Page 249 - Weiss, Jernej, ur./ed. 2024. Glasbena kritika – nekoč in danes ▪︎ Music Criticism – Yesterday and Today. Koper/Ljubljana: Založba Univerze na Primorskem in Festival Ljubljana. Studia musicologica Labacensia, 7
P. 249
symphonic matinees of jeunesses musicales slovenia: the first two decades
only one concerto or one symphony was presented and that the duration of
the matinee was half that of a normal season ticket concert.
Within my analysis, I focused on the following four aspects of the col-
lected data:
– Number of reviews by year
– Number of reviews per newspaper
– Author, year, and number of reviews
– The author, the newspaper and the critic’s sympathy. To illustrate
this trend, I have also chosen some quotes to illustrate the differ-
ent levels of favour, which also illustrate the analysis in the text.
In the following section, I present and analyse the data in terms of
these four categories.
Number of reviews by year
This section deals with the frequency of reviews published per year, and its
aim is to discern the overall distribution of reviews over the years. The dis-
tribution of reviews is given in Figure 1.
Number of reviews by year
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
T1111111111111111o9999999999999999t8777877888898898al9250126014330189
GK
Figure 1: Frequency of reviews per year from 1970 to 1991.
249
only one concerto or one symphony was presented and that the duration of
the matinee was half that of a normal season ticket concert.
Within my analysis, I focused on the following four aspects of the col-
lected data:
– Number of reviews by year
– Number of reviews per newspaper
– Author, year, and number of reviews
– The author, the newspaper and the critic’s sympathy. To illustrate
this trend, I have also chosen some quotes to illustrate the differ-
ent levels of favour, which also illustrate the analysis in the text.
In the following section, I present and analyse the data in terms of
these four categories.
Number of reviews by year
This section deals with the frequency of reviews published per year, and its
aim is to discern the overall distribution of reviews over the years. The dis-
tribution of reviews is given in Figure 1.
Number of reviews by year
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
T1111111111111111o9999999999999999t8777877888898898al9250126014330189
GK
Figure 1: Frequency of reviews per year from 1970 to 1991.
249
