Members who have left.

[Gurn Blanston]

No, I asked him. He wouldn't tell me. 

It must have been just you...   Or you didn't ask like this: "Say, aren't you XYZ, the famous Dutch writer?". That worked for ME OK...



----------------
Listening to:
Vivaldi: Concertos On Authentic Instruments - Alberto Lizzio: Musici Di San Marco - RV 533 Concerto in C for 2 Flutes 1st mvmt - Allegro

[mn dave]

It must have been just you...   Or you didn't ask like this: "Say, aren't you XYZ, the famous Dutch writer?". That worked for ME OK...



----------------
Listening to:
Vivaldi: Concertos On Authentic Instruments - Alberto Lizzio: Musici Di San Marco - RV 533 Concerto in C for 2 Flutes 1st mvmt - Allegro

I think I mentioned wanting to read one of his books, but he didn't want to go there, so whatever...

[Lilas Pastia]

Herman's identity is not a mystery. His full name appeared a few times in these pages - I can't recall if it was him or someone else mentioning it, though. In any case, he's gone and so is Molman. These two couldn't stand each other but neither took advantage of the situation by returning to claim the ground. There must be other reasons for posters' departure than just bad company.

[Gurn Blanston]

I think I mentioned wanting to read one of his books, but he didn't want to go there, so whatever...

Probably just caught him on one of the 6.5 bad days a week he had... If it makes you feel better, I'd tell you that I was really a famous Dutch writer...

[Gurn Blanston]

Herman's identity is not a mystery. His full name appeared a few times in these pages - I can't recall if it was him or someone else mentioning it, though. In any case, he's gone and so is Molman. These two couldn't stand each other but neither took advantage of the situation by returning to claim the ground. There must be other reasons for posters' departure than just bad company.

Sure. As I mentioned earlier, Molman got heavily into jazz and gave up classical music altogether. I guess that's an OK reason to leave a classical music board. Weird, but OK.

[Que]

Sure. As I mentioned earlier, Molman got heavily into jazz and gave up classical music altogether. I guess that's an OK reason to leave a classical music board. Weird, but OK.

Giving up on classical music is weird, very weird! 
Unless he never really "got it".

I am surprised that hasn't been deleted yet!

Surprise, surprise.... 

Q

[Wanderer]

Giving up on classical music is weird, very weird! 
Unless he never really "got it".

Or maybe his sojourn here proved to be too traumatic? 

[lukeottevanger]

Giving up on classical music is weird, very weird! 
Unless he never really "got it".

Somehow that doesn't really surprise me - I never thought as much of Molman's opinions on classical music itself as others may have done. He had a superb ear for what made recording x better than recording y - that's a skill transferable into jazz, of course - but as far as music itself went he rarely, to my recollection, had much interesting or new to say. As if he was less interested in the music he was listening than in what it was in the artist recording it that set him apart. That's a perfectly respectable path, of course, and one that leads quite easily to jazz. One as skilled as Molman in listening to the performer will be more at home in jazz than anywhere else.

FWIW personally I liked Herman very much, and had great respect for his knowledge too. He never lashed out at me as he is supposed to have done to so many others - I'm not blind, I saw him at his more agressive, and quite a sight it was, but I don't recall things as being as black and white as is claimed now in retrospect.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Regarding Molman: "not quite," to some of the above. I know him fairly well and have remained in touch. He was a classically trained violinist in his youth and has pretty solid tastes, although he doesn't have much use for vocal music and always preferred the chamber repertoire. While he's interested in varied interpretations, he prefers to keep just one or two of the ones that most appealed to him, and gradually trimmed down his classical collection while he took a greater interest in jazz for a while. But he never sold his entire classical collection, and he doesn't approach record-collecting as maintaining a permanent personal library; instead he thinks of buying a CD as equivalent to buying a concert ticket, and if he doesn't think the performance will interest him enough to keep, he'll sell it.

[Renfield]

But he never sold his entire classical collection, and he doesn't approach record-collecting as maintaining a permanent personal library; instead he thinks of buying a CD as equivalent to buying a concert ticket, and if he doesn't think the performance will interest him enough to keep, he'll sell it.

A whimsical approach, to be sure; but it does have a charm to it!

[ezodisy]

If the sort of behaviour shown in the past page or two is common for some of you then I really feel sorry for your friends. How could they endure such pettiness? People talk of what a nasty person Herman could be, implying that his true character might have come out here whereas it couldn't with all the restraints in daily life. Well if that is true, then some here must be pretty nasty people.

First of all Herman told me that he would rather his full name is not known on this board. Whether or not it slipped out a few times as Lilas said it did is neither here nor there. The fact that some people are dropping hints is the very nadir of poor taste.

