|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.30.248.240
In Reply to: The hall design is as important as the orchestra itself or the conductor? posted by tinear on February 14, 2007 at 04:38:42:
Unlike you I would vastly prefer to hear the BPO in the high school gym than vice-versa. (And I've *played* in a number of high school gyms! ;-) )I'm going to hear the music. If the sound is good, so much the better. That goes for recordings, too.
"It is apparent that, should a community set out to have a wonderful orchestra, they place most emphasis on the hall-- THAT must be first rate."
---This is by no means apparent. Said community might invest in a wonderful hall and end up with Avery Fischer. Then what? They'll still have a fine orchestra--or not. See point one.
The music comes first. All else is gravy.
Follow Ups:
as
.
I really dumbed it down as much as possible.
Go back, read. Understand.
Repeat if necessary ad infinitum (tell us you're not so thick as to believe someone actually would only evaluate an orchestra from a particular seat and with a suitably attired audience).
I will supply a dunce hat to your hat size upon request.
.
The whole audiophile obsession with "sound" (as opposed to, say, "music") really gets ridiculous when it's applied to live performance of acoustic instruments. Sure, it can be frustrating if you're in a hall that muddles the sound, but I think it's important to approach live performances with the understanding that they are *never* perfect. There are always going to be chipped notes, audience coughs, etc, and the idiosyncracies of the hall's sound is just part of that. Expecting a live performance to have the sonic "perfection" of your favorite recording is like expecting your wife to look like the airbrushed models in a magazine.
as
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: