an blog | AJBlog Central | Contact me | Advertise | Follow me:

DG sign new composer – oh, not that one…

I am going to ask you to read this item very quickly and then banish it from memory, as many at Deutsche Grammophon are presently doing with a very large glass in hand.

The yellow label, benchmark for the classical record industry, yesterday inked a contract with Karl Jenkins, a former advertising jingle composer who has become phenomenally popular with pastiche choral pieces on worthy themes – world peace, motherhood, apple pie, that sort of thing.

Jenkins is a para-classical hit composer. His music is easy on the ear, disposable, forgettable, ephemeral. The news of his signing to DG was released on Classic FM, a radio network that performs the equivalent of anaesthesia by constantly exhorting its listeners to relax.

Karl Jenkins was made for Classic FM. He is anathema to the standards that DG stands for.

I could name 20 living composers who would merit a contract with DG and whose work would add lustre to the label. It might even make money.

Jenkins will certainly make money, but his undemanding music will lower the label’s credibility at the high table of serious music. Mistake, bad mistake. Now try to forget you have read this. I don’t want to wreck your weekend.



photo: Classic FM

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...


  1. Galen Johnson says:

    And the Germans have word for it: “Seufz.”

  2. Luigi Carbonare says:

    That is why I keep preaching everyday that classical music business today (orchestras, artists agencies, opera houses, music festivals, record companies, PR agencies) is very sadly run by too many bunch of idiots who understand nothing about the “high arts”………….

  3. Alexandros Rigas says:

    I sincerely do not find this DG signing inconsistent with making Lang Lang the greatest pianist on earth; the opposite.

    • musicologyman says:

      I agree: this is entirely what we should have come to expect from the label of Elvis Costello, Tori Amos, and so on. DG has abandoned all pretense of taking the notion of Kunstmusik seriously.

      • Guitarman666 says:

        Also agree. Hard to put into words how saddening it all is, especially given DG’s illustrious history, for so many years the maxim “if they made it into DG, they must be good” was something one could rely on

    • not again says:

      This is why Trifonov should be embarrassed to have signed with DG. They have no standards.

  4. Luigi Carbonare says:

    Here is the next artist that DG must sign next:

    Mozart and Beethoven will weep in heaven……….RIP classical music

  5. Solenne Gonzalez says:

    If a major concert agency took an artist of this level then our music world has really gotten a big problem:

  6. Paul Beaudoin says:

    Not to far back DGG had a few releases where they asked some “DJs” to remix their catalog. So, it’s not a surprise to me to see them sign Jenkins. And to many of the people in the “public at large,” he IS a classical composer because he writes for orchestras and chorus –
    How sad of a state we are in!

    • Michael says:

      I listened to the “remix” of the Adagio from Mahler 10. I thought it was really lame. The guy who did it basically re-recorded the Sinopoli recording played back in a coffin…because, you know, that piece is all about death and all that…

  7. I’m not sure if “comooser” is a typo or not — but I like it!

  8. Very boring!

  9. Michael says:

    I think DG has stopped being the, or at least a, benchmark for the classical record industry a long time ago. It’s just odd that other labels keep pumping out “real” classical releases while DG and EMI are just a former shadow of their selves, Philips has disappeared, and Decca has, too, as far as I can tell, at least as a publisher of new records. In the meantime, labels such as Oehms release interesting new recordings, like a complete new Ring and symphonic works by Mahler, Bruckner, and Brahms with Simone Young and the Philharmoniker Hamburg. Right around the corner from where DG’s offices are (or used to be, I lost track).

  10. Parsifal says:

    We can expect future classical album released by DG played not by human beings but by a group of vampires

  11. Stephen Richards says:

    Oh dear, Norman got out of bed the wrong side this morning. Give DG and ClassicFM a break for goodness sake. Think of cross-covers, audience-building and revenue generation. Money makes the world go round; even in the hallowed precincts of classical music.

  12. Luigi Carbonare says:

    The world is upside down, a Great Maestro as Herbert Blomstedt has to have his recordings released by an obscure label called Querstand with very limited distribution and marketing. How sad that is…..listen to the wonderful new Beethoven Missa Solemnis album by dear Maestro Blomstedt with Gewandhausorchester Leipzig as well as the recently completed set of Bruckner Symphonies No. 1 – 9. Shame on Decca for having stopped working with this honest and deep musician

    • Steve de Mena says:

      If you’re on iTunes and Amazon, do you need much more “distribution” with the death of brick & mortar stores?

