|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.32.55.1
In Reply to: That's an excuse, not a solution!:-)... posted by SE on April 10, 2007 at 15:12:23:
There's also the ticket sale factor, which is that Beethoven and Brahms pack houses, and with few exceptions, most 20th century music fails to draw an adequate crowd. I've observed a most striking incident of this two years with a Philadelphia Orchestra program that had the Dvorak Cello concerto before the intermission and Zemlinsky's Die Seejungfrau afterwards. Easily 20% of the audience did not return to hear the Zemlinsky. If people are not going to listen to it, why play it?This is where recordings come in. I always prefer to hear music live, but recordings are the most cost effective way to distribute contemporary music. Thankfully labels like BIS and Naxos will record the most unpopular non-mainstream music.
Follow Ups:
I wouldn't even have a reference to cite as the basis for wanting more new music to be made actively available. They should play the Zemlinsky for the other 80% assuming maybe half of those folks enjoy it. At least it's an effort. No effort, no future.
I've always felt that part of the solution is a supply and demand approach.The major orchestras give 3 to 4 concerts per week. If they put Webern on the program, orchestras see that as having 3 to 4 nights of bad ticket sales, and thus, don't program Webern at all. My solution: put Webern on the program, but only have the concert repeat once -- so 2 nights as opposed to 3 or 4. And when you put Beethoven's 5th on the program, repeat it up to 6 times. Now some orchestras do the latter, but not the former.
as much as pre-dispostion or actual experience. I agree with your approach.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: