The Sound Board

Have known about him for years, but never realized he was THAT popular ..... and he does it playing the waltz. The particular world tour was in 1994, but he pulls enormous crowds, wherever he performs.

His big break came in 1995, after he bought a minute of live TV coverage during the break of a major European football/soccer game - Ajax (Amsterdam) vs Bayern Munich, where he lead many thousand Ajax fans in a sing-along of Shostakovich’s hummable – though hardly well-known – Waltz No 2, which was on his about to be released CD.



He said later Ajax did him a huge favour; it scored just before half time. The next week he sold over 200,000 CDs.

Kitsch ....? He certainly does know how to play the violin and manipulate the crowd ......



http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/d ... -interview

He is a cunning businessman indeed. His tours can cost several millions, which he finances privately. So he is taking big financial risks. If a tour doesn't sell well, the loss is on him. With that model he did very well so far, and he created employment for musicians, technicians and so on. For this he certainly deserves credit.

Kitsch? Indeed. But that's not a problem for me. My gripe with him is that he doesn't know or doesn't care about the substance of the music he is exploiting. Take that Shostakovich waltz. That music is so sly, perfidious, and scary if you care to listen. There is so much going on under the surface. It is everything but the harmless Schmalzfetzen Rieu is trying to make of it. In fact, it is just about the last piece of music you can imagine being suitable to be bawled drunkenly in a soccer stadium.
And that is where I stop respecting him as a musician. If he doesn't take seriously the music he plays, I don't take him seriously as a musician. There are many more examples, this here being one of the more disturbing ones:



What does he play the few measures of Beethoven for at the beginning? For a silly - and badly executed at that - joke. So, he isn't going to play Beethoven 5 after all? What a surprise. And thanks god!

If somebody is so careless, or ignorant, to completely do away with the fundamental substance of the music he is interpreting, I can't see a single reason why I should listen to him playing.

That creature embodies everything, and in bloated quantity, I loath about this breed of musician: vaingloriousness, bad taste, populistic and patronizing attitude, a euro symbol where the G- and F-clefs should be, and that sickening habit of mutilating great pieces of music into vaseline.

_

...... but he appeals to the masses worldwide ..... huge crowds everywhere.

Do you have similar feelings about HZ's bombastic extravaganzas? Btw, he announced he'll stop doing those "concerts" - maybe he'll find time now to try and compose some real music.

That's actually the main reason I started this thread - totally different genres, but motivation and lack of substance seem similar.

Udo wrote:...... but he appeals to the masses worldwide ..... huge crowds everywhere.

Yes, the McDonald's of music making.

Daryl wrote:

Udo wrote:...... but he appeals to the masses worldwide ..... huge crowds everywhere.

Yes, the McDonald's of music making.

Trust you include HZ's bombastic extravaganzas in that too, right?

Udo wrote:

Daryl wrote:

Udo wrote:...... but he appeals to the masses worldwide ..... huge crowds everywhere.

Yes, the McDonald's of music making.

Trust you include HZ's bombastic extravaganzas in that too, right?

As I'm not a fan of Hans Zimmer's music, I can't really answer that question.

I thought this was going to be another article about Lindsey Stirling, but this is even worse

Now you made me google Lindsey Stirling. Five minutes of my life I'll never get back.

Then I am the only one here who loves the man. Here is why:

1. He popularized the violin as a likeable instrument in a time when it had become extremely "uncool" to turn up with a violin case for the kids. He and Nigel Kennedy did more in that regard than all the other violinists together.

2. He broke up the static concert format and showed that "orchestra music" and "having fun" are not necessarily opposites.

3. He studied violin with the same teacher as my teacher (André Gertler from Belgium), so I quite relate to the violin style.

4. He started out as a serious orchestra concert master but with a hang to coffee house music and entertainment - quite similar to what I did however in a much much smaller scale.

5. Business-wise he is a self-made-man, he is not "pushed" by companies.

6. He earns his success with honest, proper playing (not just talking or bossing or whatever other successful people do).

7. The one live concert I attended to had very good sound.

8. I know several people first hand that he makes sing, dance and smile to his music in the morning. Some of them are very ill and suffering but the waltzes help. That alone would suffice.

9. Yes there are some cheesy arrangements now and when it comes to TV then this screws up anything anyways, but I have several CDs with his earlier ensembles that I really like.

No, it is not for purists, by no margin. Still I applaud him and am honestly happy for his success.

Also note that he is in the business for about 40 years now, and before he came to TV and football, he toured and toured and toured .... here a concert in a barn, there a concert in a church ... and that for decades. In my book he deserves every bit of fame (but unfortunately a stroke too).

Two words only:
Oy vey.

Making a living-the final heresy.

I wonder what you guys think about this then,

There are a lot of musicians like that. They're talented but they make covers of famous tracks for money and fame. I don't blame them to be honest. If you're not a singer or rapper, that's probably the only way to have a big career in music industry. Here is another example: