David Hurwitz

[Mookalafalas]

I think he means unsubscribing from alerts about new posts in this thread.

  I doubt that he will. He cannot leave an argument alone, even when there isn't one, and it isn't directed anywhere in his direction. When I first joined GMG I posted how much I loved box sets, and how much better I considered it to buy a large group of CDs for 1-2 dollars a piece than to pay $15 a piece for them. He appeared out of nowhere and interpreted the statement as a personal attack agains him. I was flabbergasted. I went to another thread and posted, and he followed me there and continued attacking me. I apologized to him profusely, just to end the onslaught. In the post above, I was not attacking Hurwitz, although I did say he should have owned up a little more to how much his view has changed. He himself says how his opinion of Marriner's "proto-hip" Haydn symphonies have changed from negative to positive as a result of what he considers the excesses of the "full-on-hip" movement.
   Part of the reason I posted it in the first-place was to try to nuance the thread's "Good Dave/Bad Dave" dichotomy by pointing out an "evolving Dave." Really, my main complaint against Hurwitz is he now has me trying to simultaneously listen to about 6 mega-box sets which his rave reviews have gotten me excited about. 

[Karl Henning]

I doubt that he will. He cannot leave an argument alone, even when there isn't one, and it isn't directed anywhere in his direction. When I first joined GMG I posted how much I loved box sets, and how much better I considered it to buy a large group of CDs for 1-2 dollars a piece than to pay $15 a piece for them. He appeared out of nowhere and interpreted the statement as a personal attach agains him. I was flabbergasted. I went to another thread and posted, and he followed me there and continued attacking me. I apologized to him profusely, just to end the onslaught. In the post above, I was not attacking Hurwitz, although I did say he should have owned up a little more to how much his view has changed. He himself says how his opinion of Marriner's "proto-hip" Haydn symphonies have changed from negative to positive as a result of what he considers the excesses of the "full-on-hip" movement.
  Part of the reason I posted it in the first-place was to try to nuance the thread's "Good Dave/Bad Dave" dichotomy by pointing out an "evolving Dave." Really, my main complaint against Hurwitz is he now has me trying to simultaneously listen to about 6 mega-box sets which his rave reviews have gotten me excited about. 

(* chortle *)

[LKB]

In the last couple of hours Hurwitz has uploaded a fairly lauditory review of Decca's new Janet Baker set:

https://youtu.be/3wWCF1-pAlA?si=icsZ5S_jh2kxhQ8J

Dame Janet has been a favorite of mine since l heard her Kindertotenlieder on EMI back in the '70's. Hurwitz has nothing but good  things to say about her, just as he should.

[Madiel]

I doubt that he will. He cannot leave an argument alone, even when there isn't one, and it isn't directed anywhere in his direction. When I first joined GMG I posted how much I loved box sets, and how much better I considered it to buy a large group of CDs for 1-2 dollars a piece than to pay $15 a piece for them. He appeared out of nowhere and interpreted the statement as a personal attack agains him. I was flabbergasted.

ROFL.

Read the first page and a bit of the Boxset blather thread. Not just you. Everyone. Revisionist history at its finest.

It's the first page, I'm contributing to the first page just like you are rather than coming to respond to you, and then you say I made excellent points.

The other thread you're talking about... you basically seem shocked that anyone would have read what you said and responded to it? And as we're picking over something from 9 years ago, I can see I was not the only person who responded to you. Glad I was so memorable. But I do find it fascinating how often people seem to think that the role of a message board is for them to be able to post things, without anyone else actually doing the same. It's a message board, not a blog. You said a certain thing I disagreed with. I said so. I explained why I disagreed. This apparently is an "onslaught" just because I didn't change my mind.

Not that I remember any of this. I had to go back and look to find out what you were talking about. But see, I'm a great believer in primary sources.

Oh, and I have indeed unsubscribed from this thread. But I decided to glance at it for first time in a couple of days, and I find that it's now not just a thread for dissing Hurwitz, it's a thread for dissing me. I feel vaguely honoured. It'll pass.

