HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: velde2@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Velde Francois)
Subject: price of CDs (was Re: EMI price increase)
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 19:01:35 GMT

In article <1bcg9dINNa7a@calvin.usc.edu> alves@calvin.usc.edu (William Alves) writes:
>>
>>Think it through, please: the costs of pressing the silver disk itself
>>are the tiniest part of the expense that the recording needs to earn
>>back.
>
>Why, then, are CDs about twice as expensive as cassettes, when the cost of
>manufacturing is only about 10%-20% greater? 

Because they are not the same object. I will pay more for the same music
on a medium that lasts longer, does not deteriorate, produces better sound, etc.

>The Los Angeles Times ran a
>story analyzing the manufacturing costs of each. The costs of the hiring
>of the studio, payment of the musicians, royalties, etc. was much less per
>disc than the cost of manufacturing. Of course, they were talking mainly
>about pop CDs, but still, why the great difference in cost of the two
>media? 

Even counting Michael Jackson's wages? If manufacturing costs are $0.50 
per CD and the other costs are "much less", with 10 million CDs sold you
have $1 or 2 millions to pay Michael Jackson, his groupies, the producers, 
etc?

>The answer, said several sources quoted in the story, is that the
>record companies have been reluctant to start a price war with their com-
>petition since the price of manufacturing CDs has dropped significantly
>since the mid 80's. One source said that the record companies assumed that
>inflation would catch up, but inflation slowed to a crawl and the record
>companies are still raking it in. I agree with the first poster. It takes
>a lot of nerve to raise the price of CDs even more.

So record companies mistakenly fell into a collusion agreement? Sounds bizarre.
Either two CDs produced by two different companies are close substitutes,
and then there is no reason to believe the two companies would collude
to keep prices up: 1) it is illegal: write to your neighborhood branch 
of the Anti-Trust Office 2) each company has an incentive to lower prices
and snatch all the customers.  Or they are not substitutes: then you are 
paying not DG or whomever, but your are paying H. v. Karajan or Pavarotti
for the unique talent which he finds himself the owner. That's a rent,
the same way exceptional sports players earn rents on their unique talents.
From: a70901@uwasa.fi (Mikko Suhonen)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Opinions of _Classic CD_ Magazine?
Keywords: classic cd magazine
Date: 12 Oct 92 12:40:39 GMT
Organization: University of Vaasa, Finland

In article <Bvu9vo.A5p@news.cso.uiuc.edu> cec35848@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Chuck Carroll) writes:
>I like listening to classical music, but I don't know much about it.
>(Certianly more than your average man/woman off the street, but not
>by much.)  I have about 25 classical CD's at the moment.
>I am a member of the "Musical Heritage Society" classical music
>club.
>
>Anyway, in the latest "Musical Heritage Review" (read: catalog)
>there is an ad for _Classic CD_ magazine.  Once a month the
>magazine comes, and with it a CD.  According to the ad, the magazine
>has (among aother things) "reviews of all significant new classical
>CD's" and "Special features linked to the cover CD [which] enhance
>understanding and appreciation."  The CD plays for 70 (or more)
>minutes and has "highlights from 12-16 of the month's best new releases"
>and "Each excerpt is usually 5 to 10 minutes long."
>
>The cost is $34.95 for 6 months.
>
>So my question is, is there anyone out there who subscribes to
>this magazine now, or who has ever subscribed to it?  If so, what
>do you think of it?  If nothing else, I'm hoping it will expose
>me to a wide variety of classical music so that I know what I like,
>rather than me going out and buying random CD's.
>
>-- 
>Chuck Carroll					      cec35848@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu
>"Counselor Troi, do you sense anything from this 'Stimpy?'"
>"I sense extreme stupidity...wait, there's something else...
>I feel...Happy Happy Happy, Joy Joy Joy!"

I have bought every issue of Classic CD since last autumn, and I like it
very much. I don't know too much of classical music my self, so the 
magazine gives me a lot of information plus of course plenty of music 
with each issue. The articles are very interesting and well written.
The disc is also done well. The tracks are allways connected to a review or
a larger article. The music is also the same quality as the tracks on original
discs they are taken from. 

I believe that the magazine is of worth buying and will serve the purpose
for you.




