David Stewart replied:
>Gregory Ginn wrote:
>
>>We really need to appreciate Naxos for what it really is, an economical
>>label for those who are just getting into classical music and for those
>>who find themselves on a budget and cannot always get the Decca or the
>>Deutsche Grammophon recordings.
>
>Nonsense.  This is label fascism and unfair pigeon-holing.  There is
>no earthly reason in the randomness of recording and performing that
>Naxos will not end up with a better job than DG or Decca.  They have
>well rehearsed performers with excellent sound.  They have won a
>number of penguin rosettes.  Probably in the standard repertoire
>(Beethoven/Brahms/Mozart etc.) DG and Decca are the best but Naxos has a
>far wider ranging catalogue than DG AND Decca put together.  I just don't
>understand why you would say this.

I do.  While in some cases Naxos has top drawer performances, from my
experience their batting average is a bit behind the majors though well
above the Pilz-like drek at lower prices.  Winners like Rossini's Barber
of Seville, Brahms' solo piano with Idil Biret, and, ummm, maybe Grieg solo
piano are balanced with disappointments like their Tosca, Dvorak orchestral
recordings, and Mahler First Symphony (limiting myself to recordings that
I've heard).

I have my share of Naxos CDs, but most of those were purchased when a chain
discontinued them and sold their inventory for $3.99.  That is about my
price threshold for buying their CDs "blind".  In their normal price range
(~$5.99), when possible I'll spend the extra dollar or two on, say, Sony
Essential Classics, where I've been disappointed less.  OTOH, I'm perfectly
willing to take a chance with Naxos on some rare repertoire where their
might be a shortage or dearth of alternatives.

Don't get the wrong impresssion, I'm a Naxos fan, but the hype surrounding
their recordings often exceeds my listening experience.  Face it, they are
at a budget disadvantage with the majors that is reflected in their roster
of artists.  While perhaps they have done yeoman's work in maximizing
artistic quality under such a constraint, and possibly have proven superior
to the majors in a bang-for-your-buck comparison, the disadvantage is
still real and often borne out in their performances (in particular the
orchestral ones).  To mangle an old saying, the race does not always go
to the strong and swift, but that's where the smart money goes.

I would agree completely with Mr.  Ginn by adding that Naxos is also a
budget label attractive to those seeking out new repertoire and who, on
occasion, provides performances that are competitive at any level.

Tim Dickinson
[log in to unmask]
http://www.tdware.com