CELEBRATING 53,000 Classical CD reviews on-line (Sept 2016); 21,000 page views each day. Return to MusicWeb International
Déjà-reviews
Posted by Nils-Göran Olve on June 10, 2024, 7:43 am
Ralph Moore asks in another thread what readers think about the twenty-year old reviews now posted. I enjoy them, although I'm slightly disappointed when they are used to compensate for a decreased number of new reviews - today only four, plus two déjà-reviews.
But I'm curious about the selection. It seems well balanced in terms of kinds of music, and also includes a fair proportion of older recordings that were reissued or newly transferred in the early 2000s. Readers hopefully realize that they reflect the situation when they were written. But I could spend a lot of time if I did not resist the urge to comment on these old reviews: it's so easy now, using the Internet, to add relevant information, point out more recent issues, or put the reviews into the context of artists' careers, and point out what makes them still significant! I realize it would take a lot of work also for your knowledgable selection committe (or the Editor) to do so, but every morning I end up thinking "I wonder if readers realize that...?" and would love a few lines why precisely these texts were selected.
I realize that would be a lot more work for "someone". And I hope other readers end up, like me, reflecting on the déjà-reviews in a similar fashion. So maybe it is better to leave them as they are, like now.
Re: Déjà-reviews
Posted by Jeffrey Davis on June 16, 2024, 9:41 am, in reply to "Déjà-reviews"
I enjoy reading the reviews but like Nils am surprised by the relative lack of new reviews.
Previous Message
Ralph Moore asks in another thread what readers think about the twenty-year old reviews now posted. I enjoy them, although I'm slightly disappointed when they are used to compensate for a decreased number of new reviews - today only four, plus two déjà-reviews.
But I'm curious about the selection. It seems well balanced in terms of kinds of music, and also includes a fair proportion of older recordings that were reissued or newly transferred in the early 2000s. Readers hopefully realize that they reflect the situation when they were written. But I could spend a lot of time if I did not resist the urge to comment on these old reviews: it's so easy now, using the Internet, to add relevant information, point out more recent issues, or put the reviews into the context of artists' careers, and point out what makes them still significant! I realize it would take a lot of work also for your knowledgable selection committe (or the Editor) to do so, but every morning I end up thinking "I wonder if readers realize that...?" and would love a few lines why precisely these texts were selected.
I realize that would be a lot more work for "someone". And I hope other readers end up, like me, reflecting on the déjà-reviews in a similar fashion. So maybe it is better to leave them as they are, like now.
Re: Déjà-reviews
Posted by Ralph Moore on June 16, 2024, 1:36 pm, in reply to "Re: Déjà-reviews"
It's simply because we need more people to submit more reviews, Jeffrey. Len's appeal a while back resulted in a surge but the number of submissions has dwindled away again. We rely upon the enthusiasm of volunteers; reviewers are not paid except in terms of being allowed to keep the recordings they request. We ask them to adhere to our formatting guidelines but otherwise the requirements are not so strict - just a minimum of 300 words in the main text. We have a core of committed contributors but would certainly welcome more.
Previous Message
I enjoy reading the reviews but like Nils am surprised by the relative lack of new reviews.
Previous Message
Ralph Moore asks in another thread what readers think about the twenty-year old reviews now posted. I enjoy them, although I'm slightly disappointed when they are used to compensate for a decreased number of new reviews - today only four, plus two déjà-reviews.
But I'm curious about the selection. It seems well balanced in terms of kinds of music, and also includes a fair proportion of older recordings that were reissued or newly transferred in the early 2000s. Readers hopefully realize that they reflect the situation when they were written. But I could spend a lot of time if I did not resist the urge to comment on these old reviews: it's so easy now, using the Internet, to add relevant information, point out more recent issues, or put the reviews into the context of artists' careers, and point out what makes them still significant! I realize it would take a lot of work also for your knowledgable selection committe (or the Editor) to do so, but every morning I end up thinking "I wonder if readers realize that...?" and would love a few lines why precisely these texts were selected.
