Adrian Allan wrote:I have nothing against Milos and players like him, but I believe that the resentment that follows him around is obviously a result of his success, when compared to the real virtuoso players, who remain unnoticed apart from within the tiny self-referential circle of classical guitarists.
lucy wrote:I have myself played classical guitar for many years, have 100s of CDs and have been to countless concerts.
When I first heard Milos play I heard something very different in his approach to the music, compared to many others. This may very well be similar to what you also hear? It seems the difference between us is you judge this playing style as inferior, as far as interpretation goes, and I don't.
It's a bit pointless to say he lacks technical skills, since as has been pointed out earlier he plays the fugue from the 2nd lute suite very well and I might add, he also does a fine version (imo) of the Ginastera sonata, as well as Rodrigo's Invocacion y Danza. Both of which he has performed at The Wigmore Hall. Hardly, the easiest pieces in the repertoire.
Adrian Allan wrote:I don't think it is correct to say that just because he plays Invocation and Danza, he is right at the top of his trade. I play that piece as well, but I play it several levels below that of the greats.
Actually, I didn't say that because he could play that Rodrigo piece and the Ginastera sonata, it meant he was a great player. The relevant point was that he has performed them at The Wigmore Hall, with the latter broadcast live on Radio 3.
Adrian Allan wrote:Please watch the video I embedded. The third movement of La Catedral is pure virtuosity, of a level that places Perroy in the elite level of guitar players. There is nothing on Youtube with that level of fluid virtuosity played by Milos, and this is precisely where the resentment lies and the belief that Milos is a phenomenon of marketing rather than pure, unadulterated talent.
So, it appears you've never heard Milos play in concert yourself. You're basing your judgement on a bunch of perhaps overly-slick videos aimed at marketing him to a general audience. Leaving the marketing aside, I'm still interested in what it is about Milos' playing that you deem so inadequate, apart from your view of his technical skills.
I've listened to the Perroy video and I agree that is very impressive, with machine-like accuracy, as well as good phrasing and control. However, I would question whether that kind of technical fluency is necessarily what it's all about. Perhaps, it is for you, but my take on this is that any professional player needs a minimum level of technical skill, and that skill level required is very high. Although it doesn't have to be at the "John Williams level", it needs to good enough to easily communicate the music successfully.
Speaking of John Williams, I think his technical skills are still unmatched, however, if this forum is anything to go by, most people prefer Bream, even though his technique was not at the level of JW. As you probably know, Bream often made many mistakes in his live performances. I have to say, such is the preoccupation with flawless technique, these days, I seriously wonder whether Bream would succeed today. I really hope I'm wrong about that!! For me, it's more about the qualitative, than the quantitative.
By the way, I watched a Perroy interview too and he mentioned he used to be afraid of playing easy pieces, because when you play something many other people can play, you really do have to be a great musician. Evidently, Milos was not afraid of that. Whether he pulls them off successfully, or not, he evidently took a major risk by performing certain pieces, going by the vitriol it seems to have invited.
“Do what you can, with what you have, where you are”. Theodore Roosevelt