Frank Berger wrote:

> On 3/7/2024 5:09 PM, DeepBlue wrote:
>> mINE109 wrote:
>>
>>> And restricting it to recordings eliminates
>>> Liszt, Anton Rubinstein, Alkan, etc
>>
>> This is not unreasonable as no living person
>> can really tell how they played. Hearsay is
>> not admissible evidence ;-)

> Then this means it all just comes down to
> everyone's opinion as no collective rating
> is possible, since compiling the results of
> today's critics, musicians, opinions is no
> less hearsay.

How so? One can listen to recordings and to
live performances. Who cares about critics,
reviewers, and so on.

Thx

On 3/9/2024 1:21 AM, DeepBlue wrote:
> Frank Berger wrote:
>
>> On 3/7/2024 5:09 PM, DeepBlue wrote:
>>> mINE109 wrote:
>>>
>>>> And restricting it to recordings eliminates Liszt, Anton Rubinstein, Alkan, etc
>>>
>>> This is not unreasonable as no living person can really tell how they played. Hearsay is not admissible evidence ;-)
>
>> Then this means it all just comes down to everyone's opinion as no collective rating is possible, since compiling the results of today's critics, musicians, opinions is no less hearsay.
>
> How so? One can listen to recordings and to live performances. Who cares about critics, reviewers, and so on.
> Thx

I see no point in going in circles.

Frank Berger wrote:

> On 3/9/2024 1:21 AM, DeepBlue wrote:
>> Frank Berger wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/7/2024 5:09 PM, DeepBlue wrote:
>>>> mINE109 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> And restricting it to recordings
>>>>> eliminates Liszt, Anton Rubinstein,
>>>>> Alkan, etc
>>>>
>>>> This is not unreasonable as no living
>>>> person can really tell how they played.
>>>>> Hearsay is not admissible evidence ;-)
>>
>>> Then this means it all just comes down to
>>> everyone's opinion as no collective rating
>>> is possible, since compiling the results of
>>> today's critics, musicians, opinions is no
>>> less hearsay.
>>
>> How so? One can listen to recordings and to
>> live performances. Who cares about critics,
>> reviewers, and so on.

> I see no point in going in circles.

Going in circles is far safer than
going on parabolae or hyperbolae.

On a circle one can be certain
where one ends up! ;-)

Cheers

On 3/11/2024 12:49 AM, DeepBlue wrote:
> Frank Berger wrote:
>
>> On 3/9/2024 1:21 AM, DeepBlue wrote:
>>> Frank Berger wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/7/2024 5:09 PM, DeepBlue wrote:
>>>>> mINE109 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> And restricting it to recordings eliminates Liszt, Anton Rubinstein, Alkan, etc
>>>>>
>>>>> This is not unreasonable as no living person can really tell how they played.
>>>>>> Hearsay is not admissible evidence ;-)
>>>
>>>> Then this means it all just comes down to everyone's opinion as no collective rating is possible, since compiling the results of today's critics, musicians, opinions is no less hearsay.
>>>
>>> How so? One can listen to recordings and to live performances. Who cares about critics, reviewers, and so on.
>
>> I see no point in going in circles.
>
> Going in circles is far safer than going on parabolae or hyperbolae.
> On a circle one can be certain where one ends up! ;-)
>
> Cheers

I prefer a spiral. Going up, of course.

Frank Berger wrote:
>>
>>> I see no point in going in circles.
>>
>> Going in circles is far safer than
>> going on parabolae or hyperbolae.
>> On a circle one can be certain
>> where one ends up! ;-)

> I prefer a spiral. Going up, of course.

Did you deliberately post a Talmudic reply? ;-)

What is "up" for us could be "down"
for a different civilization.

Cheers!

On 3/11/2024 4:40 PM, DeepBlue wrote:
> Frank Berger wrote:
>>>
>>>> I see no point in going in circles.
>>>
>>> Going in circles is far safer than going on parabolae or hyperbolae.
>>> On a circle one can be certain where one ends up! ;-)
>
>> I prefer a spiral. Going up, of course.
>
> Did you deliberately post a Talmudic reply? ;-)
>

No, I'm just really, really Jewish. Such knowledge is in my DNA.

