Live from the Met cancellation

[Alison]

The schedule seems a lot fresher now IMHO.

The sound quality from the Met rarely seemed anything approaching hi-fi.

The series had a jolly long run and it can be good to move on.

[amateur51]

When I first came upon this thread I assumed it would concern the 'live' mass shredding of documents at New Scotland Yard and Sir Bernard Hogan Hagen Who's recent edict that this must stop!

[Flosshilde]

Especially for Levine1 - Andrea Chenier live from the Met tonight, 6.00

[Vile Consort]

Frankly, I am glad to see the back of it. The oleaginous double-act presentation is execrable. The audiences ruin everything by applauding over the music. The actual performances are adequate but nothing to write home about.

[Frances_iom]

... The oleaginous double-act presentation is execrable. The audiences ruin everything by applauding over the music. ...

The presenters appear to be quite popular on the American network - I suspect it is a total disconnect between older generation on this side of the Atlantic and the what appears to be close to the norm in US based presentation.
On 'badly behaving' audiences - the same is now happening at RHO - at Friday's Faust I could hear one person texting during the overture/first act - applause doesn't wait for music to die away tho nothing like as bad as the Met audience - the US habit of applauding a set change luckily hasn't yet taken off here but in ballet the first appearnce of certain dancers on stage is greated with wild applause to the loss of any musical introduction

[johnn10]

And Andrea Chenier definitely fell into the category of nothing to write home about . If you look at the Met website it is clear they are finding it difficult to fill the house for most performances. I predict trouble ahead, but they should be ok for the next season as Levine is announced as being fully baton fit and due to conduct six operas.

Frankly, I am glad to see the back of it. The oleaginous double-act presentation is execrable. The audiences ruin everything by applauding over the music. The actual performances are adequate but nothing to write home about.

[Flosshilde]

They have so many productions - 26 for the current season! - that some of them are bound to be duds. It's a case of never mind the quality, feel the width. Having said that it does mean that works that aren't in the top level get an airing, & some of them aren't deservedly neglected.

However, I think that to make the second-tier ones worth listening to they need top-quality singers; unfortunately that's not oftyen the case with the Met.

[johnn10]

.but as all the singers are hyped up in the publicity material it must be difficult for the novice to know who to look out for. Rather like the radio broadcasts -anything less than enthusiastic strictly forbidden. The last time I looked at the their twitter field there was only one out of about 20 messges from the Met which did not include at least one exclamation mark. The top prices for some performances is $495. I would want to be sure of having a really good evening for even half that price.

[MrGongGong]

The oleaginous double-act presentation is execrable.

What a wonderful turn of phrase

and spot on IMV

[Barbirollians]

A so-so performance to my ears . I am not sure about the point of that quiz - surely the most camp programme on radio but nothing wrong with that - it is just rather self-regarding and not very illuminating.

[Flosshilde]

Actually the part of the broadcast I like the most!

Saturday's included a round of 'guilty pleasures' which was introduced with some not very complimentary comments about Andrea Chenier & the idea that listening to it was to indulge in something that was not quite.

[Prommer]

I heard this last night, on and off - was at a very relaxed, civilised dinner party where it was on as background music, believe it or not. Definitely nothing special. But I like the piece: the Orfeo recording with Tebaldi and Corelli in Vienna conducted by Von Matacic in 1960 is white hot...!