-- 
Mikko Suhonen
Vaasa, Finland
(a70901@uwasa.fi)
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Music Theory Question
Date: 17 Oct 92 03:16:47 GMT
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <Oct16.190508.13847@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> hurben@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Mike Hurben) writes:
>Perhaps someone out there could help me with this...maybe send me some email
>or recommend a book that would answer my question...
>  I only know a little about key and tonality (I am not a musician, but a
>physicist.)  While I have no difficulty understanding the difference between
>major and minor keys, I don't really understand how the various major keys
>are related, and how they differ.  Technically, I understand...I mean it just
>comes down to the sharps and flats in the key sig.  But very often while
>reading about some piece, I come across comments like "...now the music
>changes to the sunny key of C major..." or something like that.  Is it true
>that C major is "brighter" than, say, E-flat major?  If so, why?  Is there
>a mathematical reason?   

Sometimes there's an acoustical reason. Some instruments sound in particular
ways when playing a certain set of pitches.

Most of the time, however, there are two other reasons people use this
(sloppy) terminology.

a) Relative to what has gone before, the arrival at the new key seems
to bring some affective change.

b) What the composer *does* in that key -- not only melody and harmony,
but texture and sonority -- has that effect.

It's usually a combination of these things.

Some composers write many pieces in one key that have a similar feel.
Think of some pieces in C minor by Beethoven.  (I'll help: Pathetique,
Op.18/4, 3rd concerto, 5th sym., last piano sonata op.111.)  Now think
of a few in C major: sonata Op.2/3, string quintet, triple concerto, first
sym, quartet 59/3.  Mozart in G minor or A major.

>I run across these kind of comments all the time, and
>I am wondering just how objective/subjective they are.  I don't understand how
>one major key can be so different from any other, because the mathematical
>relationships between the notes is the same...all you do is just shift the
>tonic.  Is it possible to arrange the keys in the order of "darkest" to
>"brightest"?  If so, what is the order?

Different for every composer, often different from piece to piece.  When
equal temperament was not yet in vogue, and instruments were quirkier
outside a narrow range of keys (esp. winds -- but also strings, given
the old practice of using open strings when possible), some composers
and theorists tried to describe a sort of range.

In general, moving up the scale will imply something brighter, down, darker.
In some music, sharp/flat relationships also have something to do with it.

Roger
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
From: jwa@vipunen.hut.fi (Jyrki J Wahlstedt)
Subject: Re: switching to CD's
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: 8 Oct 92 02:45:21

  I have not read all messages on this subject very carefully, but I
  tell one thing I've noticed.
  I drive quite a lot. In the car I have now there is a CD jukebox system.
  I'd say this gives on solution to at least two problems. First, safety
  is increased *a lot*, as I don't have to search for the cassettes and 
  take care to put them in the right way. Second, if I leave the car,
  the player begins the track I was listening then. So I never get
  the horrible feeling that easily comes with cassettes, where you
  normally continue where you left. And ten CD's make many hours of
  music...
--
!
!	Jyrki Wahlstedt
!		Jyrki.Wahlstedt@hut.fi
!
!  Our life is no dream, but it should and will perhaps become one.
!
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
From: music@moravian.edu (Steve Heller)
Subject: Re: Vox Box (Was Re: Brendel's Beethoven on Vox Box CDs)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 21:28:49 EDT

I agree with Chris Brewster about the VOX BOX line. There were some
bad pressings, but I got some mighty good education in music from the
many sets of complete works they released. Amoung my favorites were
Michael Ponti's complete Scriabin piano music (included works he wrote
as a child and teenager), Peter Frankl's complete Debussy piano set,
Rachmininov, Ravel, Bartok and a host of others. I'd like to see most
of these make it to CD if the prices remain good!
-- 
  /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
/--------------------------\
| Work: music@moravian.edu |
\--------------------------/
  \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
From: leiwo@phoenix (Jussi Leiwo)
Subject: Re: Dr. Faustus
Organization: University of Oulu, Finland
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 07:07:43 GMT

Well, the person who had translated the book into finnish wrote in the
introduction that the ideas for that 'new music' come from Mr. Schonberg's
compositions.

I guess the music composed by Mahler isn't so new and revolutionary, he
wasn't even interested in what was behind his music. He just tried to compose
as 'musical' symphonys as possible. I mean his symphonys are pure music,
they don't try to e.g. paint a picture of a national romantic landscape or
something like that, like many others.

So, don't think I think that to be somehow negative feature in Mahler's music,
it just is different than that introduced in Dr. Faustus. 