I realize that would be a lot more work for "someone". And I hope other readers end up, like me, reflecting on the déjà-reviews in a similar fashion. So maybe it is better to leave them as they are, like now.
Re: Déjà-reviews
Posted by Jeffrey Davis on June 16, 2024, 4:47 pm, in reply to "Re: Déjà-reviews"
Thanks Ralph - I understand the issue. I did write one or two reviews myself, so maybe I should do some more!
Previous Message
It's simply because we need more people to submit more reviews, Jeffrey. Len's appeal a while back resulted in a surge but the number of submissions has dwindled away again. We rely upon the enthusiasm of volunteers; reviewers are not paid except in terms of being allowed to keep the recordings they request. We ask them to adhere to our formatting guidelines but otherwise the requirements are not so strict - just a minimum of 300 words in the main text. We have a core of committed contributors but would certainly welcome more.
Previous Message
I enjoy reading the reviews but like Nils am surprised by the relative lack of new reviews.
Previous Message
Ralph Moore asks in another thread what readers think about the twenty-year old reviews now posted. I enjoy them, although I'm slightly disappointed when they are used to compensate for a decreased number of new reviews - today only four, plus two déjà-reviews.
But I'm curious about the selection. It seems well balanced in terms of kinds of music, and also includes a fair proportion of older recordings that were reissued or newly transferred in the early 2000s. Readers hopefully realize that they reflect the situation when they were written. But I could spend a lot of time if I did not resist the urge to comment on these old reviews: it's so easy now, using the Internet, to add relevant information, point out more recent issues, or put the reviews into the context of artists' careers, and point out what makes them still significant! I realize it would take a lot of work also for your knowledgable selection committe (or the Editor) to do so, but every morning I end up thinking "I wonder if readers realize that...?" and would love a few lines why precisely these texts were selected.
I realize that would be a lot more work for "someone". And I hope other readers end up, like me, reflecting on the déjà-reviews in a similar fashion. So maybe it is better to leave them as they are, like now.
Re: Déjà-reviews
Posted by Michael Bullivant on June 23, 2024, 7:49 pm, in reply to "Re: Déjà-reviews"
Rather belatedly, let me say that I too very much enjoy the ‘Déjà Reviews’, and quite a few have sent me back to recordings too long neglected!
But a recent review of the Warner Klemperer Mahler box, reminded me of a regular grumble: why do the companies so often insist on issuing past recordings in vast, expensive boxes? Of course the price per disc is virtual give-away but the price of the box is anything but – the Barbirolli 109 discs at c.£220, for example. ( I know it can be obtained for less). There are several items there I’d dearly love to have but some I don’t want or (more) already have on CD - and LP! The EMI issue of Klemperer in a dozen or so separate thematic boxes was surely the way to do it (as opposed to the subsequent re-reissue in two vast boxes) or Boult with the two collections of ten or so discs. Surely sales would be much better if these massive boxes were broken down into more manageable units even if the price per disc were accordingly higher? But what do I know? – I only have a collection of around 7000 CDs so no doubt my views are quite irrelevant!
And, while I’m about it, another moan: why do so many companies give us the total disc timing (fine) and the timing of every single track but NOT the timing of individual works? So, for example, we know that W.M.B. in the Enigma Variations lasts thirty seconds or so but not how long the complete work lasts without some agile mental arithmetic?
Re: Déjà-reviews
Posted by Ralph Moore on June 24, 2024, 11:04 am, in reply to "Re: Déjà-reviews"
Michael, instead of continually accumulating CDs, I have a regular, ruthless clear-out so that I now have "only" a core collection of several thousand. I am entirely in agreement with all three of your points. I am glad you find the reposting of older reviews interesting; I suppose those mega-boxes must bring in revenue - and they are helpful for increasing shelf-space - but yes; most of us older collectors already have so much of what is included - then, of course, they try to lure us by spruiking the advantages of yet another remastering when there is often - although admittedly not always - little improvement. As for that timings issue, as a reviewer I am constantly irritated by having to add up the duration of individual tracks to arrive at a total for a work - and while we are at it, why do labels insert new CDs into redundant cardboard slipcases? Shrink-wrapping is presumably for security - but that is also annoying.
