musicianiship--when is it bad or good ?

perhaps, what i was really asking about was artistry not musicianship. but the context was for solo performances, or for a conductor.

if an artist deliberately takes liberties, including wrong notes, tempos, plays sharp or flat, some professional musicians might consider such a performance an example of poor musicianship. yet, the performing artist may disagree.

the standards alluded to above, proably accepted by "professional" musicians are just that. there may be some musicians who disagree with what are commonly accepted standards.

i am trying to get to a more universal, philosophical question, namely, the idea of quality. i believe that all instances of judgements of quality are purely subjective and therefore opinion. even if standards can be established and are accepted by experts, another set of standards could also be established by a minority, which, are just as valid.

why am i harping on this subject ??

it seems that many of the threads and posts on audiogon are directly or indirectly related to the idea of excellence of sound, music, etc. .

people have very strong convictions about sound quality and music. i feel that one should be more open minded about quality and not be critical of others or dismissive of products which are considered to be of poor quality because they are not up to someone's standards of what quality is.

in the world of the quantitative, it is logical to deduce quality, but in a world in which value judgements are made without any logic, but rather based upon standards which are determined by consensus, notions of quality are basically opinions, albeit, intelligent and eductaed opinions.

in the interests of communication it might be advised to describe a performance, sound etc., and let the reader decide whether it is "bad" or "good".

if i am attending an orchestra concert. i would describe factually what i heard. the tempos were too fast or too slow. certain performers were not in tune. their instruments sounded sharp or flat. the musicians did not sound like an ensemble. some musicians were ahead or behind the beat. they played to loud or too soft. they ignored the composer's markings and thier performance did not coincide with the wishes of the composer.

the above would be a hypothetical description of could have been observed at a symphony orchestra concert.

if you will note, i did not indicate a value to the performance. i tried to factually describe what i heard.

hi tvad:

do you rememebr a performance of a brahms piano concerto with glenn gould and leonard bernstein ?

the conductor made a stetement about the interpretation of glenn gould with which he disagreed.

whenever standards are set up by experts, there may be other experts who disagree.

if one must perform in a certain way to be licensed, one perorms according to the requirements to get licensed, but then may chose not to perform that way. it's not medicine. it's art. yes there are standards but they are not absolute.

hi ellery: communication can be neutral and you the reader then decide if you like what is being described.

my own style of communication is one of detachment from that which i am experiencing. i try to report what i observe and let the reader decide what it all means.

yes, my description is subjective, but i try to be as neutral as possible, as a reporter does.

tobias, i think you misinterpret my position.

i believe all questions of quality in the realm of the arts is purely subjective and opinion based. whatever standards exist are still based upon opinion.

if i am trying to decide upon a cd to buy, a book to read, a movie to watch, a component to buy a concert. etc. , i want information, not opinion. i cannot necessarily base a decision upon an opinion with which i may agree or disagree, but as tvad illustrated, if i want to be confident an orchestra is playing like an ensemble and all instruments are tuned properly, his description is all i need. once i listen, i will decide my sentiments toward the performance.

if i want to buy an amplifier and ask if it is warm and define warmth, upon receiving a factual answer or at least one based upon honest perceptions, i can then make an intelligent decisions.

my point is that i have my own criterion as to what i enjoy. all i need is information as to the presence or absence of factors which i can use to make an intelligent decision.

life is a chance. if i want to make sure the pianist played all notes correctly etc., i will go to hear him/her play.
i cannot predict whether i will like or dislike what i hear.

there is to much persuasion out ther either implicit or explicit and not enough information.

as channel 5 says "we report, i will decide". this philosophy is consistent with my detached reviewing style.