Musical Opinion

Musical Opinion, often abbreviated to MO, is a European classical music journal edited and produced in the UK. It is currently among the oldest such journals to be still publishing in the UK, having been continuously in publication since 1877.

In its first year Musical Opinion critically reviewed Brahms' new Second Symphony, and in 1879 his Violin Concerto. The October 1936 issue carried an interview with Rachmaninov and championed the young William Walton as Britain's most exciting young composer.

In 1927, when the editor and proprietor was Arthur W. Fitzsimmons (d. 1948), the composer Havergal Brian became assistant editor of Musical Opinion. He held the post until 1940. This period could be said to have been its heyday: it was then a leading journal in its field, with each issue comprising over 100 large-format pages and a wide range of subject-matter (including much contemporary music) being covered by some of the most prominent British writers on music of the time. Regular contributors included Gerald Abraham, Eric Blom, Dmitri Calvocoressi, Eaglefield Hull, Alfred Kalmus, Basil Maine and Percy Scholes.[1]

In 1921 Musical Opinion launched a sister magazine, The Organ.

Between 1984 and 2009, Musical Opinion was edited by Denby Richards. As of April 2009 its editor is Robert Matthew-Walker (who is editor of the Organ in addition).

From the time of its first issue (September 1877), Musical Opinion appeared monthly; but in the 1990s increasing production and postal costs threatened the magazine's survival. In 1994 Musical Opinion became a quarterly publication—with regular subscribers being kept up to date with information and reviews in the intervening months by means of 'Supplements' posted to them. In 2000 these supplements were reduced from two per quarter to one.

In 2003, however, Musical Opinion abandoned the idea of posted 'Supplements' and once more became a straightforward 'newsstand' publication appearing quarterly.

Notes
  1. Havergal Brian on Music. Volume One: British Music edited by Malcolm MacDonald (London: Toccata Press, 1986, ISBN 0-907689-19-1), p. 17.
gollark: This isn't really "repair"y, inasmuch as you can't fix it if it breaks unless you happen to be really good at reverse engineering.
gollark: Maybe what you mean is banning DRM-ish things, so you can definitely copy the program and run it elsewhere and such?
gollark: Well, you can't actually run the program if you don't have... the program, DRM or no.
gollark: A lot of things now do the fourth.
gollark: If I want to give someone access to some software, I can do MANY things:- give them the binary, which they can run locally but not edit very easily- give them a really obfuscated binary, which would be even harder to edit- give them source code, which is fairly easy to edit (or a somewhat obfuscated form, or without documentation or whatever, but same sort of idea)- not actually give them it at all, and just give them a webservice or something they can use remotely
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.