  13. Thomas (Munich) says:

    Nobody should be surprised. Just look at that company! Just look at all of Universal Classics. It is an insult to call it classics, because it has nothing to do with classics, it only has to do with the lowest common denominator and cashing in as quickly as possible. Forget about artist discovery, forget about artist development, forget about artist and brand loyalty. DG is a disgrace, an absolute disgrace and not only because of this one signing. I used to trust the yellow label as a reference, knowing that it represented quality, so did my father, so did many of my musician and music loving friends. None of us even bother to look at most of what DG produces anymore, as they can’t be trusted. Yes, there are occasionally some new things that could be interesting, but all too often what they try to pass off as the best, is nothing more than complete fabrications, artists who were signed because they look sexy, or pretend to be cool. The music making is secondary. DG has sold out to cheap short-term thinking and when I read the quotes on this site and elsewhere, by its top boss, Max Hole, I can only laugh and cry at the same time. Apparently, the new boss of DG, Wilkinson, is not very versed in the values of the company, has no deep love of classical music and is well-known as the crossover guy, so this jingle composer signing is probably an omen of more of what is to come. My advice to all readers here is stop being surprised by this. DG is not a label for the true passionate lover of great classical music anymore. Assuming that you already have the great legendary recordings from their magnificent back catalogue, just ignore the yellow label and look elsewhere, otherwise you will fall into despair. Sadly, it is the great past of the yellow label that the current idiots who manage the company are exploiting, pretending that they are the heirs to a treasure, when all they are doing is destroying in a short time what took more than one hundred years to build.

    • Dare I point out a number of Universal signings who, I suggest, defy your first argument (your 5th sentence)?
      Scholl, Grosvenor, Jansen, Kavakos, Lisitsa, Lehzneva, Bartoli, Ashkenazy, Chailly, Batiashvili, Barenboim, Grubinger, Hahn, Nezet-Seguin, Freire, Kaufmann, Uchida, Weilerstien. . .
      Show me the “crossover cash cow” in that list, tell me who of that list you think is the easy money and not artistically worth it, say who the labels aren’t committed to long-term; or may I cordially suggest re-examining your feelings on the matter?
      Universal may be big, and it may be willing to experiment around the core classical genre (and thank goodness for that), but that doesn’t stop it investing in its artists, and in working with some of the very best there are.

      • Sorry, but mot all of the names that you mention above were signed to DG or Decca many years ago, from another era, when the company actually had a notion of what serious listeners wanted to discover and hear. Scholl was signed about 20 years ago, Bartoli the same, Ashkenazy about 45 years ago, Chailly about 25 and so on…
        There is nothing wrong with the music of Karl Jenkins, only that it is not what classical audiences want and like. This whole story and debate is like the current scandal of people finding horse meat instead of 100% beef in the food chain. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with horse meat, except when you thought that you were going to be served pure beef. DG used to be the ‘restaurant’ that served haute cuisine and now it has been purchased by McDonalds and has dumbed down its offerings, substituting horse meat for beef (and still calling it beef) and putting Coca-Cola in the Château Mouton Rothschild wine bottle (and still calling it a Grand Cru). They should just be honest and simply state that they have decided, for commercial reasons, to focus on entertainment music and that will be their focus. Then the case is clear. If the just continue telling everybody that they are the reference for classical music, then they are alienating their once loyal core audience and at the same time perverting the definition of serious classical music. They can’t have it both ways!

        • Um, you are wrong again.
          Nezet-Seguin started collaborating with DG only recently. Kavakos signed to Decca last year. Weilerstein only the other year, and Benjamin Grosvenor too, etcetera…
          And as for those who have been on those labels for a long time, I need only refer you to Thomas’ comment above where he questions the labels’ commitment to artists, and suggest you have answered his point; clearly there is a long-term commitment.

        • @ Slava
          “There is nothing wrong with the music of Karl Jenkins, only that it is not what classical audiences want and like. ”
          Except that isn’t true is it? Otherwise why do people buy the records of Karl Jenkins (or why do DG think they will), and don’t buy what you might consider 100% organic acorn-fed classical? It’s clear people do like the music of Karl Jenkins, and it is also clear that it is usually packaged as such, not disguised somewhere; so here the analogy falls somewhat short.

          • Timon Wapenaar says:

            Same reason people buy the industrial sludge disguised as “food” which is sold by McDonald’s, Burger King, and their ilk: because they like it.

