birthplace and explores what was around them. A composer's environment may not seem like that big of a deal, but it actually is, as many of these cityscapes, rivers, lakes, mountains, cathedrals, etc. have inspired some of this music's greatest composers.
I haven't seen the second series yet and I don't even know if it's out yet, do you know anything about this Andre?
I quite like the show in general. It was just that one episode which praised Holst to the skies for most of its length, and then had a five minute addendum for Our Rafe, whose chief claim to fame was, according to Callow, that he was known to Holst. The balance seemed completely wrong to me, and surely the result of ignorance on the part of Callow and the series producer.
Quote from: eyeresist on May 26, 2011, 07:05:21 PM
I quite like the show in general. It was just that one episode which praised Holst to the skies for most of its length, and then had a five minute addendum for Our Rafe, whose chief claim to fame was, according to Callow, that he was known to Holst. The balance seemed completely wrong to me, and surely the result of ignorance on the part of Callow and the series producer.
I haven't seen this episode (it's in the second series), but this does sound troublesome. As a devout RVW fan, I believe I won't be watching this one. :) But, then again, I don't know that much about Holst, so maybe it might be interesting to gain a little bit more knowledge about this composer.
Quote from: Mirror Image on May 26, 2011, 07:12:17 PM
I haven't seen this episode (it's in the second series), but this does sound troublesome. As a devout RVW fan, I believe I won't be watching this one. :) But, then again, I don't know that much about Holst, so maybe it might be interesting to gain a little bit more knowledge about this composer.
Plus I imagine you enjoy being outraged on occasion :D
Seriously, I'm not that familiar with Holst's choral works, haven't heard Savitri or the vaunted Hymn of Jesus. But I doubt they could so completely overshadow RVW's masterpieces.
Quote from: Tapio Dmitriyevich Shostakovich on May 26, 2011, 09:01:20 AM
...With different instruments than they're used to, but does that really count? Maybe requires repeated listenings because of complexity, but does that count? Often good and enjoyable music from experts and: rewarding in whatever ways, that's what it has to be.
I'm serious about the following, I'm not trying to talk uninformed or smarmy rubbish or be trolling -
I have listened to the album below of arrangements by Andre Rieu titled "You'll Never Walk Alone" which has a compliment of both instrumental and operatic classical, show tunes and movie themes played by full symphony orchestra with a range of soloists - on violin, cello, guitar, piano, and vocalists including sopranos and tenors. They are all combined in the last (the title) track, which comes across almost like a grand ending to a symphony or oratorio. It's nothing if not classical in that way.
I've been listening to all kinds of classical on & off for more than 30 years, and I can seriously say that Mr Rieu's arrangements stand up to repeated listening in just the same way as not only some of the non-mainstream classical arrangers like Ronnie Binge (who worked under Mantovani producing his unique "cascading strings" sound & even penned the evergreen "Elizabethan Serenade" which is on Rieu's album as a kind of tribute), Edith Piaf and the like but also more mainstream classical arrangers like Canteloube, Orff and perhaps even the great Schoenberg (his arrangements of Strauss' waltzes are basically textbook stuff, but he also co-arranged a number of other things like Mahler).
I can discuss in detail any track from this album, which I basically think is top notch. Rieu shows his accute sensitivity to the originals, it is clear that his knowledge of these scores is above average. Some might say that his use of larger forces for simple tunes like the title track might appear kind of overblown, but I think that's just a matter of taste. I mean there are plenty of people out there who find the mammoth forces used by geniuses like Berlioz, Wagner or Mahler to not to be to their personal preferences in a similar way.
Some of the originals he hardly touches at all, eg. Elgar's Pomp & Circumstance March No. 1 (Land of Hope & Glory). In that, Rieu just uses a slightly larger string section, a much reduced chamber choir, and a brief splash of organ at the very last minute, to add some extra colour and finality. Others like Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata (first movement) are more drastically reworked, but only to emphasise things that are already inherent in the score. Here the piano is gently joined by the orchestra, much in a similar way to the famous opening of Beethoven's 4th piano concerto. Towards the middle, the choir joins in a wordless way, kind of humming or harmonising underneath the soloist & orchestra. This is very subtle, you probably won't notice them at all on the first listen. As Rieu's notes say, Beethoven didn't name this sonata "Moonlight" but the image of moonbeams being reflected at night on a tranquil pond or something seems to come into many listeners minds. Rieu just brings this kind of image into slightly sharper relief than the original, but he doesn't detract from it, he kind of adds a little extra dimension to it in his own unique way.
& you'll all laugh about this (well, maybe!). I really dislike Andrew Lloyd Webber's hit song "The Music of the Night" from his musical "The Phantom of the Opera." My mother really liked this musical (because she liked opera the most, this musical is probably the most operatic one ever penned thus far). I am kind of okay with the rest of this musical, I think it has a kind of dramatic flair overall, but I just hated that song because it was like an earworm. So when the track came up, I almost skipped ahead to avoid it. But I'm glad I didn't. Rieu's arrangement, featuring a soulful, lyrical and melodic cello solo, strikes me as a 110 per cent improvement on the original. It actually comes across as real music, not just a soundbyte or earworm. It has a slightly tragic and melancholic feel, which fits in with the story of the musical. The choir comes in at the end, singing the song, and this is also appropriate as musical theatre is part of the vocal spectrum. The cello solo might be a nod to Andrew's younger cellist brother, Julian. In any case, this track is one of my favourites on the whole disc.
