Classical repertoire is soooooooo cliche nowadays

[jochanaan]

Orchestras should only play the good old stuff.....

...unless they can find some good new stuff that's worth becoming good old stuff. You wouldn't think that would be as hard as it seems to be.

[karlhenning]

Orchestras should only play the good old stuff.....

Runs and hides......

No need to run or hide.

You were kidding, weren't you? 

[ChamberNut]

No need to run or hide.

You were kidding, weren't you? 

Yes, I was.     Because I'm still a relatively "new" classical fan, I do want to see the classics tried and true live.  But, I'm also aware of the importance of playing brand new or newer works to guarantee the future success of the orchestra.

[MichaelRabin]

There are so many ways to make a concert interesting. A Russian night that comprises of Glinka Ruslan & Ludmilla Overture, Schnittke Viola Conc, and Tchaikovsky Sym 5 (Malaysian PO this year) may be better served in my opinion by Arensky Variations on a theme of Tchaikovsky Op 35, Kabalevsky PC 3 and Tchaikovsky Sym 5. In this way, we do not get the umpteened Glinka & Tchaikovsky. I know a lot of people like Tchaikovsky 5 but to do this as a music director, the Arensky & Kabalevsky would just educate and the fans of Tchaikovsky 5 would also be happy. The general public would then go looking for a version of the Arensky and Kabalevsky - thinking why we have not heard those 2 pieces before - few versions on CD of course. Little gems that are rarely played and recorded.

[MISHUGINA]

I'm talking about more variety here than just playing more avant-garde.

Say for classical, nowadays there is more exposure of Antonio Salieri's works as compared before the 21st century where he was shunned purely because "he killed Mozart" . And Stravinsky would've been bored to death seeing his "Rite of Spring" played so often this year like an overplayed warhorse when other of his lesser known works such as Agon, Le baiser de la fée (Fairy's Kiss), Jeu de cartes or Orpheus could be highlighted.

As for Monsieur Croche's highlight of Mr M, these crocks can go shut themselves in a bloody room and blast himself with Eine Kleine Nachtmuzik all day long. It certainly disturbs me when people regard 2nd Viennese School composers, Bartok, Lutoslawski etc as "contemporary" or even "avant garde". Hell, they're from the last century doggonit!

[greg]

And Stravinsky would've been bored to death seeing his "Rite of Spring" played so often this year like an overplayed warhorse when other of his lesser known works such as Agon, Le baiser de la fée (Fairy's Kiss), Jeu de cartes or Orpheus could be highlighted.

actually, i remember a time when The Rite was so overplayed on the radio that I actually got sick of hearing it... now that's saying A LOT, being one of my all-time favorite pieces of music.

[eyeresist]

Maybe it's just me, but... if concerts were longer and more varied, I'd be happy to stomach occasional under-rehearsal.

[greg]

Maybe it's just me, but... if concerts were longer and more varied, I'd be happy to stomach occasional under-rehearsal.

not if it's this bad....


http://youtube.com/watch/v/HeaAV-_WDuQ

[ChamberNut]

Maybe it's just me, but... if concerts were longer and more varied, I'd be happy to stomach occasional under-rehearsal.

I think 2 hours max. per concert with a break in between is about all most people can handle.  Obviously operas are the exception as some are longer.

[Monsieur Croche]

There are so many ways to make a concert interesting. A Russian night that comprises of Glinka Ruslan & Ludmilla Overture, Schnittke Viola Conc, and Tchaikovsky Sym 5 (Malaysian PO this year) may be better served in my opinion by Arensky Variations on a theme of Tchaikovsky Op 35, Kabalevsky PC 3 and Tchaikovsky Sym 5. In this way, we do not get the umpteened Glinka & Tchaikovsky. I know a lot of people like Tchaikovsky 5 but to do this as a music director, the Arensky & Kabalevsky would just educate and the fans of Tchaikovsky 5 would also be happy. The general public would then go looking for a version of the Arensky and Kabalevsky - thinking why we have not heard those 2 pieces before - few versions on CD of course. Little gems that are rarely played and recorded.

I understand your point, but I personally would prefer a little more contrast in programming. Educating doesn't simply mean exposing the audience to lesser-known repertoire; it is more important to widen their taste in order to accomodate a greater variety of musical styles.

As for Monsieur Croche's highlight of Mr M, these crocks can go shut themselves in a bloody room and blast himself with Eine Kleine Nachtmuzik all day long. It certainly disturbs me when people regard 2nd Viennese School composers, Bartok, Lutoslawski etc as "contemporary" or even "avant garde". Hell, they're from the last century doggonit!

No, we should shut him in a room and force him to listen to (say) Carter night and day until he succumbs.

I don't know anyone who calls Bartok and Lutoslawski "contemporary" (now that would be really disturbing), but I can certainly imagine composers such as Cage being tagged as "eternally avant-garde" or something to that effect. This is just speculation, of course.

[MichaelRabin]

I understand your point, but I personally would prefer a little more contrast in programming. Educating doesn't simply mean exposing the audience to lesser-known repertoire; it is more important to widen their taste in order to accomodate a greater variety of musical styles.

Please programme me a Russian night concert that "has contrast" as you put it. For my concert, I have an association (Arensky's work is based on a theme by Tchaikovsky (who is also the 2nd half's composer). For variety, there is a piano concerto. Timing-wise, the concert's length is about right. So, please go ahead with your 3-work Russian programme that mixes familiar with the unfamiliar.

[Monsieur Croche]

Please programme me a Russian night concert that "has contrast" as you put it. For my concert, I have an association (Arensky's work is based on a theme by Tchaikovsky (who is also the 2nd half's composer). For variety, there is a piano concerto. Timing-wise, the concert's length is about right. So, please go ahead with your 3-work Russian programme that mixes familiar with the unfamiliar.

I didn't mean to denigrate your program, and I'm glad that at least someone is thinking about this matter. I'm merely speaking from the viewpoint of someone who is not a particularly big fan of Russian Romanticism, and would therefore find such a program rather wearisome. It may appeal to some others, but I don't presume to speak for them - I didn't say "ideally, the concert should..." but "I personally prefer..."; the distinction should be pretty obvious. That said, I like the rather clever association, and I agree that your timing is quite good as well (You must have put quite some thoughts into this, huh!  ) I personally prefer the original program, since I want to listen to the Schnittke, but I can see how that work may scare off some concert-goers.

I also did not say that all concerts should contain the maximum stylistic diversity in programming within one evening. It is certainly acceptable to program an all-Romantic concert, then devote a performance some other day to just modern music. Of course, if you do this, then you are likely to just attract different audiences for each concert, which would defeat the purpose of "education". In contrast, if you program a difficult work together with the warhorses then the audience may end up feeling "cheated"... A rather difficult situation, really.

Regarding your challenge, I will gladly confess that coming up with a program is hardly an easy work - nothing really comes to mind at the moment - but I will give it a try anyway when I have the time. Will my program be perfect? Of course not. Will it better be than yours? Not necessarily, and I'm not even sure if there is a way to objectively determine this. Will it be more congenial to my taste? Definitely. On the other hand, Michael, I detect a rather unpleasant whiff of arrogance (I hope I'm wrong) in your post, as if it were impossible to put together a program with greater contrast, and that your program is already as brilliant as brilliant gets... Also, you seem to imply that my inability to come up with a better program somehow renders my opinion less valid - and may I suggest that, if you wish to proceed with this line of reasoning, you also give up your rights to pass any judgment on works or performances, since I highly doubt you can compose or perform as well as they do.

[MichaelRabin]

I didn't mean to denigrate your program, and I'm glad that at least someone is thinking about this matter. I'm merely speaking from the viewpoint of someone who is not a particularly big fan of Russian Romanticism, and would therefore find such a program rather wearisome. It may appeal to some others, but I don't presume to speak for them - I didn't say "ideally, the concert should..." but "I personally prefer..."; the distinction should be pretty obvious. That said, I like the rather clever association, and I agree that your timing is quite good as well (You must have put quite some thoughts into this, huh!  ) I personally prefer the original program, since I want to listen to the Schnittke, but I can see how that work may scare off some concert-goers.

I also did not say that all concerts should contain the maximum stylistic diversity in programming within one evening. It is certainly acceptable to program an all-Romantic concert, then devote a performance some other day to just modern music. Of course, if you do this, then you are likely to just attract different audiences for each concert, which would defeat the purpose of "education". In contrast, if you program a difficult work together with the warhorses then the audience may end up feeling "cheated"... A rather difficult situation, really.

Regarding your challenge, I will gladly confess that coming up with a program is hardly an easy work - nothing really comes to mind at the moment - but I will give it a try anyway when I have the time. Will my program be perfect? Of course not. Will it better be than yours? Not necessarily, and I'm not even sure if there is a way to objectively determine this. Will it be more congenial to my taste? Definitely. On the other hand, Michael, I detect a rather unpleasant whiff of arrogance (I hope I'm wrong) in your post, as if it were impossible to put together a program with greater contrast, and that your program is already as brilliant as brilliant gets... Also, you seem to imply that my inability to come up with a better program somehow renders my opinion less valid - now that's a fallacious argument if ever there's one - and may I suggest that, if you wish to proceed with this line of reasoning, you also give up your rights to pass any judgment on works or performances, since I highly doubt you can compose or perform as well as they do.