Previous Message
Rather belatedly, let me say that I too very much enjoy the ‘Déjà Reviews’, and quite a few have sent me back to recordings too long neglected!
But a recent review of the Warner Klemperer Mahler box, reminded me of a regular grumble: why do the companies so often insist on issuing past recordings in vast, expensive boxes? Of course the price per disc is virtual give-away but the price of the box is anything but – the Barbirolli 109 discs at c.£220, for example. ( I know it can be obtained for less). There are several items there I’d dearly love to have but some I don’t want or (more) already have on CD - and LP! The EMI issue of Klemperer in a dozen or so separate thematic boxes was surely the way to do it (as opposed to the subsequent re-reissue in two vast boxes) or Boult with the two collections of ten or so discs. Surely sales would be much better if these massive boxes were broken down into more manageable units even if the price per disc were accordingly higher? But what do I know? – I only have a collection of around 7000 CDs so no doubt my views are quite irrelevant!
And, while I’m about it, another moan: why do so many companies give us the total disc timing (fine) and the timing of every single track but NOT the timing of individual works? So, for example, we know that W.M.B. in the Enigma Variations lasts thirty seconds or so but not how long the complete work lasts without some agile mental arithmetic?
Re: Déjà-reviews
Posted by tuxedo on June 25, 2024, 3:55 pm, in reply to "Re: Déjà-reviews"
Michael (and Ralph)
Yes, you are quite right about those 'mega-boxes' - as for bringing in revenue, I am sure they do. Some years ago I read in amazement a series of posts by members of another forum about how they'd just bought that box of XYZ, and the first response was 'Oh, great, I'm just waiting for my box of ABC to arrive...' on and on it went - all very competitive (Americans, as if I need to say). Yet no-one ever mentioned actually listening to the CD's. Not once. Extraordinary.
As for Michael's suggestion that companies should offer smaller more manageable units, I agree, they haven't really thought the matter through.
Ralph's mention of having a clear-out - I had to smile... "I now have "only" a core collection of several thousand." Ah, but what about those in the cardboard boxes that are still sitting in the spare room/garage which you forgot about?
As for having a clear-out, well I did once... damn it, I need to make some room so I can properly arrange things to be more accessible. Walked into the shop (which no longer exists) and found they were having a sale. Almost walked back out thinking they would be too busy to glance at my large bag full of discarded 'treasures' - but no, they were only too happy. Receiving over three times my realistic estimate, I promptly blew it all (and a bit more) in the sale. Oh, well...
regards
Re: Déjà-reviews
Posted by Néstor Castiglione on June 26, 2024, 3:03 am, in reply to "Re: Déjà-reviews"
You will forgive me, I hope, that patriotism, however meek and vacillating, compelled my reply. :)
Perhaps you misinterpreted my trans-Atlantic confrères' glee for "competitiveness". Goodness knows I have a hard time containing my excitement that these boxes exist at all, often at bargain prices to boot. (Remember how stingy record labels were with reissues back in the 1990s and 2000s?) And how often does the opportunity come up to share one's delight in ultra-fringe interests within a musical genre long banished from the mainstream?
As for the big boxes, I say keep 'em comin'! Even when factoring in duplication, the prices of these boxes are reasonable enough to make trading up fairly painless.
Duplication is not as big a problem for me as I am, perhaps, younger than the average MWI reader/contributor. (Turning 42 next week—chocolates, letters of congratulations, and other tokens of good cheer are happily encouraged, please!) Consequently, I have less to potentially duplicate. Although not for lack of trying!
In 30 years of collecting, I've amassed about 35,000 CDs and counting. (No, I'm not trying to "compete" with anyone!) :) Have I listened to them all in depth? Hardly—but how many men have seen every sunset, climbed every mountain, loved every woman? Collecting is its own pleasure and, as Debussy once said, "pleasure is the law".
Previous Message
Michael (and Ralph)
Yes, you are quite right about those 'mega-boxes' - as for bringing in revenue, I am sure they do. Some years ago I read in amazement a series of posts by members of another forum about how they'd just bought that box of XYZ, and the first response was 'Oh, great, I'm just waiting for my box of ABC to arrive...' on and on it went - all very competitive (Americans, as if I need to say). Yet no-one ever mentioned actually listening to the CD's. Not once. Extraordinary.
As for Michael's suggestion that companies should offer smaller more manageable units, I agree, they haven't really thought the matter through.
Ralph's mention of having a clear-out - I had to smile... "I now have "only" a core collection of several thousand." Ah, but what about those in the cardboard boxes that are still sitting in the spare room/garage which you forgot about?
As for having a clear-out, well I did once... damn it, I need to make some room so I can properly arrange things to be more accessible. Walked into the shop (which no longer exists) and found they were having a sale. Almost walked back out thinking they would be too busy to glance at my large bag full of discarded 'treasures' - but no, they were only too happy. Receiving over three times my realistic estimate, I promptly blew it all (and a bit more) in the sale. Oh, well...
regards
Re: Déjà-reviews
Posted by Ralph Moore on June 26, 2024, 8:58 am, in reply to "Re: Déjà-reviews"
Néstor, because I have nothing better to do, I have just calculated that if you were to listen to music for eight hours every day it would take you approximately fourteen years to get through your current CD collection, which places you comfortably alongside the average MusicWeb participant as certifiably insane. (Happy birthday, in advance, by the way.) All the best, Ralph
PS:...and I am sure, tuxedo, that I have no boxes lurking anywhere...
Previous Message
You will forgive me, I hope, that patriotism, however meek and vacillating, compelled my reply. :)
Perhaps you misinterpreted my trans-Atlantic confrères' glee for "competitiveness". Goodness knows I have a hard time containing my excitement that these boxes exist at all, often at bargain prices to boot. (Remember how stingy record labels were with reissues back in the 1990s and 2000s?) And how often does the opportunity come up to share one's delight in ultra-fringe interests within a musical genre long banished from the mainstream?
As for the big boxes, I say keep 'em comin'! Even when factoring in duplication, the prices of these boxes are reasonable enough to make trading up fairly painless.
Duplication is not as big a problem for me as I am, perhaps, younger than the average MWI reader/contributor. (Turning 42 next week—chocolates, letters of congratulations, and other tokens of good cheer are happily encouraged, please!) Consequently, I have less to potentially duplicate. Although not for lack of trying!
In 30 years of collecting, I've amassed about 35,000 CDs and counting. (No, I'm not trying to "compete" with anyone!) :) Have I listened to them all in depth? Hardly—but how many men have seen every sunset, climbed every mountain, loved every woman? Collecting is its own pleasure and, as Debussy once said, "pleasure is the law".
Previous Message
Michael (and Ralph)
Yes, you are quite right about those 'mega-boxes' - as for bringing in revenue, I am sure they do. Some years ago I read in amazement a series of posts by members of another forum about how they'd just bought that box of XYZ, and the first response was 'Oh, great, I'm just waiting for my box of ABC to arrive...' on and on it went - all very competitive (Americans, as if I need to say). Yet no-one ever mentioned actually listening to the CD's. Not once. Extraordinary.
As for Michael's suggestion that companies should offer smaller more manageable units, I agree, they haven't really thought the matter through.
