| Home | Audio mag. | Stereo Review mag. | High Fidelity mag. | AE/AA mag. |
|
Music on the Air Roy Hemming's "Music on the Air" in the December issue covered nearly everything in classical music broadcasting. I was especially happy to learn how much in the forefront "my" two stations, WQXR and WFMT, are (my home is in New York, my university in Chicago). But one thing was missing: frequency numbers. It would not have taken too much space to list the 108 or 174 stations you mentioned with their positions on the dial; maybe it could be done on a map. It would be very useful to be able to program a long trip with a sort of road map of good music, say the stations one could tune to along the major interstate high ways. I find myself riding a third of the way across the country several times a year, and on one all-too-memorable trip a friend tuned from top-40 station to top-40 station, and we were pursued all the way from New York to Chicago by Soeur Sourire II singing an inane arrangement of the Lord's Prayer at us. I couldn't do anything about it--it was his car. PETER T. DANIELS; Chicago, Ill. The "road map" is a good idea-but we saved it for another article which will follow in good time. The December article concerned the state of classical-music broadcasting in the U.S., which is largely a question of economics. We are presently working up a study of the technical quality of those same broadcasts, and we will be asking our readers to help us in evaluating them. Stay tuned. The article on the state of classical-music broadcasting which appeared in the December issue was quite informative. It opens up all sorts of ideas for future articles (for in stance, one on community-antenna FM ser vices, which are offered in some areas) as well as giving encouragement to those of us who enjoy classical music. WALTER R. GARRETT; Augusta, Ga. Those who followed (and some who assisted) the fortunes of New York's WNCN as it flip-flopped from all-classical to all-rock (as WQIV) and back to all-classical will be amused by this irony: a recent report on goings-on in New York by Steve Lake (writing in London's Melody Maker) notes that listenership for rock stations in New York has dropped "drastically" (I guess he means radically), and goes on to say that "FM station WQIV-formerly the most adventurous of all-has now been turned over entirely to classical music." ARTHUR CROOKSHANK; New York, N.Y. Many thanks for Roy Hemming's out standing article (December). The information it contains on the state of "good music" broadcasting around the country will be of interest here at Dartmouth College, since we have recently acquired a commercial FM license and programming content is under heat ed debate locally. ARTHUR W. LUEHRMANN; Hanover, N.H. Locus Classicus This is in response to what may have been a rhetorical question in Editor William Ander son's December editorial, "Can anyone tell me who it was who said, '0, that mine enemy would write a book'?" According to Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, the quotation comes from the Bible, Job 31 (35) and the actual wording is "My desire is, that the Almighty would answer me, and that mine adversary had written a book." The meaning of the original quote seems to have quite a different slant from the one implied by Mr. Anderson, as the next line is, "Surely I would take it upon my shoulder, and bind it as a crown to me." GARY K. MCCONE; Tucson, Ariz. The Editor replies: Some devil must have quoted that scriptural line to me, giving it a mean twist that I find more understandable (though no more excusable) psychologically than Job's self-righteousness. Performers I Hate I enjoyed "Ten Performers I Hate" (December). It's refreshing to see we are not all blind and deaf and that other people feel the way I do about performers like Elton John, Bob Dylan, and David Bowie. I was wondering, however, if Steve Simels included Chicago in his remark about 99 percent of all ja77 rock being trash. Chicago is one of the most consistently great jazz rock groups ever, but if my assumption is correct that Mr. Simels is a fan of the "musical" group the Rolling Stones, then we don't have the same tastes anyway. DAVID WILLARD; Pengilly, Minn. What is crystal clear is: if the public likes it, it must be bad. Yes, there is freedom of the press; yes, everyone has a right to his/her opinion. But it would be refreshing if genuinely qualified critics embarked on an educative, rather than a destructive, course in criticism. JIM MORRIS; Los Angeles, Calif. A ten-least-loved article is in poor taste at the very least, considering how many per formers publicly name their least-loved critics, but to publish such an article in the December issue is thoughtless. Has the Christmas spirit in this country depreciated to the point where we express our hatred instead of love during this season? JOHN R. WALDRON; Wexford, Pa. In regard to your December article "Ten Performers I Hate," let me say that I have never read a more side-splitting narrative in any other (usually) serious publication. The critics' verbal disassembly of "artists," even ones I like, was simply too much. Thank you for providing this unexpected, humorous delight! DON MACH; Highland, Ind. COME ON! How can you throw geniuses like