TromboneChat

You may notice that Zac has an intermittent big band.  He doesn't have a permanent ensemble like a symphony orchestra.  All his players, who may be "regulars", are doing something else when he is not running his ensemble.  A lot of big bands nowadays, even the "ghost" bands, are not full-time employment.

A symphony orchestra, on the other hand, is a full-time employer at the top tier.  This makes the money raising extremely hard.  Generally there is only one per large city and the city uses it as a point of pride much like a sports team.  But pride is not money and taxpayers don't want to pay for this pride (although they seem to want to pay for stadiums for the sports teams).

Our local professional orchestra, which I got to sub in once this past season, is going through a rough patch financially. They cancelled an annual outdoor Memorial Day show due to lack of sponsorship and next season they have cut back from 5 concerts to 4. And for the last concert this past season, they changed the program from Wagner to Mozart to cut back on the number of players they had to use. If you look around the audience, most of the crowd is over 60 (which will be me in 5 years ). I wonder who will be coming to concerts in 20 years?

Quote from: MikeBMiller on Jun 02, 2016, 06:40AMIf you look around the audience, most of the crowd is over 60 (which will be me in 5 years ). I wonder who will be coming to concerts in 20 years?

You know..... I can show you articles stating this exact same point and asking the same question going back to the 1920s. The simple truth is, most people develop a taste for classical music later in life and come to concerts after their kids move out. Why? Who knows. That's just the way it has been and judging by the number of articles dating back close to a century, that's probably not going to change.

Quote from: MikeBMiller on Jun 02, 2016, 06:40AMIf you look around the audience, most of the crowd is over 60 (which will be me in 5 years ). I wonder who will be coming to concerts in 20 years?

What Harold said...that old saw of classical music losing fans because of graying audiences has been around for ages, and it doesn't hold water. As long as there are humans on the planet there is a never-ending supply of aging audiences.

Quote from: patrickosmith on Jun 02, 2016, 03:10AMTime for another extract/quote from my Frank Crisafulli archives.

" ... All joking aside, this is a painful area for me. We prepare many young people, not an overly large number though, who can handle any situation in any orchestra. There are always players who can do this. Mind you, there are fine music schools across the country. Some of them almost as good as this one (laughter). I hear people from these places and they are well-coached and well-trained. I work with them, but what, really, can I promise them? Nothing. We make no false promises here at Northwestern.

What is really hurtful to me is when a young man announces that if he can't play in an orchestra then he doesn't want any part of music. He doesn't want to teach. I think that is rather sad. I point out to him that I teach and I enjoy it. Others teach and they enjoy it. I think that is a very fortunate and wonderful thing. Of course, if they don't want to or like to teach, then it is just as well that they don't.

The fact remains that this is a terrible road [professionally playing] because in many cases they may have to settle for a job in some little orchestra. Probably not even earning a living wage. Major orchestras today are looking for performers who have established themselves with another orchestra. They want someone who went out and professionally auditioned, was accepted, and remained for some years: in effect raiding another orchestra. They reason that someone has made a decision which in turn helps them.

Oddly enough, the Chicago Symphony listens to all applicants and evaluates them. This is not done everywhere. In any case, students who hope to play professionally, while I say the chances are very slight, cannot waste their time and energy worrying about this end. Their time should be spent in preparation. The tremendous discipline necessary is a marvelous thing for any human being and certainly will help them later in life."


I don't think of it so much as sad as inexperienced.

Teaching music vs performing music are two VERY different animals. My professional experiences have spanned everything thing from teaching private lessons to master classes and clinics to a full-time position as a band director, as well as all the performing work I do. Just like performing, teaching is a calling - at least, school teaching is. It's hard, thankless (mostly), disconnects you from music more than you would expect, and exhausting. I have always enjoyed the actual act of teaching, but public and private school teaching allows very little teaching currently - the paperwork load, management of students, parents, and administration, and other non-music work makes up the majority of a teachers day.

Knowing what I know now, I would probably say the same thing, when it comes to being asked about school teaching. I like master classes and clinics for classroom teaching, because you don't have the same pressures and get to teach, and private teaching because if a student is more of a problem than a pleasure I have the freedom to drop them.

It comes down to knowing who you are, what you want, and having some flexibility to explore options that come up. They are inexperienced - at some point, they will try some type of teaching. If they don't enjoy it, they probably will stop. But, if they love music that much, they will probably always play, even if they get another day gig and play for fun.

I wouldn't worry too much about it, personally. I said some stupid stuff when I was young - I don't regret so much as know that when I said it, I was a different person, and have the ability to recognize that and be willing and open to change.

Quote from: BGuttman on Jun 02, 2016, 06:16AMGenerally there is only one per large city and the city uses it as a point of pride much like a sports team.  But pride is not money and taxpayers don't want to pay for this pride (although they seem to want to pay for stadiums for the sports teams).

They seem to want to pay for Cirque du Soleil, Andre Rieu, various quasi-classical musicals and those classical spectaculars with cannons for the 1812 Overture and a Carnival of the Animals with real animals. There's been a recent vogue for movie and video game screenings with a live orchestral accompaniment, which harks back to the early days of cinema.

I think there's a few commercial tricks being missed by symphony orchestras by not emulating these financially successful shows. If they want to maintain a more highbrow approach well, Copland wrote films scores didn't he? So did Prokofiev and Walton. The Disney Fantasia is perhaps another idea and think of all the fun to be had doing a new fantasia with Strauss tone poems or Sheherezade or the Pines of Rome.

We don't have to keep playing an overture starting at 7:30 every saturday night, then a piano/violin concerto, then Tchaik 4/Brahms1/Beethoven 5 while wearing tails. A bit of variety might perk everyone up, punters and players alike.

Quote from: sonicsilver on Jun 02, 2016, 08:56AMThey seem to want to pay for Cirque du Soleil, Andre Rieu, various quasi-classical musicals and those classical spectaculars with cannons for the 1812 Overture and a Carnival of the Animals with real animals. There's been a recent vogue for movie and video game screenings with a live orchestral accompaniment, which harks back to the early days of cinema.

I think there's a few commercial tricks being missed by symphony orchestras by not emulating these financially successful shows. If they want to maintain a more highbrow approach well, Copland wrote films scores didn't he? So did Prokofiev and Walton. The Disney Fantasia is perhaps another idea and think of all the fun to be had doing a new fantasia with Strauss tone poems or Sheherezade or the Pines of Rome.

We don't have to keep playing an overture starting at 7:30 every saturday night, then a piano/violin concerto, then Tchaik 4/Brahms1/Beethoven 5 while wearing tails. A bit of variety might perk everyone up, punters and players alike.



The question is, are they financially successful. These types of shows are usually big orchestras which means lots of subs, appropriate venues, sound, lighting, advertising, rights and the extra rehearsals that are needed (a good orchestra can throw a beethoven symphony together in 2 rehearsals if needs be). I don't know what the numbers would be but I doubt that they are much more finacially viable than the old stuffy concert product.
That being said, these event shows are great advertising for the orchestra, it gets new people to the orchestra who wouldn't normally attend, if linked in with a good campaign to sell tickets and subscriptions to other events, it is worth it.

You also must remember that many (rich) subscribers and musicians do not like these events. If they are badly done they can also isolate long time atendees and orchestra members. We are a precious bunch.

When the idea of shrinkinh audiences comes up, I like to think of it slightly differently. Rather than changing WHAT we play, we change HOW we present it. This means finding abd enlarging our audience and welcoming new audiences.
Funnily enough, when Bamberg symphony tried to be hip and present student concerts in t-shirts and jeans, the students reacted against it. They wanted tails and ball gowns. I notice it here also, the younger audience members are often the ones who dress up and make the performance an event.
To get these people in and not male them feel uncomfortable is however the issue. There has to be wide and varied marketing and effective communication. Talking about the music, meeting the musicians and making a performance an exciting event is as (if not more) important than the programming itself.

Last I checked Cirque doesn't have many full orchestras on its roster. The last gig i was sounded out for had a 9 piece band.  It's a circus gig as well, so I don't know why anyone is attempting to compare it to the symphony model. It's an entirely different thing.

Note: when I say circus gig, I don't say that as a bad thing. The musicianship in circus bands is bar none and the people are great. The Cirque gig is the coolest circus gig on the planet, pays well, and I dig the music. I would've loved to do it had my life not gotten in the way. I may still - we'll see if I get another offer somewhere down the line.

My point is that circus gigs and symphony gigs are entirely different from one another... apples and oranges.