Ralph's mention of having a clear-out - I had to smile... "I now have "only" a core collection of several thousand." Ah, but what about those in the cardboard boxes that are still sitting in the spare room/garage which you forgot about?
As for having a clear-out, well I did once... damn it, I need to make some room so I can properly arrange things to be more accessible. Walked into the shop (which no longer exists) and found they were having a sale. Almost walked back out thinking they would be too busy to glance at my large bag full of discarded 'treasures' - but no, they were only too happy. Receiving over three times my realistic estimate, I promptly blew it all (and a bit more) in the sale. Oh, well...
regards
Re: Déjà-reviews
Posted by Néstor Castiglione on June 26, 2024, 9:08 pm, in reply to "Re: Déjà-reviews"
Thank you kindly for the certification and birthday wishes, Ralph. Looking forward to receiving my official MWI-branded straightjacket in the mail. :)
Previous Message
Néstor, because I have nothing better to do, I have just calculated that if you were to listen to music for eight hours every day it would take you approximately fourteen years to get through your current CD collection, which places you comfortably alongside the average MusicWeb participant as certifiably insane. (Happy birthday, in advance, by the way.) All the best, Ralph
PS:...and I am sure, tuxedo, that I have no boxes lurking anywhere...
Previous Message
You will forgive me, I hope, that patriotism, however meek and vacillating, compelled my reply. :)
Perhaps you misinterpreted my trans-Atlantic confrères' glee for "competitiveness". Goodness knows I have a hard time containing my excitement that these boxes exist at all, often at bargain prices to boot. (Remember how stingy record labels were with reissues back in the 1990s and 2000s?) And how often does the opportunity come up to share one's delight in ultra-fringe interests within a musical genre long banished from the mainstream?
As for the big boxes, I say keep 'em comin'! Even when factoring in duplication, the prices of these boxes are reasonable enough to make trading up fairly painless.
Duplication is not as big a problem for me as I am, perhaps, younger than the average MWI reader/contributor. (Turning 42 next week—chocolates, letters of congratulations, and other tokens of good cheer are happily encouraged, please!) Consequently, I have less to potentially duplicate. Although not for lack of trying!
In 30 years of collecting, I've amassed about 35,000 CDs and counting. (No, I'm not trying to "compete" with anyone!) :) Have I listened to them all in depth? Hardly—but how many men have seen every sunset, climbed every mountain, loved every woman? Collecting is its own pleasure and, as Debussy once said, "pleasure is the law".
Previous Message
Michael (and Ralph)
Yes, you are quite right about those 'mega-boxes' - as for bringing in revenue, I am sure they do. Some years ago I read in amazement a series of posts by members of another forum about how they'd just bought that box of XYZ, and the first response was 'Oh, great, I'm just waiting for my box of ABC to arrive...' on and on it went - all very competitive (Americans, as if I need to say). Yet no-one ever mentioned actually listening to the CD's. Not once. Extraordinary.
As for Michael's suggestion that companies should offer smaller more manageable units, I agree, they haven't really thought the matter through.
Ralph's mention of having a clear-out - I had to smile... "I now have "only" a core collection of several thousand." Ah, but what about those in the cardboard boxes that are still sitting in the spare room/garage which you forgot about?
As for having a clear-out, well I did once... damn it, I need to make some room so I can properly arrange things to be more accessible. Walked into the shop (which no longer exists) and found they were having a sale. Almost walked back out thinking they would be too busy to glance at my large bag full of discarded 'treasures' - but no, they were only too happy. Receiving over three times my realistic estimate, I promptly blew it all (and a bit more) in the sale. Oh, well...
regards
Re: Déjà-reviews
Posted by tuxedo on June 26, 2024, 3:05 pm, in reply to "Re: Déjà-reviews"
It was, in fact, a good deal more than just 'some years ago' yet your comments infer that this farce is continuing.
The posts on that site were examples of people locked in a competitive struggle with themselves, and other site members. A denial is a common failing in those with an addiction.