Changing conventions for a changing audience....

Baldur Brönnimann, incoming Principal Conductor of the Orquestra Sinfónica do Porto Casa da Música, offers ten changes to "spice up" orchestra concerts. This raised a large number of often spiteful comments from readers at Norman Lebrecht's Slipped Disc.

1. The audience should feel free to applaud between movements

Gustav Mahler introduced the habit of sitting silently until the end of a piece and I think after some 100 years, it’s time to change that. I love it when people clap between movements. It’s a spontaneous expression of enjoyment and people should feel free to show their feelings in a concert.

David H. writes:  If you consider audience applause disruptive, I already have doubts whether you are a real musician. It makes no sense to say you feel disrupted by an audience showing positive appreciation. It happens in opera frquently. How would you feel if they booed and jeered instead as they did at Minzcuk in Rio a few years ago? Real musicians earn their living principally by playing to live audiences and if the audience doesn’t approve of what it hears, then that audience will not come back, let alone encourage new people to come along. Since audiences bring in a large slice of a musicians income you have no place to be so sniffy about them. However, if you are so of the opinion that audience applause between movements is disruptive you could always play to an empty hall to solve the problem, but let’s see how much you get paid for doing so.

Tommy notes: OK, start with an easy one. It’s impossible to stop people from clapping between movements and, out of the hundreds of concerts I’ve been to, I think I can recall maybe 2 times that anyone has ever actually said something out loud to someone clapping between movements. There is no rule about it, so therefore there is no problem. Audiences do, however, like it when people can understand and appreciate a particularly moving or still moment in a piece that benefits from silence. That’s called appreciation of the art.

Maestroblh adds:  Let us not forget that Mozart himself wrote passages (I recall the "Paris" Symphony) in which he intentionally elicited applause.  Enough said...

2. Orchestras should tune backstage

There is something really exciting about hearing a great orchestra in a great hall. We shouldn’t spoil the impact of the first sounds of a piece by giving away so many of these magical sounds in a random way at the beginning of a concert. Works like the Lohengrin Prelude, Gigues or Lontano do sound strange after tuning onstage. They should emerge from complete silence.

Maestroblh writes:  It's often been my experience that a number of European orchestras enter the hall en masse (to the applause of the audience) and simply tune, without the scratchings and scrapings (and hootings) that one hears in American concert halls.  I like it.

3. We should be able to use mobile phones (in silent mode)

I don’t mean making phone calls, of course, but rather than switching phones off, people should be able to tweet, take pictures or record concerts silently. If people buy tickets, they should have the rights to record what they see and share their thoughts with others.

David B. writes:  Loathsome. Terribly distracting to those not wishing to comply (plus some idiots think “buzz” is interchangeable with silent …. and some will forget to turn the ringer off anyway). If I’m listening to and watching the Sibelius 7th, and some philistine in front of me can’t make it through 22 minutes without tweeting and showing tweets to others, I would want to pour my beer over his/her head. 

David A. adds:  People now do record the performance on tablets and most are entirely silent when doing so. Strangely enough they have learnt their own voice adds nothing to the recording. Also, and this is the great benefit, that audience member will most likely play the recording again and even possibly to someone else and enjoy what was played a second or a third time. It is just possible it might encourage someone new to come to a concert. Recording performances on a phone or the like is not an issue for me and the vast majority will have no commercial value, so it has nothing to do with the unions. Again, if you don’t like it, play to an empty hall. Perhaps I should also ask, if you have so much time to look round the concert hall for lights coming from mobile phones, just how much attention are you putting on the music unless of course you are the cymbal player in Bruckner 7?

4. Programs should be less predictable

The encores are often what sticks most in people’s mind and I think programmers should take the risk and not always print the whole program, but just certain key works. There must be an element of unpredictability about a concert – if it’s a piece, a different location, a little item of chamber music or anything else. Just something unexpected.

Maestroblh: Almost everyone agrees that the "Overture - Concerto - Symphony" model of programming is a thing of the past.  Exactly why would you put your audience through the most demanding work (the symphony) when it has already been seated over an hour.  It's no wonder than so many mink-coated septuagenarians snooze through the second half (I've seen--and heard it!). 

