Mr Rowe's back-handed compliment regarding Nigel Harris' review made me think again whether the reviews on MusicWeb really are lacking honesty when it comes to indicating flaws in recordings, as we pride ourselves on being independent and unafraid to deliver opinions which might be...unpalatable....unwise? if we were dependent on sponsorship and advertisers. As a result, I trawled through some of the straplines for more recent reviews to test that assertion and while I concede that many are highly complimentary, that is surely more a testament to the quality of what we choose to review - and of course one tends to gravitate towards things which will please rather than be an eternal curmudgeon. Here are some verdicts: "Readings that don’t match up with the best"..."The main works are ill-served by eccentric tempi and phrasing"..."Virtuosic but not exceptional"..."unfortunately let down by singing"..."suffers from a lack of personality and variety"..."blighted by the conductor’s very audible vocal intrusions" (mine!)..."rather disappointing"..."There are better choices"..."too often heavy and ponderous"..."Too strident for my liking"..."lacking in power"..."Best avoided – there are many far superior options" (mine again!) - and they are all from just this month so far. Maybe the accusation is rather harsh?
Nigel Harris's review of the Saint-Saens/Glazunov violin concertos is excellent. It is refreshing to read a review which is thorough and honest about a recording's strengths AND weaknesses - the latter being conspicuously absent, or severely minimized, in too many other reviews on this site. Excellent writing and observations, Mr. Harris!
Message Thread
« Back to index | View thread »
Thank you for taking part in the MusicWeb International Forum.
Len Mullenger - Founder of MusicWeb