You Tube controversy

48 posts / 0 new
Last post
RE: You Tube controversy

And now we have internet radio and a choice of classical stations from all over the world at bitrates that provide very good sound quality indeed.  Yet another great vehicle for music lovers.

I'm sure you'll want to be informed that I have just enjoyed wallowing in a hot, soapy bathtub for an hour, listening to Radio Swiss Classic, relayed through a mobile Sonos Play 5 unit!  Delightful. 

I do like this station for casual listening.  It usually only plays movements, but they seem ideally selected for this kind of listening, the introductions limited to the facts, not by announcers waffling on and pretending to be my friend, and in soft, albeit foreign (of course) language.   Identifying details given in what seems a random mix of French, German and Italian is also part of the fun.

Internet radio provides endless choice and favourites are easliy captured with presets.  How lucky we are to have such access to music.

Vic.

RE: You Tube controversy

Absolutely - and thanks for the Radio Swiss Classic recommendation

RE: You Tube controversy

My favorite internet station is http://www.concertzender.nl/ which broadcasts a wide range of interesting music, but I especially like the fact that at any time you can access a stream of particular categories of music, from Gregorian to Hard Bop (I happen to like both very much). They also have a wonderful slot called "No Day Without Bach", which is how the ideal life should be lived!

Youtube is a wonderful resource too. Just this week I found full lenght performances of two Lully operas, Armide and Atys, both performed by Les Arts Florissants. So what if everything is not "perfect" in sound and vision? The attention we pay, and the concentration we bring to the music is the most important factor.

RE: You Tube controversy

Odd that someone here thinks of *recorded* music as being the true musical experience, rather like opponents of the vernacular translation of the Bible who considered the Latin text which they relied on to be somehow 'authentic', as if it were not itself merely a translation. 

RE: You Tube controversy

Of course, dmitri, if you can rely only on "live" performances, you won't probably need the "recorded sound". However, on one hand, the live performances are fewer than the productions of the "recorded sound" and, on the other, the program much wider in the latter.

So, after the  authentic "live" (where there are limitations depending on the acoustics, the seat, etc.), the CDs, SACDs, DVDs etc. provide the next best way to approach Classical Music. It is a compromise to the "Live", but not the detriment of it but rather to the service of the actual Music, since the performers, the production team and the composers, if they are alive consent and espouse the whole project, while the companies dealing with the playback sound provide the best possible equipments.

A final thought: With all this "accessibility", do we see any improvement in the life of Classical Music. Mediocrity prevails almost anywhere and the very few "great ones" rely the least on YouTube and the rest...

Parla

RE: You Tube controversy

Music is not sound.

RE: You Tube controversy

Exactly, dmitri. When Daniel Barenboim was on Desert Island Discs, he said he didn't want to take any recordings. He would rather have the scores themselves. Sound is only a sensual representation of music; it isn't the music itself.

In which case, it seems a bit odd to place so much emphasis on the precise quality of the sound and to imply that those of us with cheap stereos and an unhealthy dependence on youtube are missing something of vital importance. The fact is, we aren't. As long as the reproduction isn't absolutely awful, the very same music is there for everyone to experience and contemplate. Though he was a multi-millionaire (from stockmarket investments), Glenn Gould used the same crappy tape recorder all his life. He didn't need anything else, because he only wanted to get at the music that was buried inside the sound. Changing the sound wouldn't have changed the music in any way.

Moving on to a slightly different point...........I have always found that the most important factor in determining my enjoyment and possibly even understanding of music is the state of mind I am in at the time. Compared to this, the quality of the sound is utterly insignificant. I remember, for instance, listening to the finale of Beethoven 9 in a car, while waiting for someone to arrive at a train station. My car radio is pretty naff and I was surrounded by interfering sounds - the squeel of trains braking, cars parking and moving away, traffic noises from the main road outside, louts jabbering in a pub doorway. But it didn't matter. It was one of the best listening experiences of my life. I have the recording at home - Charles Mackerras with LPO - and although I have played it many times, I have never come close to that moment in the carpark. I was just ready for it then. The poor sound meant absolutely nothing.

 

RE: You Tube controversy

janeeliotgardiner wrote:

 

Moving on to a slightly different point...........I have always found that the most important factor in determining my enjoyment and possibly even understanding of music is the state of mind I am in at the time. Compared to this, the quality of the sound is utterly insignificant. 

Totally agree. So many times I've heard a piece on the radio, in the car, in a record shop, at a friend's place, rushed to buy it and found somehow the magic had disappeared. Or else special circumstances combine to make a work that was long dismissed, click.

RE: You Tube controversy

While not disagreeing with any of this (and have shared the experience many times) I feel that I want the best from reproduced music that I can afford in just the same way that a musician wants the best intsrument she/he can afford.  

There might be pride of ownership, wanting the best available, or whatever, but the prime motive surely, is to get the best available sound from it.  The more you hear of an instrument's capabilities, the more satisfying the music.  This is not in place of those magical moments we all have, irrespective of the setting, it's in addition to them.

Vic.

RE: You Tube controversy

I agree with Jane as to how important important our state of mind is to our enjoyment. I've had similar experiences where a piece comes on unexpectedly and, despite the sound quality, I'm completely engrossed. Perhaps it because we haven't actively, intentionally gotten ourselves "in the right mood" that we are actually more receptive.

Plum

Pages

Log in or register to post comments

Gramophone Subscriptions

From£67/year

Gramophone Print

Gramophone Print

no Digital Edition
no Digital Archive
no Reviews Database
no Events & Offers
From£67/year
Subscribe
From£67/year

Gramophone Reviews

Gramophone Reviews

no Print Edition
no Digital Edition
no Digital Archive
no Events & Offers
From£67/year
Subscribe
From£67/year

Gramophone Digital Edition

Gramophone Digital Edition

no Print Edition
no Reviews Database
no Events & Offers
From£67/year
Subscribe

If you are a library, university or other organisation that would be interested in an institutional subscription to Gramophone please click here for further information.

© MA Business and Leisure Ltd. 2019