wjm@lcuxc.UUCP (B. Mitchell) (12/11/84)
The comments about music, program notes, etc. are quite interesting:
Let me add some of my own.
Personally, I think the artistic interpretation is more important than mere
technical skill. There is something in a live performance that even the
most perfectly edited recording cannot capture. Perhaps it is the knowledge
that the artist doesn't have the safety net of editing there. This may be
why many people have remarked that direct-to-disk recordings (which cannot
be edited) come the closest to live performances, even though they may contain
some technical errors.
Of course there are other reasons for attending live performances. One is to
hear what music should sound like - of course a trip to Carnegie Hall may be
followed by a trip to your local hi-fi store to get new equipment :-)
There are very few hi-fi systems that even come close to the acoustics in the
best concert halls. My goal in hi-fi (as I've said many times on net.audio)
is to come as close as possible given budgetary and other limits.
Another is the social experience of a live concert.
As for program notes, my comments are generally not repeatable in polite
company, especially for the Lincoln Center variety. I would prefer some
generally brief comments about the structure of the work "the first movement
is in sonata form" to give me a feel about what to listen for in a work by
a composer whom I am unfamiliar. Timings would be very useful - I sometimes
have to leave a concert to catch a train and would like to make a discreet exit.
Frankly, I couldn't care less about certain arcane facts about the composer and
his alleged/imputed motivations or psychological state for writing a given work.
Let the music speak for itself. If I want the arcane facts, I can get those
from reference works, biographies, etc.
Regards,
Bill Mitchell ({ihnp4!}lcuxc!wjm)