So you "highbrows" out there, please don't rubbish Rieu's talents or abilities. He is a craftsman just like the best of the great arrangers of the past. He knows the scores expertly and he treats them with great sensitivity and respect. These arrangements show the character of the original composer's emotions as much as they do those of Mr Rieu. You really can't ask much more than that!
[asin]B0027OSSEC[/asin]
@ MI - Not to go too much off topic, which I kind of did in the former post re Classical Destinations (but I think it fits in to the general gist of our discussions on Rieu). In a nutshell, the second TV series is as good as the first. It just covers some more composers, it has the same style and format of the first set. Simon Callow is joined by co-presenters Matt Wills and Nicki Vasilakis - the latter one of our top violinists in the chamber realm here in Australia (I've seen her in many piano trio recitals & she's a very skilled and versatile muso). Most of us here in the intermediate to advanced echelon of classical listening will be familiar with most of the composers covered, except for a Serbian guy called Mokranjac who is interestingly covered in the same episode as the great Spaniard, Albeniz. I think you'll enjoy this just as you did the first series (I'm not sure if it's still available, you'll have to look into this at your usual places for these things)...
Quote from: eyeresist on May 26, 2011, 07:05:21 PM
I quite like the show in general. It was just that one episode which praised Holst to the skies for most of its length, and then had a five minute addendum for Our Rafe, whose chief claim to fame was, according to Callow, that he was known to Holst. The balance seemed completely wrong to me, and surely the result of ignorance on the part of Callow and the series producer.
You raise the good point of balance, but I think you are seeing this in a too "scholarly" type of light.
Classical Destinations is not a scholarly documentary, it's a TV series, simple as that. Vaughan Williams did work for many years on the English hymnal, in some ways this is one of the most living aspects of his art. Many of the chruch services in the UK (& even out in former colonies of the British Empire like here in Australia) has the choir and congregation sing his masterly arrangements, which come across to me as both not too hard to sing and miniature gems in themselves.
The TV series is just a "starting point." If people want more they can consult many other sources out there, there's a wealth of them on these composers, most of them are quite mainstream (except the Serbian composer Mokranjac in the second series)...
Quote from: eyeresist on May 26, 2011, 07:26:09 PM
Plus I imagine you enjoy being outraged on occasion :D
Seriously, I'm not that familiar with Holst's choral works, haven't heard Savitri or the vaunted Hymn of Jesus. But I doubt they could so completely overshadow RVW's masterpieces.
Yes, let the RAGE begin!!! ;D
Quote from: Sid on May 26, 2011, 07:26:57 PM
@ MI - Not to go too much off topic, which I kind of did in the former post re Classical Destinations (but I think it fits in to the general gist of our discussions on Rieu). In a nutshell, the second TV series is as good as the first. It just covers some more composers, it has the same style and format of the first set. Simon Callow is joined by co-presenters Matt Wills and Nicki Vasilakis - the latter one of our top violinists in the chamber realm here in Australia (I've seen her in many piano trio recitals & she's a very skilled and versatile muso). Most of us here in the intermediate to advanced echelon of classical listening will be familiar with most of the composers covered, except for a Serbian guy called Mokranjac who is interestingly covered in the same episode as the great Spaniard, Albeniz. I think you'll enjoy this just as you did the first series (I'm not sure if it's still available, you'll have to look into this at your usual places for these things)...
Thanks for the information, Andre. Sounds like I'll be picking up this series as well. Obviously, I'm familiar with all the composers they discuss, but Mokranjac is a composer I never heard of. I did a Google on him and evidently his only claim to fame was he brought Serbian folk music into art music.
Quote from: Sid on May 26, 2011, 07:31:16 PM
You raise the good point of balance, but I think you are seeing this in a too "scholarly" type of light. Classical Destinations is not a scholarly documentary, it's a TV series, simple as that. ...
The TV series is just a "starting point." If people want more they can consult many other sources out there, there's a wealth of them on these composers, most of them are quite mainstream
No, my problem isn't scholarly, quite the opposite. It's precisely because this series will be for many viewers an introduction to music they don't know that I have a problem. Vaughan Williams wrote more music than Holst, and more masterpieces than Holst. He was more musically individual than Holst. He was probably taller than him too! So praising Holst as the master and relegating RVW to a footnote is not just a question of a choice of balance, it is grossly misleading of the viewer.
On July 3 in Vienna Andre Rieu premiered a waltz composed by Anthony Hopkins. Yes, the Anthony Hopkins of Hannibal Lecter fame. Hopkins is a big fan of Rieu and hoped "As the Waltz Goes On" would lead to a meeting with the conductor. Rieu plans to include the work in his Fall tour and his next album.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2011/07/anthony-hopkins-andre-rieu-.html#comments (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/culturemonster/2011/07/anthony-hopkins-andre-rieu-.html#comments)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GD3VsesSBsw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GD3VsesSBsw) Take a look at him conducting "Oh, Fortuna", with a violin in hand the whole time. What a disgusting experience to watch this when you know the original version well and have heard a real interpretation before.
Consider it a moral duty to never miss an opportunity to ridicule Andre Rieu and his 'art'.
Quote from: AllegroVivace on July 14, 2011, 08:40:30 PMConsider it a moral duty to never miss an opportunity to ridicule Andre Rieu and his 'art'.
Trust me, I've already done a lot of this on GMG already. ;) :D