OK - let answer you para by para

1) We've had too many Glinka R&L and Tch Sym 5 here at the MPO in KL over 10 years. Result of this is I'm sick of both. If the MD needs to do a concert of fav Russian works, there's no harm playing Tch 5, but it is good to put in the pieces I suggested ahead of the Tch 5.

2) I feel my programme educates audiences in the 1st half and yet for those who like the old warhorses, can still come to that. In the 1st half, they have to sit through unfamiliar pieces but come away very pleasantly surprised by the 2 pieces and would perhaps run to a CD shop to find a version on CD or go online to buy CDs of those 2 pieces of the 1st half.

3) Concerts, music and all art is subjective. I did not want to seem to insult you or to be arrogant about this - if I sounded so, please accept my apologies. Do dream up a nice mix of 3 or 4 pieces and we'll see how you like to program a concert according to your likes.

Cheers - MR

[jochanaan]

Let me see if I can pick up the gauntlet Michael has thrown...

I.  Shostakovich: Prelude in Eb minor, Opus 34 #14, orchestrated (not necessarily the Stokowski orchestration, although that used to be well-known).  A wonderfully dark opening that definitely contrasts with almost anything.

II. Schnittke: Concerto Grosso No. 4 [Symphony No. 5], for violin, oboe, harpsichord and orchestra (1988).  (I don't know this particular concerto, but any of his Concerti Grossi would do; I chose it because of the solo instruments it employs. )

INTERMISSION

III. Mily Balakirev: Symphony #2 in D minor

How's that?

[Don]

I didn't mean to denigrate your program, and I'm glad that at least someone is thinking about this matter. I'm merely speaking from the viewpoint of someone who is not a particularly big fan of Russian Romanticism, and would therefore find such a program rather wearisome.

I would also find it wearisome.  Three romantic works is not what I'd call a varied program. 

[Monsieur Croche]

OK - let answer you para by para

1) We've had too many Glinka R&L and Tch Sym 5 here at the MPO in KL over 10 years. Result of this is I'm sick of both. If the MD needs to do a concert of fav Russian works, there's no harm playing Tch 5, but it is good to put in the pieces I suggested ahead of the Tch 5.

2) I feel my programme educates audiences in the 1st half and yet for those who like the old warhorses, can still come to that. In the 1st half, they have to sit through unfamiliar pieces but come away very pleasantly surprised by the 2 pieces and would perhaps run to a CD shop to find a version on CD or go online to buy CDs of those 2 pieces of the 1st half.

3) Concerts, music and all art is subjective. I did not want to seem to insult you or to be arrogant about this - if I sounded so, please accept my apologies. Do dream up a nice mix of 3 or 4 pieces and we'll see how you like to program a concert according to your likes.

Cheers - MR

Woops, sorry, MR, I totally forgot about this thread!

1) The Glinka overture is not played all that often here - but I apologize for taking the classical music scene in Singapore to be normative for the rest of the world. I shouldn't.

2) Yes, you mentioned these points in your first post, and I can assure you that I understand them well enough. Your concert educates,  no doubt, but I was talking about a different kind of education that, in my opinion, should take greater priority - namely educating the average audience that there are worthy pieces of music beyond the Classical and Romantic style that gave us most of the concert warhorses. Again, I'm having in mind the Singapore audience, most of which I would characterize as being 'stuck' in the Romantic era, and I have no idea how the situation is like at Malaysia.

3) And I apologize for my overly harsh response to your post.  Must be the morning blues...

[Monsieur Croche]

Let me see if I can pick up the gauntlet Michael has thrown...

How's that?

That is an excellent concert, jochanaan, with the contrast extended even down to the instrumentation! I don't at all think I can outdo you, but I will try:

Borodin - In the Steppes of Central Asia

Mosolov - The Iron Foundry, Op. 19

Shostakovich - Concerto No. 1 for Piano, Trumpet, and Strings, Op. 35

--Intermission--

Taneyev - Symphony No. 4 in C Minor, Op. 12

Just wondering, jochanaan, does the Balakirev count as a 'familiar' work to the audience where you live? Because I'm not sure if it does over here. (Inclusion of a 'familiar' work is one of the conditions laid down by Michael)

[Symphonien]

It certainly disturbs me when people regard ... Lutoslawski etc as "contemporary" or even "avant garde"...

What's wrong with calling Lutoslawski contemporary? He died in 1994. And certain composers of the 50s and 60s were most certainly avant-garde.

[MISHUGINA]

What's wrong with calling Lutoslawski contemporary? He died in 1994. And certain composers of the 50s and 60s were most certainly avant-garde.

Can you say Beethoven's "Grosse Fuge" is avant garde then?