Steven Schwartz replies to the reply:

>Nick Perovich seconds Bob Draper:
>
>>>It's like Pavlov's dogs.  The listener starts salivating in anticipation
>>>of a performance by Karajan before a note has been played.
>>
>>Exactly the attitude that characterizes so many members of this list.  (No
>>doubt heightened if it's a performance of Mozart.)
>
>Come on.  Give people credit for knowing what they like and stop blaming
>them for not knowing what you like.  I'm not big on Karajan myself (mainly
>after he gave up the Philharmonia) and wish more people knew of composers
>other than Mozart, but presumably people have heard Karajan and Mozart and
>enjoy what they hear.  If past experience with a particular performer or
>composer has been pleasurable, the anticipation of a new performance with
>either will likely be enjoyable (to be cruelly dashed in the event, no
>doubt).

I think that some of Karajan's versions of Tchaikovsky's symphonies for
instance are up there with the very best.  The first ever Haydn CD I heard
was Karajan's version of the surprise.  It literally changed my life.

But, what I am doing here is challenging people to be more liberal in their
approach to music and think for themselves more.  I am not attacking
Karajan as such.

I have heard pianists playing for nothing who would blow your mind.  I want
to challange the perception that big names whoever they are are necessarily
best.

In HIFI circles the question of subjectivity in evaluating equipment has
been a big issue for decades.  Some audiophiles will not accept that there
is a difference between two pieces of equipment unless they have been
doubleblind tested.

I see no reason why such principles should not apply to composers
conductors etc,.dispite attempts by some posters to convince us that there
is some arcane art to appreciating music and performers.

Bob Draper
[log in to unmask]