The other good question was why does one have get rid of his soul before he
or she is able to make something new. The answer, is that I don't know. Maybe
I should read that book again. I guess, that it was something like the chance
has to be so big and total, that you somehow has to start from the very
beginning without any old ideas in your mind or something like that.

--Jussi Leiwo

P.S. How did you like that analyse in Beethoven's sonata op. 111 in the
     beginning of the book, is it really that way Mann described ?
From: cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Das Lied van der Erde ( was Re: Mahler 1)
Date: 7 Oct 92 15:45:37 GMT
	<2ACC786E.28020@news.service.uci.edu> <Bvp6o8.Cxy@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk>
	<Bvq0Aq.7n8@news.udel.edu>
Organization: pubs
In-reply-to: conrad@brahms.udel.edu's message of Tue, 6 Oct 1992 22:11:14 GMT

Jon Conrad writes:

   >For Song of the Earth, try the recording by Brigitte Fassbaender and Thomas
   >Moser with Cyprien Katsaris playing the piano accompaniment...

   Now, c'mon.  Alternative versions are fun to hear sometimes, and this
   one may be worth one listen in one's lifetime.  But the orchestra is
   *hugely* missed, in every single measure.  (And Thomas Moser's no aural
   treat, while we're at it.)

Nor is Fassbaender, at least on Giulini's recording.  As I hear her, she
has the uncontrolled vibrato that creeps into older voices.  The
Giulini/Fassbaender version is the only one I know in which the *tenor*
is the good one (it's Arraiza, I think).

Chris Brewster
cb@cray.com
From: Joseph.J.Marcheso.Jr.@dartmouth.edu (Joseph J. Marcheso Jr.)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Glass meets Clive Barker response
Date: 16 Oct 92 19:15:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: dartvax.1992Oct16.191513.11745
 <98436@bu.edu> <1992Oct13.075353.11199@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>  
 <1992Oct16.012844.22530@credence.com>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <1992Oct16.012844.22530@credence.com>
jeffw@or.credence.com (Jeff Winslow) writes:

>Verdi wrote some hot stuff; Otello and Falstaff come to mind; but what's
>so basic about it? 

How much more difficult Otello and Falstaff are yet the appear so
easily understood and so accessible. Verdi's complexity doesn't
distract the listener nor is it technically difficult for difficulty's
sake. Glass's Voyage seems so much more complex, to its own detriment.
yet It doesn't come near the hights of Otello and Falstaff. Until Glass
can meld the two [orchestral difficulty and public understanding} he
will always be on the fringe.
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
From: ssc@nwu.edu (Steven Chung)
Subject: Re: Glass meets Clive Barker response
Originator: schung@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 03:10:49 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.022331.28418@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Joseph.J.Marcheso.Jr.@dartmouth.edu (Joseph J. Marcheso Jr.) writes:

# and pure silence over Einstien on the beach

Well, at least he's a Cage fan...   :)

-- 
ssc@nwu.edu | Nam castum esse decet pium poetam (Catullus 16)
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Wednesday, 7 Oct 1992 10:55:30 CDT
From: <U58402@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Why switch to CD?

In article <BvpuK4.6yE@news.udel.edu>, conrad@brahms.udel.edu (Jon Conrad) says:
>
>For me, the medium's biggest advantage is not sonics, but convenience
>and durability.  All the little preservation-rituals which we're used to
>on LP (clean the surface, clean the stylus, clean the cleaning brush)
>are blissfully unnecessary.  And you don't have to get up every 20
>minutes.
>


Actually, this was my favorite reason for the "digital fatigue" that
many people were reporting when CD's first came out. Most audiophiles
(getting ready to duck flames here) that I know prefer listening to
their system rather than going to see live music, their protestations to
the contrary aside. One of my audiophile friends had not seen a live
concert in over 5 years. My guess is that "digital fatigue" came from an
LP-induced inability to sit for more than 25 minutes at a time.