> What is "up" for us could be "down" for a different civilization.
> Cheers!

Frank Berger wrote:

> On 3/11/2024 4:40 PM, DeepBlue wrote:
>> Frank Berger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I see no point in going in circles.
>>>>
>>>> Going in circles is far safer than
>>>> going on parabolae or hyperbolae.
>>>> On a circle one can be certain
>>>> where one ends up! ;-)
>>
>>> I prefer a spiral. Going up, of course.
>>
>> Did you deliberately post a Talmudic reply? ;-)

> No, I'm just really, really Jewish.

We wouldn't have guessed! ;-)

On Wed, 6 Mar 2024, Graham wrote:

> On 2024-03-05 10:41 p.m., Owen Hartnett wrote:
>>
>> https://www.classical-music.com/features/artists/20-greatest-pianists-all-time?fbclid=IwAR1teef5IXh6vDiVkm7fY7rY3rNBejSVDBMNSkxOCc6BKlu6LBEDgZ0OW4Y
>>
>>
>> Half of this list is the usual suspects, the other half designed to disgust
>> DK, should he be slumming sometime and deign to read it.
>>
>> But what's Van Cliburn? Chopped liver? Gilels is in there, but even Moscow
>> rated Cliburn over Gilels. Seems they rated these guys on how good their
>> first
>> movement of the Moonlight was.
>>
>> Heading the list is Rachmaninoff. A pretty safe selection, not many will
>> argue
>> otherwise, even those who haven't heard him.
>>
>> But there's a lot of not-that-far-in-the past pianists that I'd rather hear
>> then some of these old fogy, scratchy monorawl (mispelled for DK), vinyl
>> dinosaurs. Malcolm Frager is more listenable than Gieseking. Byron Janis
>> over
>> Kempff.
>>
>> -Owen
>
> I think the phrase "of all time" should be banned!!!!

Even for geologists and cosmologists? At least it makes more sense to us
in the current context than the way the pop music press uses it.

But you could always try petitioning the US Supreme Court....
--
Al Eisner

On 2024-03-13 2:53 p.m., Al Eisner wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Mar 2024, Graham wrote:
>
>> On 2024-03-05 10:41 p.m., Owen Hartnett wrote:
>>>
>>> https://www.classical-music.com/features/artists/20-greatest-pianists-all-time?fbclid=IwAR1teef5IXh6vDiVkm7fY7rY3rNBejSVDBMNSkxOCc6BKlu6LBEDgZ0OW4Y
>>>
>>>
>>> Half of this list is the usual suspects, the other half designed to
>>> disgust
>>> DK, should he be slumming sometime and deign to read it.
>>>
>>> But what's Van Cliburn? Chopped liver? Gilels is in there, but even
>>> Moscow
>>> rated Cliburn over Gilels. Seems they rated these guys on how good
>>> their first
>>> movement of the Moonlight was.
>>>
>>> Heading the list is Rachmaninoff. A pretty safe selection, not many
>>> will argue
>>> otherwise, even those who haven't heard him.
>>>
>>> But there's a lot of not-that-far-in-the past pianists that I'd
>>> rather hear
>>> then some of these old fogy, scratchy monorawl (mispelled for DK), vinyl
>>> dinosaurs. Malcolm Frager is more listenable than Gieseking. Byron
>>> Janis over
>>> Kempff.
>>>
>>> -Owen
>>
>> I think the phrase "of all time" should be banned!!!!
>
> Even for geologists and cosmologists?  At least it makes more sense to us
> in the current context than the way the pop music press uses it.
>
It makes no sense and as it happens, I am a geologist (retired).

Graham wrote:
>
> On 2024-03-13 2:53 p.m., Al Eisner wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 Mar 2024, Graham wrote:
>>
>>> On 2024-03-05 10:41 p.m., Owen Hartnett wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the phrase "of all time" should be banned!!!!
>>
>> Even for geologists and cosmologists?  At least it makes more sense to us
>> in the current context than the way the pop music press uses it.
>>
> It makes no sense and as it happens, I am a geologist (retired).

Please throw some rocks at the miscreants in this ng! ;-)
Preferably from your own personal collection. Pick the
sharpest, most pointed rocks to throw at Herman! ;-)

Cheers!