          • You really don’t seem to understand what I’m saying. I have absolutely nothing against Karl Jenkins, but it is entertainment music, perfect for a film soundtrack or even a concert experience, but don’t call it a classical masterpiece. His reworking and making pastiches of Bizet and Beethoven may be cute, but it will, I doubt, not survive the test of time, thereby making it a classic. According to your theory, everything under the sun can be called classical music, including music that I love and listen regularly to, i.e. The Beatles, Janis Joplin, Jimi Hendrix, Elvis Presley, The Stones, etc. Actually, all of these names have survived the test of time and a generation and are still relevant and interesting, so why not call them classical artists and their music classical music? Certainly they are all closer to fulfilling that definition than Karl Jenkins is. Sting also composed music for symphony orchestra and performed with none other than the Berlin Philharmonic. So, by your definition, does that make Sting a classical musician and his music classical. DG already dabbled with Sting a few years ago, pretending it was the new classics. Who remembers? Who cares? It is all short term thinking, with only the money machine as the locomotive. Nothing wrong with that, but as I said earlier, please don’t put Coca-Cola in the Mouton Rothschild bottle, tell me that it is a Grand Cru red wine and stick to your guns. You can’t fool all of the people all of the time. Universal Classics, Dg and Decca and their masquerading “classical” bosses are like the managers of the abattoirs, selling horse meat and telling the masses that it is 100% pure organic Kobe beef. For how much longer can their charade go on? Call horse meat, horse meat, call Coca-Cola, Coca-Cola, call Karl Jenkins good easy listening/entertainment music, but please don’t keep trying to fool the public, as you are flushing DG down the toilet along with all that it has come to signify.

      • I agree. And don’t forget Ben Heppner and Measha Brueggergosman.

  14. Bodo Redlin says:

    Finally DG has the good sense to sign a contemporary composer who actually has a broad following and does not just appeal to some groupie zombies in the big cities and snotty academics.

    One of Jenkins’ compositional techniques is collage. How is that different from what Berio did? Easy answer: One can enjoy listening to Jenkins, whereas Berio gives one a headache, swingle singers singing or not.

    It may come as s surprise to some elitist musicians and critics that, e.g., Jenkins’ “Allegretango” is a clever collage that really sticks in one’s mind. I can’t say that tone clusters, tone rows or Balinese gongs have ever stuck in my mind except as unpleasant memories of irritation, wasted time and being held for a sucker by some composer only other academics and music critics like.

    Welcome to post-modernism gentlemen.

    • Michel Krasna says:

      Can’t you see that you are absurd?

      Utterly insulting to any of us who *don’t* get headaches from Berio (perhaps you should drink more water?).

      Not that I live in a big City (Devon moorland).

      Tunes are good but not everything.

      • Bodo Redlin says:

        Dear Michael,

        I can’t possibly be more absurd than you, since I am stating my opinion and you, yours. You are no more an arbiter elegantiarum of contemporary music than I am.

        If you don’t get headaches from Berio, it is perhaps due to your drinking more of the Russian kind of water.

        Tunes are always better than cacophony.

  15. I welcome his inclusion to DG, it means that DG has accepted the many realities of the 21st century. I’ve been a pro orchestra player for 30 years, and have always been amazed at the self-destructive attitude of the orchestra biz as a whole- our first order of business is survival. Now is not the time for some classical “litmus test”, it’s a time for putting people in seats.

    I haven’t heard much of his music, but the Diamonds thang sounds like the Albinoni adagio, a piece written in the 1950s by someone that nobody except the Jeopardy! champions can name. We’ve all played that one to death, what’s the difference? The difference is that one has some fancy but false pedigree and the other does not. When we, as a business, are accused of “elitism”, it might be true in this case. If DG has the wisdom to sign him, they can take some of their profts from a popular, living composer to fund that Dittersdorf CD that 19 people will buy. Sounds like a smart move on their part.

  16. David Boxwell says:

    Karl Jenkins is Eric Whitacre without the blonde highlights.

    • What nonsense. Their styles of composition, recording and performance could hardly be more different with the classical genre. Just because they can both be quite pleasant to listen to hardly makes them similar!

  17. Derek Castle says:

    I’m just listening to the new ‘Parsifal’ from the Met on the radio. I always find the final 60 minutes quite overwhelming. Thank God for Radio 3, which costs so little of my licence fee. Jenkins (Karl, Katherine the ‘opera singer’ ) and Co. have not – as far as I know – infiltrated the wonderful repertoire of the CBSO (Birmingham), from whom we get an admirably varied programme every season. I’m more concerned about supporting, through my subscription, the disgraceful bosses at Sky Arts 2, who are threatening wall-to-wall Andre Rieu soon. Or is it actually a tasteless April Fool’s joke? (“We are delighted to be able to offer the ‘maestro’ (ugh) his own channel.” ). The English Channel might be appropriate.

  18. Quentin Bryar says:

    I’m guessing”inked” = “signed”?

  19. Timon Wapenaar says:

    Karl Jenkins: yet another candidate for reeducation. There seems to be a consensus amongst Jenkinites that music need only strike the ear in a pleasant fashion in order for it to be deemed worthy. After all, what is more important than whether an audiences likes it or not? Surely the idea that a piece of music can be musically good or bad, absolutely and without equivocation, is bunkum? Here, then, is the Golden Calf of new music: that which pleases most, but heeds not the law.

    Survivalists should be wary of invoking the “doom is imminent” trope. Doom is not imminent. Beethoven, Mozart, Schubert, Mahler and Shostakovich have assured our survival. The music is stronger than any circumstances which may seek to obstruct or destroy it, and you only have to look at the lives of these men to see that. Yes, orchestras find themselves in peril, and yes, it seems the gulf between the great mass of humanity and the symphonic repertoire is too great to ever bridge, but compromising on the very substance of our music is actually to admit that such a gap is unbridgeable. It is to admit defeat, and to resign ourselves to watering down the musical ideals which have been so faithfully preserved in an unbroken line, from Monteverdi through to Arvo Part.

    If only we could spend more time criticising the music itself, and less time criticising the supporters of one or the other school!

    • Timon,

      American orchestras have been “compromising” for decades. I can name 10+ pieces I’ve played 100+ times: Figaro Overture, Appalachian Spring, Firebird, 1812, Candide Overture, Eine Kleine, the dreaded Canon, Stars and Stripes, New World Symphony, Nutcracker, on and on. If I had to choose between one more “Hoedown from Rodeo” or Jenkins’ variations on Hot Cross Buns, I’m going with the latter. There is no defeat when one has already been defeated, the sweet release of death sounds more appealing than playing the finale of the Firebird one more time. :)

      The “classical” world has always had people like Friml, Romberg, Lehar. There’s room for Rutter and Jenkins too, and if stuffy ol’ DG wants to put Jenkins in the “classical” section, good for them.

      • Timon Wapenaar says:


        Once again, we’re not talking about the music but its reception, when we really should be talking about the former. Just because you play the Figaro overture to death, doesn’t mean it’s “light” music. The fact that you would choose Jenkinseses’s Hot Cross Buns over the Hoedown has more to do with the way the latter has been played to death than anything innate to the composition. This wholescale murder of a large chunk of the repertoire through overexposure has been committed precisely to get bums in seats. Because no right-thinking musician would ever subject himself to yet another freakin ’1812′.

        I hear you about the overplayed sector of the repertoire. This is the fault of management/administration/the captured conductor, and most definitely not the fault of the composer, who is usually (thankfully) dead before he has to watch his music reduced to ‘entertainment’ through overprogramming. But seriously, are we comparing Jenkins and Stravinsky?

        Yes, we’ve always had von Suppes and Eric Coateseses’s, but for some reason we’ve never confused them with the Mahlers and the Brittens. As for DG, to me this is a huge non-argument. The “physical unit” is dead, and the MP3 will go the same way. In the meantime, attempts to milk the market for the last remaining bucks will debase the value of the product.

        If we really want to reengage the audience, what we need to do is the following: scale back on the frequency of performances of symphonies by Beethoven, Brahms, and the rest of those who have come to form the mainstay of the repertoire. A performance of a Beethoven symphony should be something special, for the orchestra as well as the audience. The audience will appreciate this. Fill the resulting hole in the programming with new music. Feel free to programme your Jenkins if you wish, but please allow his music (and that of all the rest) to be appreciated critically, which is to give it the respect it deserves.

        • Timon, we’re not comparing Stravinsky and Jenkins any more than we compare Bach and Orff.

          I can only speak for many American cities: programming “new music” is like serving Superman a Kryptonite sandwich for lunch. I’m in full agreement that new music should be our first order of business- I’m a composer too. We just have to figure out how to do that in the 21st century, when “Honey Boo Boo” makes more in a week than many symphony players do in a year. Copland made a decidedly strategic switch to populist, and it worked. If we as a generation of creators can lighten up with the Bartok pizzes and the colegnos and start putting good melodies into the tunes again, we’ll be just fine.

    • Bodo Redlin says:


      I think your academical approach to contemporary art music requires a trip to the re-education camp. What you write is as blatantly nonsensical as writing that music need only strike the ear in as unpleasant a fashion in order for it to be deemed worthy. Surely the idea that a piece of music can be musically good or bad, absolutely and without equivocation, is determined by the appreciation of larger audiences. Good music, large audiences, bad music, small audiences. Who is any of us to pretend being Apollo flaying the unfortunate Marsyas?

      Orchestras may find themselves in peril because it seems the gulf between the great mass of humanity and the symphonic repertoire is too great to ever bridge, but compromising on the very substance of our music is actually to admit that such a gap is unbridgeable. Yes, the gap between large audiences and self-important bloviating academic “composers” hath no bridges, regardless of how much you wish it weren’t so and that nusic audiences were just as smart as you to prefer Stockhausen to Jenkins.

      no one is admitting defeat if we re-orient ourselves to revising the musical ideals which had been so faithfully preserved in an unbroken line, from Monteverdi to Mahler, only to be undone by the ego trips and conceit of serial, minimalist, atonal, etc. composers..

      Spending time criticising music is the fallback for musicologists to avoid starvation; we shouldn’t bother to criticise the supporters of one or the other school. Who cares about reading about a musical performance which nobody attended in the NYT? Music criticism today is a discipline where audiences vote with their feet and ticket purchases, which determines whether music is good or not. Nobody is particularly interested in what old academics have to say about the subject after they have denied the audiences’ joy of listening to music they like for almost a century. Today’s people don’t need to listen to high-faluting encomiums written about one academic composer by another academic composer. They have the courage and freedom to decide what they like and should like quite on their own. You write:

      “If we really want to reengage the audience, what we need to do is the following: scale back on the frequency of performances of symphonies by Beethoven, Brahms, and the rest of those who have come to form the mainstay of the repertoire. A performance of a Beethoven symphony should be something special, for the orchestra as well as the audience. The audience will appreciate this. Fill the resulting hole in the programming with new music. Feel free to programme your Jenkins if you wish, but please allow his music (and that of all the rest) to be appreciated critically, which is to give it the respect it deserves.”

      But my dear Timon, that is exactly what orchestras have been doing since the 60s and look where it has gotten them! Deficits and declining revenues are the result. It may be news to you, but today’s audiences actually want more of Beethoven, Brahms et al instead of unintelligible brain-constructions that only have meaning for an academic composer and his/her small group of acolytes.

      The mutual self-admiration society of contemporary academic composers has not yet seen the hand writing “Mene, Tekel, u-Pharsin” on the walls of concert halls. But it is there, and the hubris of composers, thinking they’re so much smarter and better at discerning what constitutes good music than audiences, is now coming to an end.

  20. Mr. Boolez says:

    If DG’s standard slipped any further, they’d be signing Philip Glass. With the signing of Jenkins, DG has heralded that they don’t really care about the integrity of their label any more. This is why I know tend to purchase my music from labels like Hyperion, a record that actually cares about the music it produces. -Bz

    • I tend to think that Glass would be a considerably more distinguished choice.
      Whatever one may think of his style, he’s an original voice, and his music has a contemporary flavour. It’s not steeped in pastiche.

  21. I’m stunned that a commercial record company would want to sell records. I mean, who on earth do they think they are?!

  22. Listening to the “Adiemus Colores” promo clip, in conjunction with the Katherine Jenkins-Bryn Terfel duo in “Ave Verum Corpus”, I thought it sounded more like music one might hear in a Broadway show, very simple on the ear, but not without some craft (maybe like Andrew LLoyd Webber? though for purists in the States definitely not Sondheim (e.g. Pacific Overtures) or Rogers and H (South Pacific) ). Now that Karl J has celebrated the people of Wales in the Patagonia (Chubut?), mixing Welsh chorus and indigenous Indian flutes and drums, and watering it down for elevator listening (though why, one might ask, no National Geographic pictures of llamas or penguins, or voiceover bleats of goats or sheep?), maybe he’ll consider composing a “Mass in Time of War and Ode to Broadway, Wall Street, BP and the City of London”. That one could celebrate England’s and the Falklands’ (partially) British population’s pyrrhic victory, starring Attila the Hen, with supporting roles for America’s most famous faux Irishman, Bonzo Reagan, and closet faux Scotsman, Al Haig. The luscious Katherine J. (both of her) could sing “God Save the Queen” again, mixed with excerpts from “Evita”, “Tango Argentina”, and some ghostly Indian themes to remind us of the Conquest of the Desert, and, of course 1812 Overture bursts of cannon fire in the background. Now that one would resuscitate even a dead record company. (Eat your heart out EMI.) Oh, I forgot, he could do a sequel to the “Armed Man” and take it to Las Vegas as the “One Armed Bandit” (with a tip of the hat to Rota’s “Godfather” theme)- my god, a meal of linguine and haggis (no, not haggis, sorry, wrong country (Haig was haggis), instead rarebit and cawl). The creative possibilities are enormous, and with this new affiliation between Welsh art and German industry, it might be just enough to revive an ailing British, if not world, economy mired as it is in its militant madness.