I like Dombat's idea - make it an event - reach out to younger audiences. Try this: teach 'em how to sarabande and host a dance.

Quote from: gbedinger on Jun 02, 2016, 07:44AMWhat Harold said...that old saw of classical music losing fans because of graying audiences has been around for ages, and it doesn't hold water. As long as there are humans on the planet there is a never-ending supply of aging audiences.

Since appointing a new, young and very talented music director, our orchestra has been doing better than ever in the demographics department.  His programming is vastly different from the same old same old, without veering towards pops music, video game concerts, etc.  For example, one concert set next season will be a semi-staged reading of The Barber of Seville.  We play a lot of works by living composers.  I don't have any figures on attendance by age, but simply by looking out, I can see our audience is far from geriatric.  And for the last two seasons, we have been regularly selling out concerts, something which has never happened in the over ten years I've played there.

Of course, this a small, regional orchestra, and what works for us may not be applicable to a larger, full time orchestra.

Well... you point out a few of the differences but Cirque is a large artistic show with a big cast (not so many musicians) and crew that makes a lot of money. I would have thought the parallel between it and a ballet/opera house is a fair one.

One of the things that creates a buzz in performances is allowing the audience to get close. They are often surprised that there are real people striving to conjure music apparently from silence, sound that you can almost reach out and touch in the air, and a sense of physical effort and energy that really excites people. This effect is particularly pronounced on young people, who have only ever heard music through their earbuds. It makes a virtuous feedback loop between performers and audience and makes all the hard practice feel worthwhile. When performing groups are physically remote from their audiences it dulls this effect. Maybe a change in venue design or seating plans is in order.

Quote from: sonicsilver on Jun 02, 2016, 10:20AMWell... you point out a few of the differences but Cirque is a large artistic show with a big cast (not so many musicians) and crew that makes a lot of money. I would have thought the parallel between it and a ballet/opera house is a fair one.

similar, but not the same.

Cirque is a money maker, it wouldn't exist if it weren't. It's new, it's entertaining, it's artistically done, but it is popular entertainment. It makes money therefore it exists. Maybe in a hundred years Cirque-style entertainment will be state sponsored and won't have to rely on profitability to exist...

 The Ballet/Opera house is dedicated to preserving an important cultural event and its existence shouldn't be decided over revenue streams. It exists because it's historically important. You don't bulldoze the Pantheon to make way for a shopping mall.

I like your idea of setting up the venue better for personal interaction. It may not work with a full on symphony but would be perfect for chamber ensembles.

Maybe coliseum style seating with a smaller stage?

One major difference between a traveling show like a Circus and a local symphony is that the Circus (or Andre Rieux) needs to create ONE show that travels from place to place.  A symphony, on the other hand, will often do one show per week for a 40 week season.  And an Opera Company will do different performances every night (and some matinees as well) as part of a 12-20 show repertoire (that can change from season to season).

The only time any fixed ensemble will have a show like that is a ballet company doing a 3 week run of Nutcracker around Christmas time (and that usually makes good money -- enough to support the much less popular regular shows).

Quote from: Exzaclee on Jun 02, 2016, 10:38AMI like your idea of setting up the venue better for personal interaction.


Disney Concert Hall in LA

http://www.laphil.com/tickets/seating-chart#show=1

Quote from: BGuttman on Jun 02, 2016, 11:18AMOne major difference between a traveling show like a Circus and a local symphony is that the Circus (or Andre Rieux) needs to create ONE show that travels from place to place.  A symphony, on the other hand, will often do one show per week for a 40 week season.  And an Opera Company will do different performances every night (and some matinees as well) as part of a 12-20 show repertoire (that can change from season to season).Noting, of course, that some of Cirque du Soleil's offerings don't travel, but draw their audience from people who do (I'm thinking of the Las Vegas shows).

Quote from: itisunknown on Jun 02, 2016, 11:20AMDisney Concert Hall in LA

http://www.laphil.com/tickets/seating-chart#show=1

Unfortunately, the attractive seats behind the orchestra (in Los Angeles and other halls that have such seating) are often not sold for concerts.  Either reserved for a chorus when needed, or (usually) empty, or sold at the last minute for otherwise sold-out events. 

