[A]ignore the expenses of live performances.

　　[B]reject most kinds of recorded performances.

　　[C]exaggerate the variety of live performances.

　　[D]overestimate the value of live performances.

　　解析：作者的觀點：The author believes，這個是在關注定位詞devoted concertgoers后的另外一個關鍵點;作者認為concertgoers miss the point;但具體是什么，需要看選項了。A ,忽略了現場演奏的費用，B,拒絕大多數的唱片演奏。這兩個是沒有根據的屬于未提及選項。C有一定的干擾性：the variety of live performances，二段中是有variety 這個單詞的，并且在段落中出現了好多并列的成分，這樣對于很多沒有讀懂原文的同學其實是會產生視覺干擾的。但是聽kevin老師的話的同學，會做一個主干的分析發現the value of live performances這個賓語和動詞是沒有原文依據的。最后一個選項之所以正確是由于：作者在一直說唱片的好，而前面又說concertgoers認為現場演奏不會被唱片代替。這樣就是論點上的正話反說了。答案就應該是最后一個了。高估了現場表演的價值。這就是對于觀點的把握，多么重要啊!!!

　　24. According to the text, which of the following is true of recordings?

　　[A]They are often inferior to live concerts in quality.

　　[B]They are easily accessible to the general public.

　　[C]They help improve the quality of music.

　　[D]They have only covered masterpieces.

　　解析：抓住關鍵詞：recordings根據行文順序與題目基本一致的原則，停在倒數第二段：There recordings are cheap, available everywhere, and very often much higher in artistic quality than today’s live performances; moreover, they can be “consumed” at a time and place of the listener’s choosing. The widespread availability of such recordings has thus brought about a crisis in the institution of the traditional classical concert.一連串的描述就是B.干擾項是C : They help improve the quality of music.聽Kevin的分析主謂賓，回文章中定位你會發現，文章中說的是唱片中的表演的質量要比現在的好，但是并沒有說：help improve the quality of music.分析選項主謂賓，和原文一一對應就一定能消除這樣的視覺干擾。[A]They are often inferior to live concerts in quality.和原文表訴相反。[D]They have only covered masterpieces.原文沒有提及。讀者不要自作聰明的覺得，嗯，老師講過的出現過often 和only的選項太絕對了，不能選。這樣的排除是有風險的也是，Kevin老師一直都不會這樣講的。教育部命題中心可不可以那天就用一個only 做正確選項。當然可以了!所以從小啊打好基礎!

　　25. Regarding Gilbert’s role in revitalizing the Philharmonic, the author feels

　　[A]doubtful. [B]enthusiastic.

　　[C]confident. [D]puzzled.

　　解析：問作者的態度，主體是作者，對象是Gilbert’s role in revitalizing the Philharmonic從具體表述出發尋找相應的態度表達詞：But what will be the nature of that difference? Merely expanding the orchestra’s repertoire will not be enough.一個but ,一個?，一個not就把這種不確定性給出來了。于是這就是選A doubtful.記得技巧派曾經有這樣的總結：puzzled 和doubtful 都是所謂的永陪詞匯，這樣的技巧還是不要的好啊。

　　Text 2

　　When Liam McGee departed as president of Bank of America in August, his explanation was surprisingly straight up. Rather than cloaking his exit in the usual vague excuses, he came right out and said he was leaving “to pursue my goal of running a company.” Broadcasting his ambition was “very much my decision,” McGee says. Within two weeks, he was talking for the first time with the board of Hartford Financial Services Group, which named him CEO and chairman on September 29.

　　當八月份，Liam McGee以總裁的身份從美國銀行離職的時候，他的解釋出人意料的直白。他沒有忸怩的用平常的模糊的理由來遮掩他的離開，他很坦誠的講他離開就是為了去追求他經營一家公司的目標。McGee說宣揚自己的目標就是自己的決定。兩周后，他第一次和Hartford Financial Services Group的董事會第一次會談，這家公司在9月29日提名他為董事會主席和CEO.

　　McGee says leaving without a position lined up gave him time to reflect on what kind of company he wanted to run. It also sent a clear message to the outside world about his aspirations. And McGee isn’t alone. In recent weeks the No.2 executives at Avon and American Express quit with the explanation that they were looking for a CEO post. As boards scrutinize succession plans in response to shareholder pressure, executives who don’t get the nod also may wish to move on. A turbulent business environment also has senior managers cautious of letting vague pronouncements cloud their reputations.

　　他說在離開的時候并沒有找好后面的職位(下家)，使他有時間去反思他到底想去經營一家什么樣的公司。這同時也就他的激情和決心，給了外界一個清晰的信號。這樣做的并不只是McGee一個人。最近幾周，Avon and American Express的一些高級經理離職并解釋說想需找一個ceo的職位。當董事會迫于股東的壓力對一系列的計劃進行審查的時候，那些計劃被否定掉的經理們也會想離開。激烈的商業環境同樣使得高級經理很小心，模糊的表態可能會破壞他們的聲譽。