Maybe it's old news, but Grammophone Mag reports..........

[Iago]

That Riccardo Muti will become Music Director of the Chicago Symphony in 2010.
Hopefully that will restore the eminence of the orchestra to the level it occupied under Fritz Reiner.

It's NOT speculation. Contracts have been signed, sealed and delivered.

[uffeviking]

That's good news, Iago, and I thank you for telling us about it. I used to subscribe to Grammophone but it got too expense buying all the new and interesting releases they told me about! 

[M forever]

Hopefully that will restore the eminence of the orchestra to the level it occupied under Fritz Reiner.

He will not. He can't. He has spent decades proving that he can't. None of his tenures anywhere have ever produced really outstanding, continuous work.  Muti is a very solid conductor who however does not live up to the "star" expectations his appearance and demeanor, carefully built up and marketed, of course, suggest to some superficial people. He is highly welcome as an effective, reliable and professional guest with many good orchestras. But he simply doesn't have enough musical substance to lead a first class orchestra permanently and give them a clear artistic direction.

I can't believe they are that stupid in Chicago. Well, at least they aren't as dramatically stupid (or rather, remote-controlled by powerful agents) as they are in LA. Still, rather than finding a younger conductor with potential and give him a chance to prove himself through long, continuous work - which is the only way that actually works - they hire this over-the-hill burnout.

In short, Muti is a good conductor, a good timebeater, but he doesn't have much personality. He just happens to look and act like someone special. But he isn't. There are many dozens of people out there right now who are vastly better musicians.

[PSmith08]

In short, Muti is a good conductor, a good timebeater, but he doesn't have much personality. He just happens to look and act like someone special. But he isn't. There are many dozens of people out there right now who are vastly better musicians.

It won't take long to get one of the 'vastly better musicians,' since I give Muti a year. Two, tops, before his unjustifiable preening leaves him on Michigan Avenue with a lot more time to study American Gothic over at the Art Institute than he had first planned. I don't know who they should get instead of Muti, though I could float several names, but I know Muti will end badly for Chicago - which is to say that he won't be the best fit for the band.

Hopefully that will restore the eminence of the orchestra to the level it occupied under Fritz Reiner.

The only way you're going to get Reiner-like results out of the CSO is if you invent either a resurrection machine or a time machine. A convincing robot might work, too, but a resurrection machine seems like less work. Reiner wasn't Reiner and his name isn't still mentioned in reverent tones at Orchestra Hall because any jerk can walk in and replicate his style.

[MahlerSnob]

It won't take long to get one of the 'vastly better musicians,' since I give Muti a year. Two, tops, before his unjustifiable preening leaves him on Michigan Avenue with a lot more time to study American Gothic over at the Art Institute than he had first planned.

A nice thought, but unfortunately it doesn't work that way exactly. MD contracts are for a period of years: no less than three, no more than seven, probably five. Even so, five years is a good enough amount of time for Muti to be there and for other, younger candidates to "mature." Both Spano and Robertson will probably start looking for other jobs within the next five years and I suspect positions will be opening in Boston, Philly, and a few other cities as well. We all hope that one of these orchestras will hire someone young, and lately I've been surprised to see New York do just that (I don't mention LA because they have a track record of hiring outrageously young MD's). But will Chicago or Boston look to conductors under the age of 60 (much less 50 or 40) next time they have vancancies? I doubt it.

[M forever]

I think Spano is already a significantly more mature artists than Muti ever was, even in his better days when he was at least somewhat dynamic. Robertson is simply not good enough for an orchestra like the CSO. Or maybe they will be bad enough for him in a few years.

[PSmith08]

A nice thought, but unfortunately it doesn't work that way exactly. MD contracts are for a period of years: no less than three, no more than seven, probably five. Even so, five years is a good enough amount of time for Muti to be there and for other, younger candidates to "mature."

Contracts, believe it or not, can be terminated early if one or both parties want it badly enough. It's usually an expensive proposition, but, like I say, Muti will undoubtedly create an audience willing to help out the CSO get out of the deal.

[Greta]

Yeah, I heard about this a few weeks ago. I had a feeling Muti was actively looking for somewhere "to land".

But if they're going to pull from Europe, why not go for someone younger and with more personality? They go from lusting after Dudamel....to hiring Riccardo Muti?! Bit of a headscratcher. I think personally they're crazy not to poach Spano from Atlanta, but hell, now that he's been passed over by NY, LA, and Chicago (and Cleveland just extended FW-M's contract by TEN years), Spano might as well just stay in Atlanta, and is probably planning to. ASO is getting a fancy dancy new hall sometime this decade, which he might wait to see through, and then move on. And maybe Philly will have had a chance to do some courting by then....

In any case, if Chicago had been more patient, and done a bit more courting themselves, I think they would have ended up with a much more suitable leader for the long-run. Considering the recent bold appointments on each coast, this one seems pretty...lackluster.

But as mentioned above, it's likely CSO won't want to renew his contract after the first go-round - and may find themselves with another chance to snap up someone better. If I were their management, I'd make sure to get some of the younger promising maestros in there for guest spots over the next few years and quietly do some "talking" in the guises of "long-range planning".

[karlhenning]

Dyspeptic and boorish is NOT good enough when decent is expected.

[mahler10th]

Yeah, I heard about this a few weeks ago. I had a feeling Muti was actively looking for somewhere "to land".

But if they're going to pull from Europe, why not go for someone younger and with more personality? They go from lusting after Dudamel....to hiring Riccardo Muti?! Bit of a headscratcher. I think personally they're crazy not to poach Spano from Atlanta, but hell, now that he's been passed over by NY, LA, and Chicago (and Cleveland just extended FW-M's contract by TEN years), Spano might as well just stay in Atlanta, and is probably planning to. ASO is getting a fancy dancy new hall sometime this decade, which he might wait to see through, and then move on. And maybe Philly will have had a chance to do some courting by then....

In any case, if Chicago had been more patient, and done a bit more courting themselves, I think they would have ended up with a much more suitable leader for the long-run. Considering the recent bold appointments on each coast, this one seems pretty...lackluster.

But as mentioned above, it's likely CSO won't want to renew his contract after the first go-round - and may find themselves with another chance to snap up someone better. If I were their management, I'd make sure to get some of the younger promising maestros in there for guest spots over the next few years and quietly do some "talking" in the guises of "long-range planning".

Agreed about Spano.  I saw him a few months ago do Mahler 5th -awesome.

[M forever]

In any case, if Chicago had been more patient, and done a bit more courting themselves, I think they would have ended up with a much more suitable leader for the long-run. Considering the recent bold appointments on each coast, this one seems pretty...lackluster.

There is nothing "bold" about these appointments, maybe about the one in NY, certainly not about the one in LA. That is something which is completely engineered by powerful managements who want to "groom" a new "young star" but from an artistic point of view, it is a competely ridiculous decision, however much young impressionable girls like you may be fascinated by people like Dudamel. The orchestra has already suffered massively in quality under the current MD who now rapels off to London, just in time before it becomes really obvious - although it already is to a lot of people who are more interested in musical quality and craftsmanship than in what nice poses these young (and not so young) men can strike on the podium.

[johnQpublic]

Hopefully Spano has improved but I saw him in Atlanta in the spring of the year (2000, I believe) that he was announced as the next season's ASO director. His Sheherzade was sloppy in spots; he especially ignored the basses.

[Brian]

however much young impressionable girls like you may be fascinated by people like Dudamel.

If Dudamel attracts more impressionable young girls to classical music, I know I'll be a happier man. 

[MahlerSnob]

Dudamel is extremely talented and is a good musician. He also has more energy and a better stick technique than most conductors I know (and that includes some very well respected conductors). Although I have not performed under Dudamel, I have met him and seen him in rehearsal and performance (both with Simon Bolivar and as a guest). I agree with M that he was not the best choice for LA, or for any orchestra at that level, but if he continues on the path he's on now he will be a truly great conductor in 20 or 30 years. Let me again say that his appointment in LA wasn't very surprising. Salonen was hired at age 34, and Zubin Mehta was hired at 26. Compare that to the New York Philharmonic where the youngest MD was John Barbirolli at age 37 in 1936 or to Chicago where Kubelik was 36 in 1950. LA has precedent which most of the other major orchestras in this country don't.

[M forever]

I agree with M that he was not the best choice for LA, or for any orchestra at that level, but if he continues on the path he's on now he will be a truly great conductor in 20 or 30 years. Let me again say that his appointment in LA wasn't very surprising. Salonen was hired at age 34, and Zubin Mehta was hired at 26.

If he continues on the path he's on now, he will definitely not be "a truly great conductor" in 20 or 30 years or ever. Because he won't ba able to take the time that is needed to study and learn, reflect and artistically mature. It just takes a very long time, even for the most "talented" people, to learn and really internalize all the many things a really good conductor needs to master. Mehta and Salonen are very good examples for people who became famous and successful early and delivered some decent work, then stagnated more and more to a point at which most of what they are doing is mediocre routine.

