Andrew Carlan wrote:

>That Mehta should appear on any list that includes the word "best" or
>even "good" is something mighty to reckon with.

I have heard that some soloists like him as he is not one to force his
perspective.  However I must add that I have found his performances to be
so lack luster that I am not quite sure what perspective he does have.

I found that list to be quite odd.  Who on earth would think so highly
of Boult, other than the British.  I don't mean to slight his fine
accomplishments, but so high on the list...

But then as I looked at the list I continue to wonder why people make up
these lists.  I feel that they do more bad than good.  Would a prospective
consumer choose one performance over another because one conductor rates
higher than another? Of course we all know that some conductors were more
at ease with one style of music over another.

I also wondered about the criteria used in the selection process.  For me,
rating von Karajan anywhere near the top says something about those who
voted.  From my perspective, while he was a gifted musician who took his
art seriously, he represents more of the image of a great musician than
anything else.

Karl