(Still ducking)

Wilbur Pan
(aka u58402@uicvm.uic.edu
 at the ever so friendly and personal univ. of ill. at chicago)
The opinions expressed are not that of the Dean's office of the College
of Medicine of the University of Illinois. They're not that clever.
From: league@whatever.cs.jhu.edu (Christopher League)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star
Date: 17 Oct 92 03:56:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: blaze.1992Oct17.035622.15056
Organization: Johns Hopkins Computer Science Department, Baltimore, MD

In article <music.719291685@batman> music@moravian.edu (Steve Heller) writes:
>In <Bw8qGE.L5r@fiu.edu> klimczak@serss0 (Peter Klimczak) writes:
>
>>I would like to know the Sonata (or is it a Lullaby) number which is  
>>commonly known as "Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star."  I know the composer
>>is Mozart.
>
>It is a set of variations on a French folk song, the name of which I
>can never remember verbatim...


"Ah, vous dirais-je Maman".  It's a set of twelve variations for piano.
I *believe* it's K.3701, but don't quote me on that.

-Chris
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
From: PCZZ@ibm.rz.tu-clausthal.de (Nick Aust)
Subject: Panufnik wanted
Organization: Rechenzentrum der TU CLAUSTHAL
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 16:32:32 GMT

I am looking for the following record:
 
Andrezej Panufnik
Klaviertrio (1934)
Drei Saetze ohne Titel
 
Sorry, haven't got further information;
any help is appreciated!
 
Nick Aust                      pczz@ibm.rz.tu-clausthal.de (Nick Aust)
From: Joseph.J.Marcheso.Jr.@dartmouth.edu (Joseph J. Marcheso Jr.)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Glass meets Clive Barker response
Date: 16 Oct 92 01:34:56 GMT
 <1992Oct15.020911.15679@slc.com> 
 <1992Oct15.200056.10779@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>  
 <1992Oct16.003838.20320@Princeton.EDU>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <1992Oct16.003838.20320@Princeton.EDU>
roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig) writes:

> Joseph, welcome to the net.  People are going to write things like that,
> usually after they've been provoked.  (Don't tell me you don't think
> you've provoked anyone, or made any specious arguments lately...)

First of all I never adressed this person before. Second any address I
made concerned MUSIC and COMPOSERS not this kind of issue.
From: Joseph.J.Marcheso.Jr.@dartmouth.edu (Joseph J. Marcheso Jr.)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Brahms 3rd Symphony (Repost)
Date: 13 Oct 92 21:19:07 GMT
 <1992Oct13.020233.27468@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>  
 <Bw1z4D.3rF@sci.kun.nl>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

I'm sorry if there was any confusion I like the Brahms 3 with Abbado
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: Alternate Classical-Music FAQ Memo
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 04:32:26 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.164910.18433@newstand.syr.edu> jmwobus@mailbox.syr.EDU (John M. Wobus) writes:
>Alternative FAQ Memo for Classical Music
>
>THE QUESTIONS:
>
>(1) Why do 20th century composers write music that no one wants to
> listen to?

I don't get it.  Everyone listens to 20th century music...The Beatles,
Michael Jackson, Billy Joel, Madonna, etc.

>(1A) How come no 20th century composers write music like the old days?

Because everyone knows classical music is boring.

>(2) I am interested in learning more about classical music.  What should
> I listen to?

Buy "Switched-On Bach" by Walter/Wendy Carlos, and nothing else.  Play it
over and over again.

>(4A) Are those grunts I hear on my Glenn Gould recording?

Yeah, those are the recording engineers grunting over the BAD PERFORMANCE
taking place in the studio.

>(5) Was Vladimer Horowitz a fake?

A fake what?

>(8) What are the 10 best pieces of classical music?

The Pailliard version of Pachelbel's Canon...
The Hogwood version of Pachelbel's Canon...
The Pinnock version of Pachelbel's Canon...
etc.

>(9) Wasn't Schoenberg conceited to think he could ruin music like that
> and we'd let him?

We did let him.

>(10) I am interested in learning to play a musical instrument.   Which
> one should I learn?

The baryton.  Make Haydn happy.

>(11) Why should music majors have to learn Music Theory?

What else would we teach them?  Certainly not *performance practice*.  That
would be useful, and therefore counter to the spirit of academia.

>(12) Wasn't Schenker crazy to think that all music is basically
> variations on the same little piece?

But it all *is* a variation on the same little piece.  It goes I-IV-V-I.
Didn't you take Theory I?

>(12A) Who the hell is Schenker?

The Indian guy with the sitar, right?

>(13) How can people listen to (some type of music)?  It all sounds alike.

It is all alike.

>(14) Who is better: Bach or Beethoven?

Better at what?

>(15) What's the deal with temperment?

My temperament's fine.  How's yours?

