Donald Satz wrote:

>Chris Bonds wrote:
>
>>Somewhere along the line, it's what the music has to say that matters,
>>and HIP is only worthwhile to the extent it makes the music happen.
>
>This applies to *any* performance style or practice.  Why single out only
>HIP for scrutiny?

I realized later, after I'd sent the message, that this was the case. In any
event, it was implied in my statement, I think.

>Chris provided what I consider a reasonable "take" on HIP.  He indicated
>there were many HIP recordings he likes, but that he was still suspicious.
>That's what I can't figure out.  What is there to be suspicious about?

Of the motivations of SOME practitioners of HIP.  That they are more
interested in being cool and in the know than in the music.  Just an
intuition on my part.  I could be wrong.

Chris Bonds