What we have seen in the last decades is an interesting shift of balances. While orchestral musicians have become better and better, and most musicians in good orchestras today are on the level of soloists on their instrument, conductors have become more and more just posers without musical substance and character. That is easy to understand, because these days, orchestral musicians are trained so well and know the standard repertoire so well that they can play it well even under the most incompetent conductors. One would think that that high level of technical proficiency and well-informed familiarity with the standard repertoire would be an ideal situation for conductors, too, because they can more or less straight go to rehearsing musically while even just a few decades ago, conductors had to be much more orchestral trainers. But the reality is, it still takes a very long time for a musician to really study and acquire a repertoire and clearly formed musical ideas that he can then take to an orchestra and work on, but since it is way too tempting to just stand in front of 80 or so highly trained people on autopilot and strike cute poses and be very successful with that, conductors just don't have or take that time anymore.

That's why we hear so many technically polished, but empty performances these days.

[Renfield]

If he continues on the path he's on now, he will definitely not be "a truly great conductor" in 20 or 30 years or ever. Because he won't ba able to take the time that is needed to study and learn, reflect and artistically mature. It just takes a very long time, even for the most "talented" people, to learn and really internalize all the many things a really good conductor needs to master. Mehta and Salonen are very good examples for people who became famous and successful early and delivered some decent work, then stagnated more and more to a point at which most of what they are doing is mediocre routine.

What we have seen in the last decades is an interesting shift of balances. While orchestral musicians have become better and better, and most musicians in good orchestras today are on the level of soloists on their instrument, conductors have become more and more just posers without musical substance and character. That is easy to understand, because these days, orchestral musicians are trained so well and know the standard repertoire so well that they can play it well even under the most incompetent conductors. One would think that that high level of technical proficiency and well-informed familiarity with the standard repertoire would be an ideal situation for conductors, too, because they can more or less straight go to rehearsing musically while even just a few decades ago, conductors had to be much more orchestral trainers. But the reality is, it still takes a very long time for a musician to really study and acquire a repertoire and clearly formed musical ideas that he can then take to an orchestra and work on, but since it is way too tempting to just stand in front of 80 or so highly trained people on autopilot and strike cute poses and be very successful with that, conductors just don't have or take that time anymore.

That's why we hear so many technically polished, but empty performances these days.

That seems to me a rather even-handed assessment.

Though I'd still like to hear a sample of Dudamel's work in LA. Muti is "mostly harmless" from my point of view, to quote Douglas Adams.

[PSmith08]

Muti is "mostly harmless" from my point of view, to quote Douglas Adams.

That's the problem. A band like the CSO doesn't need a "mostly harmless" conductor. They need someone who has a clear artistic vision, considerable talent, and the ability to force the CSO to perform at its peak.

[Renfield]

That's the problem. A band like the CSO doesn't need a "mostly harmless" conductor. They need someone who has a clear artistic vision, considerable talent, and the ability to force the CSO to perform at its peak.

Yes indeed. I didn't mean the term as a compliment to Muti.

[knight66]

If he continues on the path he's on now, he will definitely not be "a truly great conductor" in 20 or 30 years or ever. Because he won't ba able to take the time that is needed to study and learn, reflect and artistically mature. It just takes a very long time, even for the most "talented" people, to learn and really internalize all the many things a really good conductor needs to master. Mehta and Salonen are very good examples for people who became famous and successful early and delivered some decent work, then stagnated more and more to a point at which most of what they are doing is mediocre routine.

What we have seen in the last decades is an interesting shift of balances. While orchestral musicians have become better and better, and most musicians in good orchestras today are on the level of soloists on their instrument, conductors have become more and more just posers without musical substance and character. That is easy to understand, because these days, orchestral musicians are trained so well and know the standard repertoire so well that they can play it well even under the most incompetent conductors. One would think that that high level of technical proficiency and well-informed familiarity with the standard repertoire would be an ideal situation for conductors, too, because they can more or less straight go to rehearsing musically while even just a few decades ago, conductors had to be much more orchestral trainers. But the reality is, it still takes a very long time for a musician to really study and acquire a repertoire and clearly formed musical ideas that he can then take to an orchestra and work on, but since it is way too tempting to just stand in front of 80 or so highly trained people on autopilot and strike cute poses and be very successful with that, conductors just don't have or take that time anymore.

That's why we hear so many technically polished, but empty performances these days.

I am not at all keen on Salanon, whose music making to my ears lacks passion or involvement. However, in an earlier post you suggested he had damaged standards in LA. How does this tie in with the excellence of their orchestral musicians, as outlined by the quote above?

I was in a Salonen Oedipus Rex; it excited exactly no one. I am not looking forward to his coming to London.

Mike

[knight66]

On a different tack, I would like to be able to defend Muti; but it would be based on my direct experience of him from over 20 years ago. Working with him then was an exciting event; though as I have remarked before, the final rehearsals were often better than the performances, which could be stiff in comparison.

He did good rather than great work at La Scala, so, yes, he is another who has not really grown in stature. A pity. Perhaps Chicago will inspire him; hope over experience.

Mike