Second of all Molman was a trained musician (I see that's been mentioned already). I suspect you didn't mean it in a mean-spirited way Luke but a lack of discussion in technical terms for some doesn't mean that they can't say anything interesting. His use of this message board was for another purpose, a more congenial one; and even if he isn't a musician's musician, as I guess you're implying, he certainly is a musician and nothing ever got by him. Honestly I am not sure why you had to say that as it sounds rather daft and makes me wonder what you think of the rest of us who aren't able to talk the way you do. One thing I will say is that I find the implication that a taste for jazz music underscores an inferior musical understanding to be wholly ludicrous. You might want to clarify this last point as whatever it lacks in propriety and stiffness it certainly makes up for in freedom and imagination.

Finally I'm not surprised that a whole bunch can't quite grasp the idea of keeping possessions to a minimum. It's something of an art, a lost art maybe. After all any fool can pack the shelves.

Come to think of it, maybe this approach came from Molman's love of the Transcendentalists (ha ha ha!!!!)?

[knight66]

Finally I'm not surprised that a whole bunch can't quite grasp the idea of keeping possessions to a minimum. It's something of an art, a lost art maybe. After all any fool can pack the shelves.

Yes, that is true. One issue I ought to explore more thoroughly. I suppose I don't like to feel I have wasted money. I do have the odd clear-out, but am kidding myself if I imply it is more than token.

Last year we downsized our housing radically. I parted with an awful lot of things, including about 800 books, but the CDs all came along for the ride.

Mike

[uffeviking]

What's wrong with buying, listening, watching a CD or DVD and then selling it? I had an extensive DVD collection and realised I never repeatadly watched even half of them. Signed up with amazon Marketplace, sold at least half of the discs, made a bundle - and bought new ones! But my collection remains trimmed down to only the ones I really want to keep and enjoy again and again. 

[lukeottevanger]

Second of all Molman was a trained musician (I see that's been mentioned already). I suspect you didn't mean it in a mean-spirited way Luke but a lack of discussion in technical terms for some doesn't mean that they can't say anything interesting. His use of this message board was for another purpose, a more congenial one; and even if he isn't a musician's musician, as I guess you're implying, he certainly is a musician and nothing ever got by him. Honestly I am not sure why you had to say that as it sounds rather daft and makes me wonder what you think of the rest of us who aren't able to talk the way you do. One thing I will say is that I find the implication that a taste for jazz music underscores an inferior musical understanding to be wholly ludicrous. You might want to clarify this last point as whatever it lacks in propriety and stiffness it certainly makes up for in freedom and imagination.

I think you're reading a lot more into my post than I actually said. I'm aware that I didn't express a quite simple idea very well - I wasn't posting at the best time. All I meant was that it doesn't surprise me if Molman is now more interested in jazz, because he always seemed to me to excel at listening for the individual nuances of a performance (as indeed you do Tony, and as I certainly don't - it's something which I wish was more developed in me, and I often think that my own ear is rather hampered in that respect). That's a skill that transfers pretty readily to jazz appreciation. In fact, it's the very essence of jazz appreciation. More to the point, jazz is a music which has an enormous amount to give in this respect.

I'm very sorry if you thought of me any of the sort of thing implied by this:

a lack of discussion in technical terms for some doesn't mean that they can't say anything interesting. His use of this message board was for another purpose, a more congenial one; and even if he isn't a musician's musician, as I guess you're implying, he certainly is a musician and nothing ever got by him. Honestly I am not sure why you had to say that as it sounds rather daft and makes me wonder what you think of the rest of us who aren't able to talk the way you do.

those implications being, as I read them:

1) That I think that only technical discussion is interesting. About as far off-base as could possibly be, may I say. Technical discussion is only interesting if it illuminates something non-technical, and it's that non-technical thing which is truly the object of interest. My own composer's thread shows precisely how I feel the technical should always be relevant to bigger expressive or aesthetic issues, and that it isn't of interest except in as much as it leads to them.

2) That technical discussion isn't congenial - and ergo, I suppose, that I'm not congenial if I indulge in it. Very sorry, I try my hardest.

3) That I think Molman wasn't a musician's musician. That's not a terminology that means as much to me as maybe it does to you. There are plenty of people here who aren't 'musician's musicians' in that they aren't professionals - and amongst them are some of the most percipient, intelligent musicians I know.

4) That I look down on those who don't discuss things technically. Which is crap, really - you don't need to look further than yourself to find a GMG member whose posts on (for instance) Chopin and Chopin recordings have always impressed and humbled me to an extent you probably don't imagine.

