@funnyfilms007 If you're talking about the quality of the recording, blame YouTube. Otherwise, find me a better live performance from a college or university choir, =]
I think the vocal phrasing is more what needs as bits of work. Remember too that this recording is probably mastered by an audio engineer which boosted the EQ round 8K. I think it's a bit too fast too. Still, LOVE the song! This song has so much emotion to whiz through in a few minutes
I think the vocal phrasing is more what needs as bits of work. Remember too that this recording is probably mastered by an audio engineer which boosted the EQ round 8K. I think it's a bit too fast too. Still, LOVE the song!
I'd have to agree a bit punchy. No doubt a good conductor and good singers. For my tastes, I would prefer a performance with good diction, but less space between the syllables. A little too much daylight. Maybe a little more dusk. mg
I disagree with WMC as well. Beautiful pieces like this should be heard. Too often the diction gets lost in sloppy starts and stops. This is the best I've ever heard this performed. GREAT JOB UCLA :-)
Hmmmm -- Good intonation but the conductor's obsession with precise diction defeated the way Thompson wrote the piece: in smooth, flowing legato/rubato phrases. Unfortunately the result was a bunch of punchy staccato disconnected notes, almost "rappy".
@WMCPhD I have to disagree. The emphasis on diction helps bring clarity to the words for the audience. Randall used a poem with incredibly meaningful text, so the integrity of diction is vital to the expression of the music. And there were certainly sections with beautiful legato when needed.
@WMCPhD --I agree--but it isn't the over-diction that is the main problem, but the overly-precious attention to accent and non-accent. I happen to be one of those conductors who asks for this kind of detail, but the key word is "detail." Instead of being a "detail," the rise and fall of syllables became a main feature, and was an unfortunate distraction to the both the text and the long legato lines. Zephyr, I totally expect you to disagree. To that I say, to each his/her own.
I agree to zephyr2050. Diction must be clear to the listeners. Some flowing legato/rubato phrases kill the lirics undestanding.
acgmataruna 2 months ago
I have yet to find an interpretation of this wonderful piece that doesn't feel rushed instead of timeless. This, unfortunately, isn't an exception.
Sharoney 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Absolutely beautiful. I sang this with the Cal State Northridge chorale back in the early 80's. UCLA is a top notch music school.
HDBirdsall 11 months ago
Come on--for that much tuition you would think they could put out a better sound.
funnyfilms007 11 months ago
@funnyfilms007 If you're talking about the quality of the recording, blame YouTube. Otherwise, find me a better live performance from a college or university choir, =]
zephyr2050 11 months ago
RMB
I think the vocal phrasing is more what needs as bits of work. Remember too that this recording is probably mastered by an audio engineer which boosted the EQ round 8K. I think it's a bit too fast too. Still, LOVE the song! This song has so much emotion to whiz through in a few minutes
rbuscher 1 year ago
I think the vocal phrasing is more what needs as bits of work. Remember too that this recording is probably mastered by an audio engineer which boosted the EQ round 8K. I think it's a bit too fast too. Still, LOVE the song!
rbuscher 1 year ago
I'd have to agree a bit punchy. No doubt a good conductor and good singers. For my tastes, I would prefer a performance with good diction, but less space between the syllables. A little too much daylight. Maybe a little more dusk. mg
k12tn 1 year ago
I disagree with WMC as well. Beautiful pieces like this should be heard. Too often the diction gets lost in sloppy starts and stops. This is the best I've ever heard this performed. GREAT JOB UCLA :-)
WingManOC 1 year ago
Hmmmm -- Good intonation but the conductor's obsession with precise diction defeated the way Thompson wrote the piece: in smooth, flowing legato/rubato phrases. Unfortunately the result was a bunch of punchy staccato disconnected notes, almost "rappy".
WMCPhD 1 year ago
@WMCPhD I have to disagree. The emphasis on diction helps bring clarity to the words for the audience. Randall used a poem with incredibly meaningful text, so the integrity of diction is vital to the expression of the music. And there were certainly sections with beautiful legato when needed.
zephyr2050 1 year ago
@WMCPhD --I agree--but it isn't the over-diction that is the main problem, but the overly-precious attention to accent and non-accent. I happen to be one of those conductors who asks for this kind of detail, but the key word is "detail." Instead of being a "detail," the rise and fall of syllables became a main feature, and was an unfortunate distraction to the both the text and the long legato lines. Zephyr, I totally expect you to disagree. To that I say, to each his/her own.
elderwall 1 year ago
@elderwall -- After listening again to Zephyr2050's interpretation, I tend to agree with your critique. I stand corrected.
WMCPhD 1 year ago