5. You should be able to take your drinks inside the hall

You can do this in a pop concert and I don’t know why you shouldn’t in a classical concert if the hall allows it. I like to feel relaxed at a concert, have a good time and not having to empty my glass in one after the interval.

David B:  Fraid not. Much as a tasty ale or three would genuinely enhance the experience, the constant back-and-forth to the concession and the loo would destroy the pleasure. This is not a football game.

Neil:  Concert halls are not pubs. Please keep glasses out of auditoriums. And mobile phones too!! 

David A:  Yes, but glasses should be plastic for safety reasons and many halls will need some adaptions close to the seat to make it possible, but this can be done.

6. The artists should engage with the audience

Many of us do: we speak to the audience before, after or during the concerts. But this can’t be an option, it must be mandatory for every artist to at least be able to introduce a piece, greet the audience or to sign a program. On that note, I think it is a shame that the public is often prevented from going backstage after a concert. Everybody should be able to talk to the musicians and share their thoughts and opinions, if it’s backstage or in the bar. We don’t live in an ivory tower and we have an obligation to talk to the people who love music as much as we do.

Josep:  The artists should engage with the audience! They are storytellers, and that means telling stories with words and music. If you give a story to the audience, they will follow during the whole performance.

Duncan: I was once seated in the front row for a performance of Der Rosenkavalier. At the end of the 2nd act a cellist interacted with me – he asked if he could scrutinise my programme. I asked him why. He replied, “I’m a ring-in and I haven’t played in vocal rehearsals, so this is the first time I’ve seen the singers. .I need to know the name of the singer playing Sophie, because I swear I’m going to marry her – she’s absolutely gorgeous.” Indeed she was – a young Swedish soprano starting out on her career, who could sing as well as dazzle. Miah Persson no less. Is this the type of interaction with audiences that is being advocated?  Maestroblh: snark.

7. Orchestras shouldn’t play in tail suits

That’s an old and easy one. But I think it’s still true. I don’t think the perception of an orchestra changes by simply playing in coloured shirts, but tail suits are definitely out. Too 19th century. There are classy and much better looking suit options around.

Maestroblh:  True story that has happened more than once.  In some European orchestras, when it is too warm in the hall, the men in the orchestra are not required to wear coats.  Of course, the "maestro" is always expected to don his tailcoat.  I've sweated through Beethoven, Brahms, and too many others to count....and, for the record, renowned cellist Lynn Harrell calls this kind of attire, "dressing like Captain von Trapp's butler."

8. Concerts should be more family friendly

People with small kids want to go to concerts too, but they have to be able to leave the hall quickly and silently when the little ones get bored. Just as airlines, concert halls should do more to think about families with small kids and offer priority seats near the exits. I have never minded if a baby starts to cry during a piece, but one should be able to come and go, because some concerts can be long even for adults. Playing areas, interactive content, even child-minding facilities – concert halls need to think about families.

Nick:  Yes and no. Babies crying should not be part of any concert experience, except for concerts geared specifically to mothers and their young children. There has to be a certain minimum age, and I know some venues where it is 6. Creches for younger children is a great idea.

David B:  Ye gods, spare us this tyranny. Say, let’s just provide diaper-changing tables amid the seats too. If I pay $190 for good tickets to hear the Mahler 9th played by a fine orchestra, do I have to tolerate some baby (who should be home asleep hours earlier) getting loose and screeching during the end of the Adagio? Choose another type of entertainment.

Maestroblh:  I remember a particularly magical moment that happened during an undergraduate performance of Vaughan Williams' Hodie.  During the "lullaby movement" a baby began to unobtrusively coo.  The effect on the music was priceless.  That being said, my own child has attended concerts since she was eight days old.  I can recall but one occasion that her mother had to escort her from the concert hall.  Most of the time (when she was quite young), she would simply sleep--until she heard something she "knew."  As she grew older, one can hear rapturous applause and a tiny voice shouting "Yay Daddy!"