Emerson, Lake & Palmer, John McLoughlin, Chick Corea, Weather Report, Todd Rundgren, and George Harrison into the gutter with clowns like Bowie, Cher, Denver, Vinton, etc.? STEREO REVIEW has just hit the top of the list of "The Magazines I Hate!" BILL RIEGER; Cleveland, Ohio I enjoyed reading "Ten Performers I Hate" and agree with most of your music critics. We are living in a world where trash is making more money than quality material, and the record industry produces more trash every month. JOSE J. PEUA; Corona, N.Y. People have varied musical tastes, they like what they like, and to me it is unfair to sum up a performer with such criticism just because he does not correspond to our liking (although I must admit I do not care for any of the performers listed). JON C. LIEBLING; Van Nuys, Calif. How dare Joel Vance compare Judy Gar land to Barbra Streisand in any way! Doesn't he know that Miss Streisand had at least four teen albums (all gold) and two movies at the time of Miss Garland's death? I'll be willing to bet that Streisand's audience has been and al ways will be bigger than Judy Garland could ever hope for. SCOTT JONES; Carmel, Calif. Funny how "Funny Girl" made the "Ten Performers" list. Against great odds for many years I have been saying she had no talent, either vocal or acting, and possessed one thing: volume-and I suspected that it too was a gimmick. With no competition permit ted to enter the arena, she had to succeed, the worst performer since Teresa Brewer. Time will prove me correct. Will she be around as long as Peggy Lee has been? E. H. MARREN; Long Beach, Calif. To each his own, but "Ten Performers I Hate" was, in my opinion, of poor quality. I would much rather have seen those pages used for advertisements than that poor excuse for criticism. N. NICASTRO, JR. Spotswood, N.J. An amusing wad of artificial dissemination by your motley crew of record offenders. However, the comments on Bob Dylan indicate something more than a mild case of staff infection. STEREO REVIEW critics have projected one overburdened image after another upon Dylan and then criticized him for the images they created. Peter Reilly's redundant observations that "Dylan's early work was historic, mostly be cause he was in the right place at the right time" and that Dylan was "cleverly repeating in song the ferment and anger that were sweeping the campuses" imply obvious indications of phoniness on Dylan's part. Finally, Reilly pigeonholes Dylan as a "sphinx without a secret," thus condemning the image that he has invented of Dylan. Too bad Mr. Reilly didn't keep his tongue in check rather than in supposed cheek. ROBERT KELLY; Indianapolis, Ind. Mr. Reilly replies: "A "creative" artist's responsibility is to pass along his subjective view of the world no matter how awry it might seem in any conventional sense. Songwriters and popular entertainers simply catch and interpret (often superbly) the prevailing mood. I've always admired Dylan's managerial abilities and his professionalism, which I think I once compared to that of an Irving Berlin in shredded jeans. It is his pose as savant and avatar of social change that bothers me. I agree with better than 95 percent of the choices of all the critics, an amazing statistic in itself (and a commentary on the improving perceptions of critics, no doubt). Some of the targets I particularly relished were Barbra Streisand and Chick Corea. Thanks for a delightful article. STEWART W. VANDERMARK; Natick, Mass. A superfluous article. It is no surprise to see almost every major name in rock music on the critics' hate lists, because over the past few years it has become apparent that the popular music critics of STEREO REVIEW do not enjoy listening to popular music. THOMAS EKSTEDT; Davis, Calif. I thoroughly enjoyed seeing those of questionable talent get the verbal slashing they de serve. On the other hand, these people per form a useful service in that they increase our appreciation for genuine talent and artistry. RANDY S. PARLEE; Milwaukee, Wisc. An atrocity which was totally ridiculous and served the reader in no way. But instead of getting steamed up over it, I want to suggest another kind of review. Why not com pare a record to the same artist's other works or to other artists' records of similar style and quality? Readers have knowledge of their favorite music and can determine from this whether or not they want it. This is a much more efficient method, I feel. Tom FRIEDLEY; Dallas, Tex. I didn't exactly like what Noel Coppage said about Elton John. In my opinion he is, with Bernie Taupin, the greatest thing to hap pen to rock 'n' roll since the Beatles. Every thing he does is pure showmanship. He likes people to laugh and have a good time, an attitude the business needs. Of course he loves the money he gets from it, but who wouldn't? BARBARA TIERNEY; Setauket, N.Y. The "Ten Performers" comments were wonderful. My faith in the credibility of your publication is restored. BRIAN PAULSEN; Grand Forks, N.D. I took Editor William Anderson's sensible editorial advice ("Hearts and Heads") before composing this mild broadside about your December issue. With sneering regularity the STEREO REVIEW gents put down Tony Orlando and Dawn, as in "Ten Performers I Hate." So they're