As far as niches go, I've never considered myself to be a "completist"
in the sense of a specific work, composer, performer etc.  That said,
over the past couple of decades or so I do seem to have "picked up"
multiple interpretations of two rather diverse sets of works:

1)  Smetana's "Ma vlast" cycle, and
2) Biber's "Mystery" or Rosary Sonatas.

And I'm still on the lookout for more.

So when Olivier Solanet wrote:

>Why would anyone want so many different interpretations of any singular
>work?
>
>To me, if one has a predilection for a particular piece of music - as I
>presume we all do - wouldn't the superlative interpretations be the only
>ones sought?  I of course intend superlative to be entirely subjective,
>as we all listen with different pairs of ears...

Well, there you go--it seems you've answered your own question, have you
not?

But to be less glib--there are going to be performances one runs across
that "speak" to a listener in a certain way--and sometimes, over the
years, what that constitutes does change, after listening to more
interpretations.

I agree--superlative is subjective, and that subjectiveness is not always
a constant.

Bill H.

             ***********************************************
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