9. Concert halls should use more cutting-edge technology

Part of the excitement of live classical music is to see people play it up close. Nowadays we have a different visual perception than a hundred years ago, so why do concert halls not use screens to show details of a performance to people who can’t see it from the back? Or why are we not using more physical enhancement for acoustically difficult concert halls? Or offering more contents to download before and during a performance? There is an unnecessary purism about technology in concert halls, but we should move the concert experience into the 21st century. As creative artists we should be at the forefront of using technology creatively.

David B: More catering to those without attention spans. If you need visual spectacle, try opera.

Tommy:  Do you know how much it costs to do this? Do you have any suggestions for who might pay for such things? In order to put an image up on a screen, you need cameras, camera operators, rigging, someone to select the shots, a projector, a screen, and all the personnel it takes to achieve this. All these things cost money, and most orchestras are just trying to break even on a concert. To raise money to support these ideas, manpower and time is needed – and they cost money too. It should be mentioned, however, that many orchestras do actually have screens during performances. And you’ll find that, almost without exception, some of the audience like it and some of them hate it. Promoters wrestle with this.

10. Every program should contain a contemporary piece

Along with the unexpected element, there is often a lack of relevance or cutting edge to classical programs. Every piece was once new and unexpected and we have to reconnect the classical repertoire with our contemporary lives, we must play the music of our time. This is not to say that we shouldn’t play the historical masterpieces, but classical music has become a kind of “fetishizing of the past”, as Alex Ross calls it in a great article about Beethoven’s influence on classical music for the New Yorker. Programming the great works of the past alongside the music of our own time will shed a different light on the musical past as well as the musical present.

David H:  NO! What on earth? I can understand the good intentions behind this and more needs to be done to promote and incorporate modern music, but there is a wonderful corpus of music written throughout history which needs to be heard. Sometimes it is better WITHOUT such an addition.

David A:  Hard and fast rules like this do not help. The reverse is to say every contemporary program should contain a piece from the 18th century. This idea does not work. What is needed is variety in programming. 

Tommy: I have to assume you know how much it costs to perform contemporary music: the commissioning itself (if appropriate), extra rehearsal, usually extra players and hiring of extra instruments (especially percussion), the expensive music hire costs and royalty collection. Although it should be noted that many, many orchestras around the world do exactly what you suggest and programme “the great works of the past alongside the music of our own time”, so at the very least your suggestion is rather redundant. And, hard as it is for you to accept this, some audiences are very happy to listen to the old pieces, sometimes without contemporary works – and anyway, intelligent programming doesn’t mean box-ticking.

Maestroblh:  Obviously, as I conduct a number of wind groups, much of our repertoire is contemporary in nature.  I more often than not cajole orchestras for playing nothing but "dead, white, male, European" music.  I think we need to remember that, until sometime in the mid to late nineteenth century, all of the music offered at concerts and recitals was new.  Movements of symphonies were rarely played in succession, and audiences applauded when they heard something they liked (how many stories have we heard of premieres in which particular movements were encored?).  To me, the solution is simple.  The "classical" world needs to get off its high horse and make the concert experience more enjoyable.  Maybe even leave the lights up so they can actually read the program notes!

For the record, here's my upcoming concert with the Quad City Wind Ensemble:

Stafford/Stamp:  Star-Spangled Banner (a love song for my country)

Karel Husa:  Smetana Fanfare (1984)

Carl Friedemann, trans. Lake:  Slavonic Rhapsody No. 1 (1904, ed. 1913)

Robert Russell Bennett:  Rose Variations (1955), Kurt Dupuis, soloist

Richard Scott Cohen:  Azcárraga (1994)

Ralph Vaughan Williams:  Toccata Marziale (1924)

Ralph Hultgren:  The Hornets' Nest (1988)

Ottorino Respighi, trans. Leidzen:  "Pines of the Appian Way," from Pines of Rome (1924)

Hmmm.  Split almost 50-50 between dead and alive.  Three Europeans (a German-Swiss, a Brit, and an Italian), a transplant (Czech-born Husa has been a U.S. citizen since 1959) two Americans and an Australian.  And more than one surprise in store.....