    Now why does this music seem to resonate with the public and DG? Maybe it’s found a pretty good formula of melding topical themes that make people feel good, with easy on the ear pap that put them on automatic pilot, while dumbing down their neurons with NutraSweet and milk chocolate (It’s an alternative the Interior MInistry might think about to replace its present methods of crowd control and pacification.)

    • Bodo Redlin says:


      “Now why does this music seem to resonate with the public and DG? Maybe it’s found a pretty good formula of melding topical themes that make people feel good.”

      Are you intimating that music shouldn’t resonate with people and that it should perforce make them feel bad, otherwise it’s nothing but ear pap?

      Oh dear…I better throw all my Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, Brahms, Mahler, Bruckner etc. etc. recordings in the trash can! Here I thought they were good composers when in reality they are facile hacks who are used to control the masses.

      • Michael Schaffer says:

        None of the composers you mentioned wrote simple “feel good” music. In fact, they wrote a lot of music in which conflict and other emotional levels rather than just “feel good” play an important role. That is one of the reasons these composers are often called “great” composers, because they offer us highly nuanced musical and emotional experiences. If you “feel good” at the end of a Beethoven symphony, it’s because the composer has taken you on an emotional journey to get there, not because it’s just “feel good” music.

      • My dear Bodo, you didn’t read what I said carefully. (Why would you, “it’s just another one of them snide comments from a bozo from the States”). Topical and feel good are ok. Melding it with pap (which doesn’t have to be done) may not be quite as fine. As for the great composers you mentioned, are you suggesting they are as good as Karl or just “touchy feely” good?

  23. deeply disappointing from a record label which in the 70′s was putting out groundbreaking stuff like this:
    incidentally, i did hear from a friend that Karajan put up the money for the recording of Gruppen…not sure how accurate this is. Perhaps this was a mix up with the 2nd Viennese Box set which he did finance.

  24. Mark Stratford says:

    >>Karajan put up the money for the recording of Gruppen…>

    No I think it was the Berg, Schoenberg & Weben box set he self-financed.

    But in a HvK biography (Morrisson?) there is a pic of him sitting in a box intently watching a Gruppen rehearsal.

  25. “Karl Jenkins … [writes] pastiche choral pieces on worthy themes – world peace, motherhood, apple pie, that sort of thing.”

    Interesting, Norman. But the apple pie part sounds suspiciously Yank.

    What would be the British equivalent of apple pie?
    World peace, motherhood, sticky toffee pudding?

    Or, since Jenkins is Welsh, does it need to be pwdin rhiwbob?

  26. Michael Dubonnais says:

    Just because no-one likes your music, this doesn’t mean that what you write is “deep” or “meaningful”.
    Just because your music is popular, this doesn’t make your music rubbish.

    A lot of sour grapes in the world of music.

  27. David Walsh says:

    I have always found the contempt for Jenkins and similar composers to be puzzling, counterproductive, and not at all respectable. To the extent that you might actually value increasing musical understanding and appreciation among the wider public, condemning Jenkins certainly doesn’t serve that purpose. If you do not value that, then who are you talking to and why are you talking? This would be somewhat different if you were complaining about a public broadcaster’s service with a specific mission to provide support for art music.

    A profit-making entity is supposed to make profits, and if you’re going to hate them for it, remember that their action in this instance is really just a reflection of public taste. If you want to change public taste by encouraging consumption of musical with more complexity of form, technique and so on, the worst way to do that is to dismiss crossover as anti-intellectual trash, which you have just done.

    Finally, why do you hate this development when it will actually probably help DG survive? The alienation that this tiny, greying, insular audience seems to get from Jekins and equivalents is bewildering – they are directly helping your preferred music survive both commercially and in the wider culture.

    Take a look at the outside world for just a second, honestly.

an ArtsJournal blog