ADDITIONAL EDIT: If you want to read the "onslaught", it's on this page: https://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,23076.40.html  You will see that I, the person committing the "onslaught", actually say a lot less than the person I am supposedly onslaughting.

Again, I remembered none of this until now.

[71 dB]

This thread truly never changes... People who've decided "Dave good" or "Dave bad" repeat their positions as if they will ever convince each other (or as if we forgot where everyone stands)... At least this time I learned about Spontini and got some possible tips on where to start listening to Boulez?

At least we can all agree David Hurwitz is a controversial person. 

[(poco) Sforzando]

At least we can all agree David Hurwitz is a controversial person. 

I'm sure in his own mind he's not. 

[71 dB]

I'm sure in his own mind he's not. 

You are mistaken my friend. He enjoys his status as the King of controversiality!

[(poco) Sforzando]

You are mistaken my friend. He enjoys his status as the King of controversiality!

But he has an infallible belief in his own infallibility.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Today's talk, taking 15 minutes to humiliate some poor guy who attacked him via email, is entitled: "Music Chat: I Am A Pompous A-Hole, Evidently."

To which my friend wrote me to say, "He's being too hard on himself."

[71 dB]

No, this is not a response to this thread: 

[foxandpeng]

Ahem. I have quite clearly stated things about Hurwitz' videos that I don't like.

But thank you for continuing the spirit of sweeping basic generalisation that this thread is so committed to.

I'll be unsubscribing next time I'm on a computer rather than phone. I've honestly had enough.

That would be a shame.

[Karl Henning]

You are mistaken my friend. He enjoys his status as the King of controversiality!

Mister Click-Bait!

[Mookalafalas]

I don't want to fight or argue with anyone, but I'm curious about how he's controversial.
   For GMG folk, he's certainly polarizing, but from the (admittedly few) videos of his I've seen, he's mostly conservative in his tastes. In general, he reveres the canonical composers and conductors, and has reservations about the HIP movement and modernism (i.e. Boulez, serialism), but so does a wide swathe of classical fans.  When I disagree with his opinions, I still know where he's coming from.
 Of course, he states his opinions as though they are incontrovertible (sometimes he calls them "facts"), but the opinions themselves seem pretty standard. By that I mean he doesn't claim that Beethoven has always been overrated or all contemporary pianists are bad, or extreme positions like that which would strike me as "controversial"  Karl, and many others I think, consider him an obnoxious jerk. I can see that too. It's an excellent reason not to like him, but that's not controversial. Either he rubs you the wrong way, or you find his weird, outspoken, crusty flakiness rather refreshing.
  What I like about him is that he's never a complete fanboy. For example, he likes Karajan, but rips into his Bach and pre-classical music like crazy. In fact, he says it's so slow and stodgy that "it made the HIP movement necessary." Similarly, he raves about the new Klemperer box, but then criticises a surprising number of the disks--especially the later ones--and usually gives specific reasons. He complains about the HIP movement, but then raves about Bruggen's Haydn interpretations.  And he really does know a hell of a lot, about the music, trends, and the history of the labels. I learn a lot, but then have to skip forward when it's just old man ramblings and ravings.
  Anyway, I hope someone can respond...coolly.

[Brian]

To me that is a perfect summary!

[Atriod]

Some of my favorite recordings I've discovered via Hurwitz:

François-Xavier Roth/Les Siècles. Hurwitz's videos on him are rants, I had to hear them out of sheer curiosity. I find the 20th century music fascinating, not from a genuine HIP sense (i.e., we can hear Stravinsky conduct his works and they sound nothing like this) but more like some entertaining avant-garde performance art. The next time we revisit France I would love to try and see them live. After hearing them play Symphonie Fantastique a few times it's now one of my favorite performances.

Mahler Symphony 7 Alexandre Bloch/Orchestre National de Lille.

