The Romantic Piano Concerto, Vol. 61

[Alan Howe]

The Döhler is not really to be compared with Hummel, in my view, any more than Hummel is to be compared with Beethoven. I suggest listening to Döhler on his own terms...

[Mark Thomas]

The Döhler is simply entertainment, of course. Look for more than that and you'll be disappointed.

[Alan Howe]

Quite. And Hummel is mere entertainment when compared with Beethoven. But the comparison is both irrelevant and unhelpful.

[eschiss1]

And to the extent anyone remembered Döhler even for a brief while, it was for a few of his brief piano works- which did attain a sizeable number of reprints (some of which have been digitized, and I think recorded too) and may be more worth looking into (at a guess, even though I don't usually try to guess quality based on popularity )

[LateRomantic75]

The Döhler is simply entertainment, of course. Look for more than that and you'll be disappointed.

Well, sorry, but I don't listen to music for "entertainment" alone. I realize that there are many who do, and I'm perfectly okay with that. It's just that I have to have some kind of emotional gratification when I listen to music. OK, I'll admit my Hummel comparison was somewhat unfair, but am I not allowed to express a negative opinion without getting scolded? It seems like everyone here has to agree with each other. I mean, that rather defeats the purpose of a forum, doesn't it?

[eschiss1]

Is there a logical glitch here? I don't always listen to music for entertainment "alone" (in the sense of always and only? quite ambiguous, that!), but if that's all a certain piece has to offer me, then in certain moods, I'm perfectly glad and content to have that, too.   Mahler 6, and Pettersson 9, are happily on my shelf (well, "shelf", since I rarely use my CD player now'days, mostly my iPod)- but so are quintets by Cambini - and much else of varying emotional hues and "demands" ; for some people only one or the other or something else will do - that's fine too, yes, no international legal case need be made nor offense felt at the thought I should suppose.

[Alan Howe]

To me, there are no redeeming qualities to the Dohler whatsoever

I am perfectly happy with your opinion - but that's what it is - an opinion. I just don't happen to agree with it, that's all. Nothing wrong with that. And BTW, nobody is scolding anyone - just disagreeing. And that's what this forum is for - gentlemanly, well-argued agreement, or disagreement.

[petershott@btinternet.com]

Two quick, quite off the thread, points:

First, whether or not this concerto has redeeming qualities, isn't it marvellous that Hyperion has issued it?

Second, and re. Alan's last point, I do hope the Form welcomes good natured agreement and disagreement from contributors other than 'gentleman'.

[Alan Howe]

'Gentlemanly', of course, is a synonym for 'courteous'.
Actually, I'm not in favour of the recording of music which has no redeeming qualities...

[giles.enders]

It depends on what one considers redeeming qualities.  There is some 'modern' music which I would claim have none, yet others sit entranced. There is also the argument of the 'comlpletists' some bits of Lizst or even Mozart, I would argue are not in themselves worth hearing yet there is always a curiosity about these pieces. Finzi's wife Joyce Black, took it upon herself to destroy much of Ivor Gurney's late compositions. It is very subjective. and who is to judge, one has only to read reviews by music critics to wonder if they have been at or listened to the same performance that I have heard.

To stick my neck out further, we seem to be talking about the Hyperion recordings, well for me the only composers in this series that I wonder why they were recorded are Vianna Da Motta and Henri Herz.  However there was a direct link between Da Motta and the pianist Pizarro so that may be the reason for that.

[Alan Howe]

Well, you said...

<<whether or not this concerto has redeeming qualities>>

...which clearly implies that you thought it possible it might not have any such qualities - and, of course, you are perfectly at liberty to pose the question...

All I was saying was that music that has no such qualities - and there's an awful lot if it around, I'm sure, just as there is music out there which does have such qualities - is not worth recording.

I realise that any judgment as to whether any particular piece of music is worth bothering with can be subjective - which is why a consensus of opinion is essential when it comes to a recording project. Unless, that is, an individual is wealthy enough to get something recorded anyway.

[FBerwald]

Regarding the "redeeming qualities" of music and weather the lack of it should stop the same music from being performed, let alone recorded... The liking of any piece of art is always subjective, and while that should not be a reason to put a pile of trash on a table and label it art, turning up our nose on anything lesser than a standard bench mark could prove very dangerous as we can witness in the classical performance repertoire. Unsung composers are shunned in the concert halls or NOT reviewed in so called stellar music publications. An open mind is the best solution here. You are allowed to NOT like anything. Just don't label them too strongly [you might ruffle some feathers...  ] Let me put across the example of Henry Hertz whose wonderful concertos we are well acquainted with thanks to Hyperion. Some of us hate it. I personally love it. Is there anything profound in it? ABSOLUTELY NO. Does it cheer me up. HELL YEAH! And doesn't comfort on some level play into music? Or else we might as well all start reading great volumes of Spinoza and Confucius and listen to endless torrents of Reger [my version of Hell !]

[eschiss1]

Er... how well do you know Spinoza?...
er... never mind, never mind, never mind...

[Alan Howe]

Sorry, I'd like to agree, but there's some awful music out there. It makes no sense to claim otherwise. We must recognise that some music has been forgotten for all the right reasons...

However, this doesn't apply to Döhler or Herz. But don't mention Prout too loudly...

[petershott@btinternet.com]

It's a difficult one. Like Alan, my instinct is to agree. Deciding something should not be recorded, which is just about equivalent to banishing it from the public ear, would seem to be just as regrettable as censorship. And none of us would want to play the role of a censor.

On the other hand a certain realism must prevail. Imagine yourself to be whipping up the funds to organise a concert. Wouldn't you feel a little wretched if you knew the proposed works in your concert were third rate, pretty shoddy, and actually not worth a performance? You'd want to preserve your funds for unsung works that you considered at least worthwhile. Same with record companies surely. For good or ill there's a huge amount of music out there, and far more than one could hope to listen to even in a long life of dedicated listening. It just isn't sensible or practical to hope to record it all.

Incidentally, and forgive me, for years of correcting text have produced an ingrained habit: the 'weather' is the thing that rains. You surely meant the subordinating conjunction of 'whether'.

And my experience of reading Spinoza is to engage with unending torrents of hell. Listening to Reger is light relief in comparison. (Earlier tonight I treated myself to the Op. 49/1 Clarinet Sonata. Ha, pure bliss.)