To ALL Uilleann Pipe List Readers (Please Read)

Brazenkane · Post by **Brazenkane** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 3:21 pm

I am a contributor to the Piper's Review and have been for a number of years. My "job", for those readers here who do not own a subscription, covers the gamut; interviews, detailed transcriptions, articles regarding practicing, etc. Because, we do not have a letters to the editor, I have chosen this forum to address a topic of concern. This is soley my editorial. In no way should this be misunderstood in the regards to myself having and axe to grind with editor Wally Charm, whom I respect, and have worked with for quite a number of years.

I have read many CD reviews throughout the years, and have contributed some of my own. I was moved to write this after reading the reviews of Eamonn Dillon's CD's. Before I go on with my thoughts on the reviews, I will preface my words with a couple of observations.

A reviewer (usually) has no responsibility to the artist, and equally, an artist should have a thick skin when it comes to critiques. However, reviewer can take the harsh road. I see no point in our small
piping community for opting to go in this direction. This is not Billboard, DownBeat, or Rolling Stone. The artists being reviewed are not going to sell 100,000 units.

In the reviews I had published, I made points about elements I did not care for, but I was as objective as possible while expressing my opinion. The fact that the artists I covered are professional musicians in a very narrow market was always in the forefront of my mind.

I will presume the reviewer who took the assignment of reporting on Eamonn Dillon's CDs, knows what the life as a pro musician entails. Making a living as a musician is VERY difficult, which is why I was astonished by the review... the project "Storm in the Kettle" in particular. I should mention that despite the fact I know Eamonn Dillon, we have been out of touch for a number of years. Having said that, I am certianly not running to his rescue...he doesn't need that. My reason for writing is far more broad.

The author did a decent job of explaining some of what Eamonn's CD is about. However, the harsh critiques, and crafty quips show no regard for the artist in review, no knowledge of the circumstances around which the recording was created, and gives the general idea to the readers that the reviewer knows what is best for the CD purchasing piping community as a whole.

I may be alone on this idea though I doubt it; I personally do not condone, nor will I ever support reviews that include opinions that hurt the recording artist. It is damaging on MANY levels... period.

If you, the reader, recorded a CD ..and in a review of your project, a potential customer read something to the affect of "My 4 year old loved it," "..the piping is pretty good.."This is plastic music" or " ...this lacks nyaaaa" how well do you think your product would sell?

Many points about the pro's and cons of being a reviewer, and his or her responsibility to the recording artist etc. could (and may well) be drilled into the ground. I am simply not interested in taking part in that sort of banter, my point is simple and crystal clear.

In conclusion:

This commentary is for those future and current reviewers alike. I am all for reading a telling review about a recording, as I am sure every other reader is, but don't do us any favours, and dazzle the readers with whit and comments that knock the artist. Perhaps, ask yourself "what does this artist have offer?" In addition, if there are elements that do not suit your veiw of what is "good" music, there are constructive ways in which you can express that.

Whether a musician has a home recording set up or not, they spent thousands of dollars to get the CD you will be critiquing. Many musicians who make CD's are full time players. Those who are not...at very least count on the sale their CDs to offset the expenses of the production of product. It is important to support piping recording artists who give a CD for review with objective reporting, and prudent governing of the pen as it were.

Thanks for taking the time to read this.

Kynch Padraig O'Kaine[quote][/quote]

djm · Post by **djm** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 4:19 pm

Kynch, this topic has been raised elsewhere on this forum. http://chiffboard.mati.ca/viewtopic.php ... 889f7a9db6

I wasn't sure what to make of the review in question, not having heard either CD prior to reading the review. Regardless of the words used or the tone of the review, I took its message to be "Beware!"

Are there no editorial standards at Piper's Review? Does the editor disagree with you on standards for wording a review? Surely you are in close enough contact with the publishers of Piper's Review to air your disapproval privately. Did they disagree with you so that you felt you needed to raise your objections here? It would be good to get the whole story.

I have since had an opportunity to hear a couple of clips of Eamonn's CDs. From what I heard he seems to be a competent UPiper. His choice of synthesized accompaniment is not at all to my personal tastes. Would that be acceptable to you as a way of expressing a sentiment similar to the original reviewer's?

djm

glands · Post by **glands** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 4:38 pm

Kynch's message is well taken. I can see it as a broad general commentary and, when separated from the review that prompted the authoring of the message, the recommendations can be applied to many aspects of our "need to review" whether stating an opinion on a CD, piper, or set of pipes for that matter.

