Charlie Rose

pmyshkin  01/27/2009 04:45 AM Report

It seems with all these money making types that their ultimate purpose with their wealth is to indulge in some ridiculously luxurious "passion" as if they completely deserved it, and often to impose these projects on the public.

judyviola  12/15/2008 06:49 PM Report

dear johnnysmoke--

believe me, it's not your ears. i was also shocked at rose's fawning. sadly, most of the critics seem to drunk the koolaid as well.

johnnysmoke  12/14/2008 12:15 AM Report

To the orchestra members that commented on their experience, thank you for your feedback. To watch the show you'd think we'd seen the 2nd coming of Lenny. It's always nice to have a dose of cold water thrown on chutzpah and hyperbole. Thank you for comments and alternative suggestions. I've found Mahler interesting and thought I'd had a tin ear to prior listenings. I'm surprised Rose didn't push back a little. He's getting soft in his old age.

kpmirk  12/10/2008 04:16 PM Report

Oops. In the comment below, I meant to say "Mr Kaplan."

kpmirk  12/09/2008 10:52 PM Report

I am also a member of the NY Philharmonic, and played the concert Monday night with Mr Gilbert. I can safely say in my 27 years in the orchestra, he is the worst conductor I have ever played under. Mr Kaplan is completely incompetent, and is just on a huge ego trip. If he wants to do justice to Mahler, he should use his philanthropic funds to pay real musicians to do the conducting. That concert was a low point in the careers of all the musicians of the Philharmonic. The concert sounded quite good, but that is because this great orchestra was able to ignore Mr Kaplan and play on our own. It is time for the press to stop lauding Mr Kaplan and call him for what he is: a charlatan. This emperor has no clothes, and it is not a pretty sight.

judyviola  12/09/2008 10:10 AM Report

I played in Monday night's concert and in the three rehearsals that preceded it, and I can say that in my 25 years in the Philharmonic I have never played under a worse conductor. He is certainly an enthusiast, and has clearly built his life in recent years around this symphony and around studying Mahler's life and work. This is fine preparation to be a scholar, but it emphatically does NOT prepare him to lead an orchestra. He's really no more than an extremely ambitious and well-coached amateur with deep pockets and a lot of chutzpah. Philharmonic members are furious that this memorable occasion, the centenary of Mahler conducting the American premiere of the piece, should be observed by this shabby performance. We made it through the piece, even with some style, because we've performed it many times with great conductors and we know it inside out. When I compare this to the unforgettable experience of playing it with Lenny, with Jessye Norman, I weep with frustration. If you want to check out a really passionate recording, listen to ours with Lenny and Christa Ludwig. Now THERE was a true Mahlerite.

REMant  12/09/2008 12:09 AM Report

Actually there were/are quite a few composer-conductors. Dvorak who preceded Mahler in NY is one such. They were/are usually better at one than the other. But when do such dreams stop being egotistical? I couldn't help thinking of the 9-11 hijackers who learned to fly, but not take-off or land. Gramophone gave his 1989 recording with the LSO (now re-issued) high marks, but 15 yrs later said that tho it "crackled with energy and enthusiasm," it was awkward, sloppy, and the sound, shallow. The 2003 recording with the VPO, however, was said to exhibit "a strange lack of vitality" despite fine orchestral playing, and to have worse soloists. Neither is usually among those considered the best recordings.