What I wanted to address is the timing issue. In most cases reviews are about performances that happened in the past, and will not be repeated in the near future. While it may be interesting to those who live vicariously to read about what they cannot experience for themselves, I believe that most of us would prefer to read an intelligent review before seeing a performance, just as we usually read a book review before buying and reading a book, and read a movie review before selecting a movie to see in the theater or even at home. What we want is knowledge prior to making choice, not knowledge after there is no longer an opportunity to make a choice. In some cases, as with runs of operas and plays, opening night reviews are very useful to those of us who would potentially go to the opera or attend the play–what you write may well influence our decision to go, or not to go. But many concerts, particularly local concerts of classical music happen once or twice, and that’s it.

What if reviewers were to be invited to sit in on a rehearsal, perhaps a week or two before the actual concert, and to write the review and have it published sufficiently prior to the concert that this review could actually impact our awareness of the concert and our willingness to go to it? I know I am suggesting an unusual collaboration between artists and reviewers, but why not? This would enhance the value attached to the review and to the reviewer. And reviews would have more depth if they involved the reviewer coming into contact with the performers.

I completely agree with the other comments to the effect that the only reviews that are valuable to either performers or audience are those that are well informed and scrupulously honest.

I often wonder what the reviewer brings to the table in regard to their personal experiences and biases (we all have them!). I don’t like bad reviews based on the taste of the reviewer (ie. “I can’t stand this combination of instruments”), but a honest review is greatly appreciated. I do wish there were more educated reviewers!

Keep writing ‘em

I think it is very important to differentiate bad (means negative) reviews and just bad review, or the review written from the standpoint of sub-expectable reference points. I love negative review. I love those bitchy, hard to please reviewers who set standards and expectations insanely high, if they do. It requires a great talent to write great reviews, not less then to compose a great peace. It is no surprise that history keeps much more name of famous composer or performers then the names of great reviewers. The other thing is that no one pays for “better” reviews….

Still, I think the greatest damage does not come from negative reviews but from those semi-idiotic exuberant reviews that are unfortunately filed all print “paid” publications. The orchestra was out of tune, played the Fists Movement of the Beethoven Second as it was the Offenbach’s can-can and the conductor was so incapable that he was afraid to make eye contact with public, however the “reviews” drools about “great interpretation” and unique vintage sound. I think those “patronage” reviews are something that do the most damage. I wish you professionals would battle them. I wish a musician after an unambiguously bad performance followed by a great review would stand up and inform public that the reviewer was a Moron. Who knows, then we might not have too many Morons-reviewers…

I am too idealistic?

Some good points were raised and, in a most interesting manner..

THANKS!

Perhaps we could explore the different functions of reviews:

1. Inform the general audience about the event. For movie reviews, this is the most important for the general reader who wants to know which movie would be most suitable to see. For a one-time musical performance this is irrelevant and useless. Perhaps for a performer on tour the newspaper should reprint the review from the previous city on the day before the concert.

2. Inform and edify the fans. Many of us feel like “insiders” vicariously through the reviews and feature articles. We like to learn about standard and unusual repertoire and how these pieces can be most effectively played.

3. Marketing and business. Whether you like it or not, you are a kind of “Consumer Reports” for booking agents and producers. A recording tells you if an artist can play well under the best circumstances; the reviews tell you whether he can deliver the goods again and again in a different city each night. Yes, your opinion carries a lot of weight, even as one of many critics’ opinions. It’s normal to want to give thanks to the reviewer for a good review, but maybe it would be more appropriate to thank the piano tuner, the lighting designer and the house and stage managers.