Dave Lampson:

>[Just for the record, I have no idea what Ian is referring to here.  -Dave]

Not entirely seriously, I suggested that the continuously developing
researches of the HIP movement gave the recording industry good excuses for
releasing new versions of the same material over and over again and selling
them many times over to buyers who are a ready target for anything under
the HIP banner.  I used Beethoven's metronome markings to illustrate the
point.

Dave pointed out that HvK (not renowned as one of the leaders of the HIP
movement) had produced several versions of the LvB symphonies - with the
implication that record companies did not need the HIP bandwagon to justify
repeated releases of the same music.  That's what I took him to mean, in
any event.  [There was no implication whatsoever.  You asked a question,
and I answered it (incorrectly it turns out).  -Dave]

I acknowledged a good debating thrust from Dave (touche!), and attempted
a debater's parry by hinting that just possibly the multiple releases of
LvB / HvK were a result of the conductor's desire to establish / maintain
a dominant position in the recording world rather than because of
significantly re-thought interpretations, and therefore that Dave's point,
although valid, was not an effective counter-example to mine as Karajan was
something of a special case.  Last thing I want to do is to reopen the
Karajan debate, but I hardly think it's an original or a controversial
idea.

All clear now? [No, but with every post your viewpoint does become more
plain to see.  -Dave]

BTW, in case anyone's wondering, I do not think that one set of Beethoven
symphonies is enough (even for someone like me who has made a deliberate
attempt to strip his once out-of-control collection down to much smaller
proportions).  I have retained one HvK set, and I have two HIP ones, plus
a good few singles - of which at least three-quarters are HIP.

Ian
[log in to unmask]