Nick Clow wrote:Good grief. Mark
Whilst I have been concerned about the possible distress or damage caused by this thread to Peter Fletcher, I am now more concerned at the damage to your standing. It is a car crash of a thread. No conciliation appears possible. One vote for its deletion.
Ha ha. I have no standing to worry about Nick - but I do thank you very sincerely for your concern.
I value free, open and honest discourse - therefore I would not like to see this or any thread in which the contributors have offered their true opinions deleted. Whilst it's true that a certain misapprehension became manifest thus drawing some critical comments from others, I stand by my assertion that I have at no point made any derogatory assessment of PF's general abilities as a performer.
I even tried to distract attention away from PF and on to my query:
Back on page 3 Mark wrote:I'm surprised that the prevalent topics are still Mr. Fletcher's tone, or the recording quality, or interpretation - none of which have any significance.
... and how could I be any more clear than this?
Still on page 3 Mark wrote:Please forget Peter Fletcher - it's us the listeners and our perception that I'm questioning.
But to little avail.
I did draw attention to a short passage of just a few measures displaying certain characteristics (which I would not allow to go unaddressed in a student) and asked firstly, do others perceive these characteristics and if so, is it acceptable to them? Perhaps naively I was expecting straightforward replies along the lines of:
"Yes, I hear it but it doesn't detract from the experience for me.", "Yes, I hear it and it really bothers me." or "This is great, I can't hear anything wrong."
and so on. If anyone still doesn't understand that then I throw the towel in.
As I commented before - I do at least have an answer of sorts which appears to be that a majority have no idea what I'm talking about.