I must say, however, that I do find the CD or music reviews in The Piper's Review by the editor in question to be somewhat condescending, full of disguised pot shots, and generally incongrous to my own opinion and that is why I no longer read them. I favor reviews that are designed for the level of understanding of the readership and focus on what is good about a recording, why it may appeal to the public, and when criticism must be leveled, that it be done in a constructive way. In this way, we all might be better listeners and reviewers as we will learn how to be critical (in a good sense of the word) of the recording, which, in the music industry, is essentially a publication and must be treated with some respect in the first place.

Joseph E. Smith · Post by **Joseph E. Smith** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 4:39 pm

The review was by another proffessional piper...Todd Denman. I can't help but wonder why somebody also 'in the business' would go to such lengths to show disdain for another's efforts. Having said that, it was a review and only a review, biased or other, just a review. I do hope that, in the future, this publication's reviewers choose their wording more carefully, and monitor their rapier like wit....lest it cuts somebody else.

Brazenkane · Post by **Brazenkane** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 4:45 pm

In response to djm

_____________________

Are there no editorial standards at Piper's Review?

of course there are!

Does the editor disagree with you on standards for wording a review?

irrelevant question. Wally and I don't interact on that topic.

Surely you are in close enough contact with the publishers of Piper's Review to air your disapproval privately.

You missed the point my freind.

Did they disagree with you so that you felt you needed to raise your objections here?

You are TOTALLY off base. Re-read what I wrote. There are no letters to the editor. Wally and I have a GREAT working relationship period. My letter is to ALL readers and reveiws ON THE LISTS.

anima · Post by **anima** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 5:32 pm

Well, I was originally apalled by the review and still am. Have you seen this topic?

http://chiffboard.mati.ca/viewtopic.php ... 889f7a9db6

The review was unduly harsh and phenomenally disrespectful. I believe it did a better job of describing the personality of the reviewer than the music it was supposedly about.

I won't be purchasing any more of Mr. Denman's CD's because of it.

Jeff

djm · Post by **djm** » Sun Nov 28, 2004 6:51 pm

KO'K wrote:You are TOTALLY off base. Re-read what I wrote. There are no letters to the editor. Wally and I have a GREAT working relationship period. My letter is to ALL readers and reveiws ON THE LISTS.

Sorry, just trying to find alterior motives. I find myself agreeing with Mr. Denman's assessment, and am glad I didn't spend my hard-earned dollars on Eamonn's CDs, but I can also see your point that Todd was pretty vicious in his methods.

It all balances out in the end. I wouldn't buy one of Mr. Denman's CDs either.

djm

Jay-eye · Post by **Jay-eye** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:22 am

Post subject: To ALL Uilleann Pipe List Readers (Please Read)

Perhaps we should all use this subject line for all our posts from now on?
Just to help us decide which ones are relevant, eh?

j.i.

Kevin L. Rietmann · Post by **Kevin L. Rietmann** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:14 am

glands · Post by **glands** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:19 am

Perhaps we should all use this subject line for all our posts from now on?
Just to help us decide which ones are relevant, eh?

Oh no, absolutely not. We simply need to write MUST HAVE in our subject lines and use three exclamation points, as you have recently, to imply that everybody better read the post or they will be missing out on something they need!

Jay-eye · Post by **Jay-eye** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 12:28 pm

glands wrote: Oh no, absolutely not. We simply need to write MUST HAVE in our subject lines and use three exclamation points, as you have recently, to imply that everybody better read the post or they will be missing out on something they need!

Oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooh! Cheeky!

j.i.

glands · Post by **glands** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 2:38 pm

Just posting an observation.

Royce · Post by **Royce** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 7:45 pm

[quote="Kevin L. Rietmann"][/quote]

Thought provoking insight.

Royce

ausdag · Post by **ausdag** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 9:54 pm

Royce wrote:
Kevin L. Rietmann wrote:
Thought provoking insight.

Royce

No Royce, you're not doing it right. You have to look through the screen as if you're staring past the surface and gradually the message will appear 3D.

Kevin L. Rietmann · Post by **Kevin L. Rietmann** » Mon Nov 29, 2004 10:52 pm