Inbal's Mahler Exton recordings. Hurwitz usually only mentioned them in passing. I've owned his Denon cycle and they are solid performances, but with so many Mahler recordings I really only want to listen to the best given how much time you have to dedicate to them. The TMSO cycle is now my all time favorite cycle from a single conductor/orchestra (though some that are only average like Symphony 7). And the recordings with Czech Phil are just as good just with a hair less commitment than the TMSO. The performances are most reminiscent of Bernstein's most romantic interpretations.

Takashi Asahina. Another conductor that Hurwitz mentioned in passing in I think a Celibidache video, I think he drew the comparison with Asahina and called Asahina over rated. So this caused me to explore some of his recordings and he has recorded some of the very best Bruckner performances I've heard. The Beethoven cycle on Fontec is old school German ala Barenboim/Staatskapelle Berlin and now up there with my favorite cycles maybe even eclipsing Jochum's DG. YMMV as for modern tempi/full orchestra the only cycle I listen to often/like is Leibowitz.

Daniele Gatti Tchaikovsky 4-6, wow they give Mravinsky a run for the money in terms of sheer intensity and in much better recording quality as far as realism goes.

[Karl Henning]

Gatti does great work. 

[DavidW]

Gatti and the New Philharmonia is the only time I heard a major orchestra live.  And yeah I love his Tchaikovsky (wasn't the concert though).

[Atriod]

Remembered another - Ashkenazy conducting the Asrael Symphony. This led me to checking out Ashkenazy's 2000s recordings as a conductor and they are very different from his Decca recordings. The new ones have so much warmth, about the polar opposite of most of his Decca interpretations (not a criticism, I like plenty of them).

[Mookalafalas]

Some of my favorite recordings I've discovered via Hurwitz:

François-Xavier Roth/Les Siècles. Hurwitz's videos on him are rants, I had to hear them out of sheer curiosity. I find the 20th century music fascinating, not from a genuine HIP sense (i.e., we can hear Stravinsky conduct his works and they sound nothing like this) but more like some entertaining avant-garde performance art. The next time we revisit France I would love to try and see them live. After hearing them play Symphonie Fantastique a few times it's now one of my favorite performances.

Mahler Symphony 7 Alexandre Bloch/Orchestre National de Lille.

Inbal's Mahler Exton recordings. Hurwitz usually only mentioned them in passing. I've owned his Denon cycle and they are solid performances, but with so many Mahler recordings I really only want to listen to the best given how much time you have to dedicate to them. The TMSO cycle is now my all time favorite cycle from a single conductor/orchestra (though some that are only average like Symphony 7). And the recordings with Czech Phil are just as good just with a hair less commitment than the TMSO. The performances are most reminiscent of Bernstein's most romantic interpretations.

Takashi Asahina. Another conductor that Hurwitz mentioned in passing in I think a Celibidache video, I think he drew the comparison with Asahina and called Asahina over rated. So this caused me to explore some of his recordings and he has recorded some of the very best Bruckner performances I've heard. The Beethoven cycle on Fontec is old school German ala Barenboim/Staatskapelle Berlin and now up there with my favorite cycles maybe even eclipsing Jochum's DG. YMMV as for modern tempi/full orchestra the only cycle I listen to often/like is Leibowitz.

Daniele Gatti Tchaikovsky 4-6, wow they give Mravinsky a run for the money in terms of sheer intensity and in much better recording quality as far as realism goes.

  You seem to like Hurwitz as a negative compass--his disses become your faves. I agree with most of his opinions, but still find him tiresome to listen to. If you don't agree with him much, doesn't he drive you nuts?

[(poco) Sforzando]

François-Xavier Roth/Les Siècles. Hurwitz's videos on him are rants, I had to hear them out of sheer curiosity.

Quoted without comment:

The main novelty, both here and in The Sorcerer's Apprentice, is the use of period instruments, and the best thing I can say about the performances is that you'd never know it. These are just smashing performances of both works, fresh, lively, transparent, and full of character. The climax of Apprentice, in particular, marking the reappearance of the sorcerer at the height of the orchestral chaos, is just tremendous.

- Hurwitz's 9/9 review of a Dukas CD by FX Roth/Siècles