I personally love to sit there.  A couple of years ago, I attended a Vienna Philharmonic concert conducted by Lorin Maazel (his last public appearance) where I sat in the first row, just behind the French horns and trombones - I could read the music on their stands.  And I was able to chat with the players after the concert - and more closely examine the Vienna horns with their "Pumpenvalves" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_horn).  Maazel (who died a few months later) was his usual grumpy self, but elicited a great performance (Schubert & Mahler) - and we could watch every motion and facial expression from up close; he actually smiled at the end.  I felt as if I were in the orchestra, just a row behind my usual place in the trombone section! 

Don't know if this was posted, but here is what a librarian does: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uGsWORyKlg

Just to sort of chime in on the circus comparison, having played for symphonies, ballet/theatres, and the circus, I feel that they are very different.

In the symphony, although I loved playing the music, I always felt a great deal of pressure. Being hyperaware of tuning within your section, and then again within the orchestra. Burning a hole in the conductor's hand with your eyes, trying to catch every little nuance EXACTLY as he's delivering it. Knowing that every mistake is not only a reflection on you, it is a reflection on your peers and mars their performance too. Knowing that every wrong note and every tuning issue is a ticking time bomb to the end of your career.

In the pit orchestra this pressure was slightly lessened, but still there, and there were other types of tension. Things happening on stage that we couldn't see, yet were expected to enhance via the conductor's interpretation. Unending problems with acoustics, space, line of sight in the pit. And a worrisome feeling (especially when the low brass are moved to another room with a monitor) that you're not exactly wanted or welcome at the same level as the artists visibly performing on stage. That coupled with the symphony-like fears about the slightest mistake ruining your future...not fun. I always loved playing theatre music, especially opera, but often it was less enjoyable because you could never just PLAY.

In the circus there are pressures, but not like these. The band is in the background, being the soundtrack, just as it would be for a ballet or opera. And yet unlike in those settings, we're visible to everyone in the arena for the entire two hour show, so if people want to see us work they can. I think that's wonderful. Still, most patrons don't even realize that there's a live band despite our visibility. At the moment that's ok, because even a button-pushing digital DJ can't react, catch cues, and enhance what circus performers (especially animals) are doing like a live band can. I will always remember the first time we rehearsed with the Mongolian act...they'd been rehearsing with the aid of a DJ and computer track for weeks. We played their music for the first time while they performed, and afterward they all turned around and applauded us. In my experience, the circus environment as it is now lends a sense of pride to the work, a feeling of usefulness and purpose and of being wanted, and this in turn staves off bitterness.

In the circus, I can switch instruments and mouthpieces whenever I feel like it. I even played the Pbone once for half a show (before it overheated haha). I can crack notes sometimes. I won't get fired for being caught off-guard by a change in the show, or for missing an unplanned cue once in a blue moon. It took me such a long time to RELAX at this gig. I was so used to years of orchestral preparation...trying to play as perfectly as possible, don't ruin it for everyone, don't ruin your musical future by making an obvious mistake, etc etc, that when I got this gig and Brett sat me down and explained that he wouldn't be firing me for the next six months no matter what I did, I laughed. YEAH RIGHT. It had to be some kind of trick.

To quote the original article:
QuoteFrederick Zenone, a longtime orchestra labor leader and a cellist in the National Symphony, said by telephone last week that while a lot of orchestra players are generally content, unhappiness over certain issues is widespread. Mr. Zenone couldn't find one single reason but mentioned several, including limited access to advancement and personal growth, and a lack of preparation by teachers for what orchestra life will be like.

I would absolutely agree with these. How can you grow personally when any change you make might end your career? How can you advance when you've got to reaudition annually just to keep the place you have? How can you grow as a musician if your orchestra puts machinelike precision ahead of a passionate performance that will reach the hearts (and maybe even the wallets) in the audience?

As far as lack of preparation, I have to say that for honing my skills on the trombone, college was great. But that's NOT what a career in music is all about. I can't recall any classes on orchestra organizational structure, or funding, or booking, or politics. I can't recall any "AFM 101" courses that explained even the basics of the musician's union (it's history, what it actually does, when you should consider joining). I have no idea if other schools might have offered such knowledge. But in my opinion, all music schools should. The AFM shouldn't be a mystery. Where your paycheck will be coming from if you get into an orchestra shouldn't be a mystery. But for a whole lot of students and musicians, it is. And so I can imagine that even if you're one of the lucky few who earns a spot in a major orchestra, you'll be shocked, and disheartened, and eventually bogged down and made bitter by all of the politics involved. The earlier musicians are made aware of these FACTS of the orchestral music industry, the better they can handle them, and the more they can CONTRIBUTE.

To go back to the pressures of orchestral playing, to be clear, of course I think it's a good thing to strive for perfection even if it's stressful to do. And it's an important way to identify and raise up the best of the best musicians out there. The top symphonies and their musicians are downright amazing and those folks deserve the highest respect for all they've done to get to where they are. But I think sometimes, for symphonies both major and minor, perfection becomes too much the focus, and it takes the joy out of the craft.

I'm debating whether I should try to take auditions again once I leave the circus. I'm not sure that I'm one of those rare folks who can obtain the level of musical perfection that seems to be required. Although I would love to play perfectly and I do constantly work very hard to improve, I also refuse to lose sleep over being a human being who cracks a note sometimes, and if that means I'm not cut out for orchestral work, I'll have to accept that.

A computer can do perfection. But can a computer convey music emotionally like I can? I think not.

Megan,
YOUR post is one of the kinds of thing that keep me reading and responding to this forum!
Beautifully done!

Quote from: boneagain on Sep 17, 2016, 04:47AMMegan,
YOUR post is one of the kinds of thing that keep me reading and responding to this forum!
Beautifully done!


Thanks, sorry it's so long. I like to write a little too much sometimes!
It's just my perspective on the issue, as someone who's not played with a major symphony, but did make a strong effort to get there.

Don't apologize. It was good-long. I have the attention span of a goldfish and I read every word.

That's a post that every young player considering their future careers ought to read.

Megan, I'm so happy for you that you found the right niche, and I hope more aspiring players do read your post and get the message that there are many paths to a beautiful, successful life in music and with music. One of our recent graduates from Boston University has been touring with Blast, and is now heading off for a cruise ship. He's having a blast, literally!.

At the same time, I want to say that the orchestral life doesn't have to be like your experience. I try to teach my students that you can't guarantee perfect performance, but you CAN guarantee perfect intention, which will help you get close more often than not.

- You can practice so that your personal rhythm and intonation are solid and based on what you hear in your musical imagination (the machines are only useful in so far as they can help you clarify your own imagination). 

- You can know what you're playing well enough that you know the best part of the orchestra to listen and play with for any particular passage. In my section of the Rhode Island Philharmonic, the principal trombone rarely gives cues to the section, but we all agree on how to play with what we are seeing from the conductor and (more important) hearing from the rest of the orchestra, so we play very well together.

- You can know who you are accompanying at any moment in an orchestra and phrase with them.

- Likewise, you can know when YOUR line is the most important one and take that moment to shine, to play that passage the way YOU hear it. Nobody can take that away from you.

These are just the beginning. For me, playing in an orchestra is exhilarating, but I don't expect everybody to have that same experience.

Ideally, for me, "perfection" - if it exists, which I doubt - is a byproduct of more important goals, not the goal itself.

Thanks!
I am aware that every gig is temporary, and I'm enjoying this one for as long as I'm able with a great deal of gratitude.

I totally agree with you Gabe and can relate to all of the examples and experiences you've mentioned. Maybe I should have added a disclaimer to my post: the contextual moments that I mentioned there are not meant to express my entire experience with orchestral playing. I specifically mentioned "stressful" incidences because that was the topic of this thread: reasons why symphony orchestra members might be dissatisfied with their work despite having worked so hard to get those gigs. And then on top of that comparisons were made between various ensembles, so I tried to compare stressful things among each. As I haven't been in a major symphony, all I can do is try to empathize and relate using my own experiences of what "orchestral stress" feels like. But those stresses are just personal examples, and only a tiny part of a larger experience. Overall I love orchestral playing! Wouldn't have centered my career around it if I didn't!

To sum it up, my post was subjective, please season accordingly

There should have been an episode of The Flintstones where the Great Gazoo switches Fred around with a symphony player for a day so the kids could see it's not all tuxedo wishes and classical dreams.

There should have been an episode of The Flintstones where the Great Gazoo switches Fred around with a symphony player for a day so the kids could see it's not all tuxedo wishes and classical dreams.