Donald Satz wrote:

>Juozas Rimas writes:
>
>>Donald, is artists' identification with the composer's world really
>>so important to you?
>
>Yes, because experience tells me that my listening enjoyment and
>enlightenment peaks when the identification is strong.  I'm not talking
>about the composer's "world" in terms of the social environment as much
>as the composer's inner world of thought and emotion.  There's no better
>world to enter than the one inhabited by the creator of the music.

That is a difficult task when you have to deal with generic recordings.
I get discs for review that are so bad I don't even want to give them away.
I am afraid that the recipient will not appreciate the music because it
is a bad instance of the concept.  When the elements combine, however,
feedback is perfect.  It is something like listening to a CM station whilst
driving.  At points the signal gets weaker, dissonance increases to the
point of noise, then another signal begins to emerge and become clearer and
clearer and then perfect and that is perfect feedback.  I am thinking all
this whilst listening to Stravinsky's "Rite" in a recording by Girgeiv and
the Kirov.  As my jazz buddy, Bruce, would put it, "That kicks my ass."

On the other hand, I am not so sure that the process has to be as
academically sounding as put forth here.  'If it ain't got that swing
then it don't mean a thing.' Or as ee cummings put it:

   since feeling is first
   who pays anything
   to the syntax of things
   will never wholly kiss you

   "Rite"

Peace from he who is Stumpf
aka: Sisyphus