I thought you knew me better than that. My comments regarding his discussion of the 'purely musical' as opposed to the 'interpretative' were meant in a comparative way, not in a derogatory one - he quite patently had an extremely musical ear, and I'm sure you're right that he was a fine musician. But - and I don't see why I can't be allowed to say it without these imputations of elitism - I was never that interested in what he said about the music itself, just as I'm sure many people aren't interested in what I have to say about it (and particularly, just as I'm sure most of you aren't interested in my recording recommendations - quite rightly too).

For the record, I'm a very big jazz fan, though I don't discuss it here since the time I was told off for mentioning Miles Davis ('this is the Good Music Guide, you know'  ) I'm about the last person on this board who would make any crass and idiotic jazz-isn't-real-music comments.

Anyway, stuff this for a game of soldiers. I knew there was a reason I don't usually post stuff like that.

[(poco) Sforzando]

First of all Herman told me that he would rather his full name is not known on this board. Whether or not it slipped out a few times as Lilas said it did is neither here nor there. The fact that some people are dropping hints is the very nadir of poor taste.

If Herman's name was already public knowledge, I can't see "dropping hints" as the very nadir of anything.

[Lilas Pastia]

I don't think Herman's name was "public knowledge". But since I know it, have never read his books and do not frequent other forums, I assume it must have appeared here now and then. Unless it was in his email address. I can't tell. I've never mentioned my own name on the forum, but anybody who emails me knows it. But that's not really important. What's there to hide? It's not like this was a XXX forum...

[Dancing Divertimentian]

I distinctly recall Herman referring to himself quite often (usually while in a flame war) as someone whose occupation involved writing. Coyly, yes, but always open-ended.

So if his "identity" has become public knowledge, seems to me it's his own fault.

[ezodisy]

I think you're reading a lot more into my post than I actually said.

Listen, at this stage of my life I'm just happy that I can read at all.

and I often think that my own ear is rather hampered in that respect

this of course is nonsense, you've got the most acute hearing around and know and discriminate between so much that it makes my head spin. Sorry for going too far with my response, it was more of a gut reaction as I took your comparative point in a mostly negative way. I was surprised by it because I think I do know you a little and that sort of thing, which got all twisted up in my mind, didn't seem characteristic and didn't go down well at all. It's worth keeping in mind that for foster listeners like me Molman is like the Godfather of Comparative Listening and led all of us little runts by the hand to the holy interpretive shrine. Anyone who says anything even remotely untoward about him is gonna get it!!!!!

[knight66]

Gents, I have been watching this entire thread with some misgivings. Now we, (me included), seem to have been sloshing around in murky waters. Can I suggest we step back from challenging one another further on these aspects of the topic.

I am not suggesting anyone is breaking any rules; rather that there is some irritation growing and it is very unfortunate if it breaks out any further. This is especially the case when the cause is ex-members, folk who are not here. I know Wagner induces worse and he has not posted for some time...but I have no doubt you catch my drift.

Mike

Edit: I wrote it prior to seeing Tony's latest, which I have no problem with. I also have/had no problem with Moleman....thought I ought to own up to that.

[lukeottevanger]

Listen, at this stage of my life I'm just happy that I can read at all.

this of course is nonsense, you've got the most acute hearing around and know and discriminate between so much that it makes my head spin.

That's very kind of you, but I know very well that my hearing, whilst working perfectly well in most ways, is extremely fallible in certain areas. I am a complete dunce when it comes to comparative listening, which is the very area which as you say - and as was my main point - Molman excels in, as do you, Todd, M Forever and others too. The type of deep-hearing to the interpretation that you guys are capable of is usually beyond me, and I read your posts with awe. And gain a huge amount from them, too, for which I am eternally grateful. That's not to say I don't have my own opinions and gut reactions, of course - but I can't elucidate them as you lot do.

Sorry for going too far with my response, it was more of a gut reaction as I took your comparative point in a mostly negative way. I was surprised by it because I think I do know you a little and that sort of thing, which got all twisted up in my mind, didn't seem characteristic and didn't go down well at all. It's worth keeping in mind that for foster listeners like me Molman is like the Godfather of Comparative Listening and led all of us little runts by the hand to the holy interpretive shrine. Anyone who says anything even remotely untoward about him is gonna get it!!!!!

Don't worry - I'm aware of his status, and what's more, though I don't think I ever profited personally from his recommendations, I know enough to be sure that he deserves that status. My point was a compliment to him really - jazz is the epitome of a music where the composer recedes into the background and the interpreter, speaking through his instrument in the most personal of ways, is all-important. (Don't forget that Chopin's improvisations are supposed to have left his notated music in the shade - the ellusive 'note bleue' was a phenomenon peculiar to his improvising, IIRC; no coincidence that it translates as Blue Note    ) Such a music is a natural eventual home for someone with Molman's type of ear, I think, as I said before.