mediocre, but gee whiz, golly neds, and jeepers, they do provide musical variety in the vast desert of does and cops on the tube. You don't have to buy their records. BARBARA ANN REESBY; Houston, Tex. Ah yes, but critics do have to review them. This article was much more interesting than the usual ones on favorites. As a moderate music listener since 1968 and constant reader of critics of all kinds, I have formulated a few rules which seem to cover the entire situation fairly well: (1) Most performers and groups have only one good record or album, and anyone who buys his/her/their second album does so at his own risk. (2) Music criticism is not an exact science i.e., Noel Coppage dislikes the Fifth Dimension but elsewhere in the same issue they are praised. (3) Great musicians may have extremely unpleasant voices-Cat Stevens and most op era singers are examples. (4) Average to only moderately talented musicians may have extremely beautiful and pleasant voices-Karen Carpenter is a prominent example. (5) It is inadvisable to keep the same musical style, as the critics will complain of lack of imagination and growth. (6) It is inadvisable to change musical styles, as the critics will complain that you haven't realized your promise, that you aren't as good as you used to be, that you have forsaken your roots, etc. (7) The almost unforgivable sin, according to a music critic, is to become very popular. BROOKS A. MICK; Findlay, Ohio David Bowie has been lambasted so many times by so many STEREO REVIEW critics that I have become immune to, and finally even amused by, what at first I took as aspersions on my taste. So, I was hardly amazed at the appearance of Bowie on three of the lists. But unexpected were the mentions of Bob Dylan, Barbra Streisand, Phoebe Snow, Roberta Flack, and Labelle, all of whom have received ecstatic praise in STEREO REVIEW. Maybe rock criticism is so contradictory and polarized because there is still no firmly established aesthetic for it. RANDY BYRN; Memphis, Tenn. Performers I Like Your December article "Ten Performers I Hate" inspired me to come up with another kind of list. Here are "Ten Performers I Like": John Prine-each album has a different style. Bob Dylan-his "amateurish" harmonica is great; also, I like rough voices. Bruce Springsteen-"Born to Run" is the best album in rock today. Steve Goodman-his versatility in song and guitar playing is unique and beautiful. Arlo Guthrie-I like his voice. Linda Ronstadt--aside from being the prettiest girl in pop, she has a very pretty voice when she tries. America-a good, mellow sound. Guess Who (Burton Cummings)--the most fantastic voice in rock. (Continued overleaf) Jackson Browne-humor and style. Gordon Lightfoot--I grew up on "The Canadian Railroad Trilogy." MIKE HOUBSICH; Hallach, Minn. Critics I Hate Since the critics handed out the compliments in "Ten Performers I Hate," I made a list of my own-ten critics I hate. Two of them are associated with STEREO REVIEW. The first is Noel Coppage. I think he and Steve Simels have a hate club for Elton John. Elton has talent and is turning out visual and musical masterpieces; he deserves everything he gets except criticism. MARK GOULD; Fort Wayne, Ind. Partridge Fancier Martha Bennett Stiles is tremendous ("A Partridge in an Etymologicon," December 1975). Give her another assignment. Has she written anything else for adults? W. E. TINSLEY; Los Angeles, Calif. We think she is tremendous, too. If you look in our April 1971 issue, you will find her article "Bel Canto Banquet." Mrs. Stiles is a serious writer on horses and racing, and in the December 1973 issue of Esquire she writes about the horse's role in opera. Critics' Memorial Well, I see by Music Editor James Goodfriend's December column that somebody has finally erected a statue to a critic-and just look what RCA's Little Nipper is doing to it! Lincoln Perry's cartoon should be mounted over the typewriter of every one of your record reviewers to remind them that they're fallible too. R. HANSEN; Madison, Wisc. Delius Pearls In Richard Freed's review of the Unicorn recording of Delius' violin sonatas (December), he asks for information on the unpublished sonata of 1892. That sonata was record ed by David Stone and Robert Threlf all in association with the Delius Society, and was is sued by Pearl (SHE 522). The recording was reviewed on page 645 of the October Gramophone magazine. HARRY A. YERKES, JR. ; Oceanside, N.Y. Pearl Records may be obtained in this country through Mr. Otto Quittner, 65-37 Austin Street, Rego Park, N.Y 11374. Linda Ronstadt I found Steve Simels' review of Linda Ronstadt's "Prisoner in Disguise" (December) quite outrageous. The most incredible sentence of the entire review is: "Despite a lovely voice, her emotional range just isn't that broad, and her success, I suspect, is more a result of her lucking out on the uniform mediocrity of the competition than anything else." What a horrendous statement! Steve Simels is not only slamming one of the great artists of our time, but at the same time he is insulting every other woman singer in the United States as well! RICHARD KANAKARIS; Pebble Beach, Calif.
------------ Also see: AUDIO QUESTIONS and ANSWERS--Advice on readers' technical problems
|
Prev. | Next |