Richard Pennycuick <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>The reviewer spent a sentence or three saying unkind things about Glazunov.
>This seems to be a fairly common practice among reviewers.  I happen to
>like Glazunov's music and while I wouldn't regard him among the greatest
>of the Russians, I think he's a considerable deal better than the amiable
>hack, as he's so often painted.

And I agree wholeheardedly, Glazunov was a fine composer, and in addition
to his composing skill, he was a very skilled and knowledgeable musician
in general, with a great knowledge about other compsoers works.  It is
especially admirable the wide sight he had on music.  In his time the
general opinion was still that Musics history started with Bach, and before
him there was a desert...but Glazunov enjoyed also Byrd, Dezprez...etc...
Eyewithnesses claims he seemed to master every instrument.  Sjostakovitj
tells once when Glazunov visited England he was about to conduct a local
orchestra in an own work (I don't remember which).  And the orchestra
rioted as they thought Galzunov was an inknowledgeable barbarian.  A
hornist refused to play as he claimed that note was impossible to play.
Glazunov stepped down to the hornist, grabbed his horn, and played the note
in issue.  The riot was striked down.  Sjostakovitj comments:  "I don't
know what I had done in that situation"...

Mats Norrman <[log in to unmask]>