Hurwitz - the back story

[Mark Thomas]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_f6fkrSfqg

[Justin]

My exposure to Hurwitz was slightly different than most where I first encountered his thoughts on YouTube, and then proceeded to read his reviews, and I understand his criticisms without being taken aback. For others, it is clear how he may have been snobbish.

He is clearly self-aware of how he can come off as a pretentious jerk in his written reviews, but shows his humbleness in how this isn't his career or destined profession. He pokes fun at himself, and sarcasm is one of his fortes.

I remember in his Raff video where he went off on a tangent of how the composer was on Wheel of Fortune to win a vacation to Thuringia. No idea why he did that, but it made me laugh and I gained more respect in that he never takes himself or his readers too seriously. Everyone has their own opinions, and it is sometimes healthy to satirize the music world for the benefit of the community.

I wonder how many of our fellow members have a similar Overflow Room?

[eschiss1]

Learn something new every day; I had no idea Wheel of Fortune was on in the late 1800s and would have made sure to have DVRd it. ;^)

[matesic]

Allowing some time off for essential bodily functions I reckon he must have used up 5 years of his life listening to the CDs on that wall alone

[hyperdanny]

Besides my envy for his monstrous collection (and also for the real estate necessary to house it), I have to say that i found this video refreshing in its self-deprecating frankness.
Yes, sometimes he comes across as a jerk (and he knows it), often times I get the impression that he's wilfully superopinionated for shock value (the Elgar videos---) ...but he's always so interesting, and also personally quite delightful.

[Alan Howe]

It's the classic case of someone coming across as more likeable in person than in print.

[Kevin]

I dunno why, but I'm starting to warm to him more and more lately.

[Alan Howe]

I understand his prejudices much better.

[Joachim Raff]

Like with many critics, and he is no different, reviews need a big BEWARE sign. He clearly is a maverick in the reviewer circles. He is often very critical about other critics particularly Gramophone. Nothing wrong with that, but his approach can be rarer abrupt and sometimes borders on rudeness.
He is the executive producer of Classics Today but he isn't the only reviewer from that organisation. Jed Distler is an acclaimed critic and his views on a recording can be at poles apart from David's. 
Treat his YouTube videos as entertainment, nothing more nothing less. Just do not take David seriously. He is very knowable and well read, so are many others. There are no rights or wrongs on opinions.         

[Alan Howe]

There are no rights or wrongs on opinions

I respectfully disagree. For example, if I express the opinion that a violinist on a certain recording plays well but it is demonstrated that his intonation is consistently off, then I have been proved wrong.

[Joachim Raff]

There are no rights or wrongs on opinions

I respectfully disagree. For example, if I express the opinion that a violinist on a certain recording plays well but it is demonstrated that his intonation is consistently off, then I have been proved wrong.

If opinions are based on factual information then you have a point. Unfortunately, no review i can think of, contains just pure facts. A 'true' feeling for the work cannot be measured or calculated. Therefore, its open to subjective manner. 

[Alan Howe]

Well, it was Hurwitz's review of Davis' RCA Sibelius cycle which prompted my objection as he points out certain serious and demonstrable orchestral failings which I have never read any British critic comment upon - in fact on this side of the Atlantic that particular cycle has been lauded to the skies. If Hurwitz is right - and I think he is - then it's important to note that opinions may and often do contain both subjective and objective elements. The former may provoke genuine disagreement; the latter are verifiable and, as such, are either right or wrong. In this case, Hurwitz's observations call into question the positive opinions of certain British critics precisely because they have relied too much on subjectivity and forgotten that there are objective criteria that have to be taken into account as well.

At UC we've always insisted on opinions being backed up by reasons. This means that subjective views have to have some basis in objective fact, otherwise they're of no interest. Like him or hate him, Hurwitz does at least fufil these criteria.

[Reverie]

He's mad as a hatter. I guess that's what's interesting about him. I like eccentrics.

His critiques are well grounded. On the whole he tells it as it is I think.

He needs to put his CD collection on to a hard drive for safety. I suggest a 5000 gb 

[Kevin]

Speaking of Classicstoday, I've always had a high opinion of Robert Levine. He's always one of the first I go to for an opera review.

[adriano]

Hurwitz on Fritz Brun:
(1) Brun's spasmodic syntax must be as frustrating to the musician as to the listener. For penitential souls only.
(2) it's really a lost cause.