D. Stephen Heersink wrote:

>By-and-large, Naxos' performances and sonics are rarely deemed competitive
>in ARG's reviewers' eyes.  There are exceptions, but Hecht, the reviewer,
>was not one of them (see below).

Then, later:

>Hecht's own review of Elgar's "Falstaff," . . . \
>
>"I like Adrian Boult's ability to fill out textures and structures
>without heaviness (EMI). . . . I enjoyed this clean, gentle, and
>intimate reading; but I slightly prefer the fuller, deeper accounts
>of Davis, Boult, ETC" emphasis mine). Fine, but to whom does this ETC
>apply? Other than "Bryden Thomson's detached, dallying account," Hecht
>makes no mention of who these "others" are!  He only mentions Thomson,
>Davis, Boult, and the conductor under review! Who are the "others" of
>the "etc" that surpass the Naxos'. ....

Mr. Heersink has quoted me out of context, totally distorting the meaning
of the original.

Following is from the last part of my review from the July/August 1999
American Record Guide.

   My previous favorite among the "storytelling" Falstaffs was
   EMI/Mackerras, but this more elegant and involving newcomer has
   replaced it.  (For those seeking something else, I discussed other
   recordings in my Davis review.  [This was mentioned earlier.  In that
   review I discussed Falstaffs by Barbirolli, Boult, Mackerras, Solti,
   Handley, Dutoit, Rattle, Barenboim, along with Davis's older one.
   Out of this group, I pulled out Mackerras' as the one that most
   resembled the storytelling approach of the Naxos, referring the reader
   back if he/she were interested in a more symphonic style.]

   The Sanguine Fan (1917) is a ballet based on a Charles Conder fan
   design showing Pan and Echo and couples in Louis XV dress.  [More
   about the work.] Lloyd-Jones has plenty of appeal--he is superior
   to Bryden Thomsen's detached, dallying account--but in music less
   substantial and cohesive than Falstaff, I like Adrian Boult's ability
   to fill out textures and structures without heaviness.  (EMI) [This
   is the part *before* the ellipses.]

   The notes say that Elegy (1909) may reflect "sorrow at the recent
   death of colleagues, notably August Johannes Jaeger", [More about
   the work] I enjoyed this clean, gentle, and intimate reading; but
   I slightly prefer the fuller, deeper accounts of Davis, Boult, etc.
   [This is the part *after* the ellipses.]

   This CD is an outstanding bargain.  The sound is a bit distant and
   opaque, but does not detract from the enjoyment one bit.

Mr. Heersink has taken two sentences from two different paragraphs about
two different works and conflated them as if they were one sentence or
idea. I have no idea if he thinks this quote, as ellipsed, applies to the
entire disc, Falstaff, The Sanquine fan, Elegy, both of the latter or what.

The answer is none of the above.

I will admit that "etc." was sloppy shorthand, put in, I guess, to
save space.  It wouldn't have taken that many more words to have added
Barbirolli, Cox, and Del Mar.  A worst sin is that it might imply inclusion
of Menuhin, whose Elegy I don't care for.  I guess I figured Elegy is a 4+
minute work that is not going to influence anyone's decision to purchase,
but still, "etc" is a bad device here.

>If it didn't cost so little, would or would not this CD be recommended? I
>never know.

Then you didn't read this sentence.

   "My previous favorite among the "storytelling" Falstaffs was Mackerras,
   but this more elegant and involving newcomer has replaced it."

Falstaff is the major work. If it is your reason to read this review and
you like the style as described, purchase is a nobrainer. It is, dare I
say, great value even if you prefer other performances of its companions.

As for the business about bargains:

>Naxos recordings by-and-large get short shrift in ARG, are almost
>always tagged only as "recommendable at its bargain price," and are almost
>always deemed inferior to some such recording (ancient and modern) gem.

Speaking only for myself--

Bargain: "an advantageous purchase; something whose value to the
purchaser considerably exceeds its cost." To me, to call something a
"bargain" is praise and enthusiasm, not condescension.  The Penguin Guide,
which Mr. Heersink approves of, is always saying that some recording,
while reasonably competitive at full price has come into its own now that
its been reissued at midprice.  Why not? It's a legitimate point.
Sometimes this information can be redundant, but I don't see it as
condescending.

Roger Hecht