|
|
Post by Richard on Apr 12, 2007 14:27:52 GMT
Now this post makes sense, moved from the Sophie Westenra thread. Hi milewalker Jon, Thank you for your input re Hayley reviews. There can never be an objective review by anyone. Tastes differ too much and moods vary as well. But you are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. Therefore I do not take you or your friends opinion too seriously. I know who I rather listen to and that's what counts to me...Hayley Westenra time and time again! Love, Marianne 
How many crtics of any sort take the time to listen, to observe properly before rushing their pens to paper to thrust from them with the cavalier indifference of throwing away a paper dart their 'well considered views', as they should be, upon another artiste's work?
Peter S. |
|
|
|
Post by Stephany on Apr 21, 2007 16:32:44 GMT
I initially posted this review on the Hayley Metascore thread but here it is again in the right topic. [/b] Celtic Treasure - Hayley Westenra
(Decca/Universal) Hayley Westenra needs sage advice. Urgently. She should be told it is a serious cultural crime to murder an operatic aria, such as she has perpetrated on Puccini's Un bel di, the pivotal offering on this disappointing disc. It is no fine day in the illustrious history of Madama Butterfly that Westenra has reduced Cio-Cio San's soul-shredding aria, one of opera's supreme components, to a pallid ballad, bereft of the emotion the young, callously deserted geisha pours forth. Mercifully, it is Westenra's sole flirtation with opera on Celtic Treasure which, despite the title, offers only a handful of genuinely Celtic songs amid an otherwise mixed program as diverse as Scarborough Fair, Shenandoah and Abide with Me. Alas, the fold-out, difficult-to-read insert booklet contains no printed lyrics. [/size][/quote] |
|
|
|
Post by grant on Apr 21, 2007 17:48:42 GMT
[/b] Celtic Treasure - Hayley Westenra
(Decca/Universal) Alas, the fold-out, difficult-to-read insert booklet contains no printed lyrics. [/quote] Well at least there's a tiny bit of this idiots review that I agree with!!  He is obviously an opera devotee and doesn't accept any deviation. I have heard the opera version and it does absolutely nothing for me. Hayley has created a version that is far more palatable to those of us not passionate about opera which has to be a good thing. If this twerp doesn't like it, perhaps he should give the album to someone else.  Grant |
|
|
|
Post by Dori on Apr 22, 2007 5:51:23 GMT
Its funny, because the booklet has nothing to do with Hayley! That's the production of the company!! Also, if they don't like the album, they can just give it to someone who will appreciate it.....even at the least.....
Dori
|
|
|
|
Post by Stephany on Apr 24, 2007 2:35:05 GMT
Err...I don't really know what to say to this one. |
|
|
|
Post by comet on Apr 24, 2007 7:49:56 GMT
Err...I don't really know what to say to this one. This was a decent enough comment. He implies it's not his "Cup of tea" but at least he says nothing unpleasant about it, A very wise thing to do considering where he works.  comet |
|
|
|
Post by roger on Apr 24, 2007 8:57:19 GMT
Err...I don't really know what to say to this one. Hi Stephany, You're not the only one who didn't know what to say. Neither did the reviewer! It qualifies for the "non-review of the year" award. It says nothing other than, if you don't like it, don't buy it. Surely that is true of anything? And the reviewer gets paid for writing this stuff?  Roger |
|
Martin
Global Moderator
HWI Management Team
Posts: 3,339
|
Post by Martin on Apr 24, 2007 10:09:19 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by roger on Apr 24, 2007 11:29:08 GMT
Hi Martin, Ah, but what happened is this. The album was often wrongly named as 'Treasures'. He was told to remove the "s". Unfortunately, he removed both of them! Roger  |
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Apr 24, 2007 13:23:29 GMT
I reckon he was trying to steal a dollar, so he obviously doesn't know two euros are worth more!  TR€A$UR€ Richard |
|
|
|
Post by milewalker on Apr 24, 2007 14:06:53 GMT
It says nothing other than, if you don't like it, don't buy it. Surely that is true of anything? And the reviewer gets paid for writing this stuff? Roger But that isnt what it says Roger. It says if you dont like Hayley, dont buy the album. That is a very different thing. It might be clearer if parphrased like this: "If you are not already a Hayley fan (a "convert"), there is nothing here in my opinion which is worthwhile (leave it buried)". That isnt a good review - particularly if the acquisition of new fans is a goal - but it is a logically valid one. The reviewer may be wrong of course - but it is consistant with some other criticism we have seen. Jon |
|
|
|
Post by roger on Apr 24, 2007 14:37:23 GMT
Hi Jon,
Okay, perhaps what I should have said was "if you don't like her, don't buy the album". The point is, he wasn't criticizing because he didn't say anything other than to state the obvious. If I don't like an artist, of course I'm not going to buy their album. I don't need to be told that in the press.
Roger
|
|
|
|
Post by milewalker on Apr 24, 2007 15:43:40 GMT
Roger,
By your argument, there are only two classes of possible buyers - the "coverted" and those who dislike her. So, are you saying that everyone who bought a copy of Pure in the UK is a "convert"? Since she hasnt sold a million per release since then, the clear implication is that most people are actually somewhere in between.
I have one Celine Dion album. I am not a convert, but I dont actively dislike her either. If we changed the name, isnt this review telling me not to waste my time and money on the new release?
This is relevant in my opinon because high sales levels are not generated by "converts". They happen because there is something about an album which "non-converts" also find appealing - which is precisely what this guy is saying he didnt find.
Jon
|
|
Dave
Administrator
HWI Admin
Posts: 7,700
|
Post by Dave on Apr 24, 2007 16:20:59 GMT
It seems quite straightforward to me: the reviewer doesn't like the album. It's not a review it's an opinion but he does seem to have listened to it and by implication, if he had published a review, it would have been negative.
Cheers, Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by roger on Apr 24, 2007 16:25:59 GMT
Exactly, Dave. As it stands, it doesn't tell anybody more than the fact that he doesn't like it. As a journalist, surely he could manage to put together something more substancial that that?
Roger
|
|
