Anne queries: >Why all this emphasis on blaming reviewers? Quote from an "expert" reviewer in Gramophone Liszt solo CDs: "Recorded between 1990 and 2004, these performances are reissued in brilliantly refurbished and clarified sound, forming part of a 100-CD discography. Indeed, it is no exaggeration to say that no other pianist, male or female, would even have considered such a comprehensive undertaking. ...... Even in the most daunting repertoire, her poise in the face of one pianistic storm after another is a source of astonishment. Her warmth, affection, ease and humanity strike you at every turn, her scale and command without a hint of superficial or hard-nosed virtuosity. Here, Liszt's occasional histrionics and theatricality are tempered with the most aristocratic quality." Again, I wonder how this well regarded critic did not pick up on the scam? It is a fair question. Consider the non-existent conuctor & orchestra in the later Rach and Lizst pc CDs too. Shouldn't someone have twigged earlier? Gramophone make great play of the breath and depth of their knowledge, the world's leading CM mag etc. Most importantly, why with so many different piansts/orchestras/conductors ripped-off didn't someone spot the stylistic differences earlier? Did it really need a computer to spot this? There are important questions for reviewers and those who read reviews here. It is interesting to read the classicstoday discussion of these issues but I do not feel these issues were covered sufficiently (did anyone see them discuss such issues at all?)in Gramophone and several other review sites/mags. I am questioning with an open mind. David Harbin Nottingham UK *********************************************** The CLASSICAL mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's HDMail High Deliverability Mailer for reliable, lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to: http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html