>(16) Can pianists change the tone of a single, unpedalled note without
> changing its loudness?

Sure.  Just play the key next to it.


--
Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.     "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings 
gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu       to be seriously considered as a means of 
N2GPZ in ham radio circles        communication. The device is inherently of
72355,1226 on CI$                 no value to us." -Western Union memo, 1877
From: roger@crux.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Glass meets Clive Barker response
Date: 17 Oct 92 03:18:35 GMT
Reply-To: roger@astro.princeton.edu (Roger Lustig)
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <1992Oct16.191513.11745@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Joseph.J.Marcheso.Jr.@dartmouth.edu (Joseph J. Marcheso Jr.) writes:
>In article <1992Oct16.012844.22530@credence.com>
>jeffw@or.credence.com (Jeff Winslow) writes:

>>Verdi wrote some hot stuff; Otello and Falstaff come to mind; but what's
>>so basic about it? 

>How much more difficult Otello and Falstaff are yet the appear so
>easily understood and so accessible. Verdi's complexity doesn't
>distract the listener nor is it technically difficult for difficulty's
>sake. Glass's Voyage seems so much more complex, to its own detriment.

How many times have  you heard each of those pieces?  Have you even
heard The Voyage once through?

>yet It doesn't come near the hights of Otello and Falstaff. Until Glass

Nobody said it did.  Can't you do without such obvious straw men?

>can meld the two [orchestral difficulty and public understanding} he
>will always be on the fringe.

Glass will be on the fringe no matter what he does, because *all* 
composers in this age are on the fringe.  Beethoven and Bach and Mozart and
Verdi are at the center of our musical life, and take up a huge portion
of it, and are "classics" and thus pretty much immovable.

Roger
From: sec@otter.hpl.hp.com (Simon Crouch)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: Opinions of _Classic CD_ Magazine?
Date: 9 Oct 92 12:36:18 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK.


> So my question is, is there anyone out there who subscribes to
> this magazine now, or who has ever subscribed to it?  If so, what
> do you think of it?  If nothing else, I'm hoping it will expose
> me to a wide variety of classical music so that I know what I like,
> rather than me going out and buying random CD's.

I have regularly bought this magazine and would recommend it to someone
looking for exposure to a wide variety of classical music. From my
point of view, its good points are:

(a) The sampler CD can be very good, with good long extracts from a wide
variety of music.
(b) Michael Tanner is a very, um, "provocative" read :-)
(c) It's straighforward to read, not expecting too much of its audience.

However, I've now stopped reading it for the following reasons:

(a) It's straighforward to read, not expecting too much of its audience! In 
other words, I'm finding that I've "outgrown" it and now want something more
"meaty".
(b) The reviews are not "comparative". They simply give a 1 to 5 star rating
of the disc in question and will only rarely talk about alternative
recordings.

Two years ago, reading both "Classic CD" and "Gramophone", I found that I
was getting more out of "Classic CD" (I found "Gramophone" rather 
overwhelming!) Recently the positions have been reversed to the extent that
I'll spend many hours engrossed in "Gramophone" but will flick through
"Classic CD" in half an hour. So my advice - Yes to "Classic CD" if you're
a neophyte, but expect to get tired of it in the long run!

Simon.
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
From: hafner@ifi.unizh.ch (Michel Hafner)
Subject: Re: Glass meets Clive Barker response
Organization: University of Zurich, Department of Computer Science
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 09:28:42 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.022331.28418@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Joseph.J.Marcheso.Jr.@dartmouth.edu (Joseph J. Marcheso Jr.) writes:
>More Glass? What have we done to deserve this. He is a second rate

Probably we have bought too many of his CDs and visited too many of his con-
certs?

>movie composer with his mediocre orchestration and obscene
>derivativeness (Brief history of time) his opera about Columbus is set

I see, movie scoring is about orchestrations and not being derivative. Well,
who's got the best orchestrator and never ever derives anything from anybody?
Guns and roses?

>partly in space with aliens (I doubt that will enter the pantheon of
>Great artistic achievements) he was voted most Boring Composer by
>concergoers for three straight years

I wonder why these people visit his concerts, if it's so boring. Did they also
vote for most pretentious or sexy composer? 

>and I'll take Aida over aknaten

Well, I don't, no way!

>and pure silence over Einstien on the beach

Pure silence is indeed superior to most of today's music.  :-)
							M.H.