Regarding orchestra culture and, specifically, the way the orchestral “product” is disseminated and marketed, I feel like orchestras would do themselves a great service by focussing more on the instrumentalists within the ensemble, and placing less emphasis on the role of the conductor and guest soloists.

Watch any video of an orchestra performance and you're likely to see the conductor get a great deal of face-time. You might see an occasional close-up of a principal player (if they're lucky – during an exposed trombone solo in one recording, the camera cut back and forth between the maestro and the bell of the principal trombonist's horn; you never saw his face), or brief shot of a section, but the lion's share of the spotlight is usually on the podium.

Concert reviews seem to follow the same lines. I've read several reviews where the actual performance of the orchestra is not mentioned at all. A soloist's playing gets a thorough analysis, as does the conductor's choice of tempi, other interpretational decisions and even some of his/her physical gestures. It's almost like reviewers take it for granted that the orchestra will play well, and with few exceptions, only a particularly bad night from a musician warrants special mention.

Survey the publicity materials for any size orchestra and you're likely to see more of the same: The Music Director is doing great things this season, and there's a roster of star soloists lined up.

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that we should devalue conductors and soloists. They have an important role, and can be valuable assets in increasing ticket sales and public visibility for an ensemble.

What's missing, however, is any serious focus on the members of the ensemble themselves. It's a safe bet that your average concertgoer couldn't identify more than a few of them by name. These are the musicians who turn the conductor's interpretation into what the audience actually hears, and the people who will be onstage almost every time patrons return to their local concert hall (in most cases staying with the orchestra longer than any one music director).

To draw a sports analogy, it'd be as if all coverage of you local football team was based around the coach: News outlets exclusively analyzing gameplans and defensive strategies, team advertising based solely on coming to watch the coach in action. No one disputes that a coach plays a vital role in football, but without high-level execution on the field, the best gameplan in the world is doomed to be a loser.

In my opinion, orchestras need to do a better job of marketing their musicians, and finding ways for audiences to connect with them. This is most likely as simple as having meaningful write-ups about players in the program (I've seen this done with some groups, but it's almost always a brief snapshot and Q & A with a player or two that's buried at the back of the booklet), or pushing local newspapers to run articles on the backgrounds of the musicians. A bit of background information about any musician is likely enough to make an audience member feel like they know someone in the orchestra a little, to perk up when that musician has a brief solo, and to discuss the playing of that musician, by name, with friends after the concert.

Besides that, there are other perks to having the orchestra as the main focal point of marketing. It simplifies the conductor's job: he/she gets to devote more time to music making, and less to the work of being the exclusive public “face” of the organization. Also, it ensures that there won't be a sharp decrease in audience interest and attendance when the Music Director is away and a guest conductor is at the helm, or a popular Music Director moves on. What if audience members were as excited about hearing “their” Principal Horn, or Bassoon, or Viola play a particular passage in the second half as they were about the famous soloist in the first? This would let orchestras bring in talented soloists who maybe aren't as well-known without worrying about the financial viability of doing so. The bottom line is that by making the musicians accessible, even if only in print form, you're giving your audience additional reasons to want to attend your performances.

Some of this was prompted by reading the link delmarw posted on Orchestral Culture (http://myauditions.org/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/2256096313/m/174004835001). Primarily, I think doing a better job of marketing musicians is just good business, but you might also see an orchestra's morale improve simply by pointing the spotlight at its members more often.

Agreed, agreed 100% and I think Twitter, for example, is something that will help the process..

One of the reasons that the Berlin Phil Digital Concert Hall concert streams are really awesome. The production values and exposure of many of their great players is a role model for how this should be done.

quote:

of the reasons that the Berlin Phil Digital Concert Hall concert streams are really awesome. The production values and exposure of many of their great players is a role model for how this should be done.

Agreed. As I've preached before, it's worth the cost of the subscription. Even during the summer the DCH is adding incredible archived concerts from the Abaddo era. If you get a Sony blu ray player with internet capabilities (less than $100 some places), you can stream the archives directly to your TV.

Interesting side argument. What do you think about the way the close-ups and editing affect the way you listen to a piece? If you close your eyes and listen to Brahms isn't the listening experience completely different than watching the concert with a close up on the flutes, then violas, then basses, then the ppp timpani roll, etc...?

quote:

Originally posted by bystander:


Interesting side argument. What do you think about the way the close-ups and editing affect the way you listen to a piece? If you close your eyes and listen to Brahms isn't the listening experience completely different than watching the concert with a close up on the flutes, then violas, then basses, then the ppp timpani roll, etc...?

If it helps the audience connect with the music and the orchestra, then I have no problem with it. Personally, I have my CDs/iPhone, so if I want to listen without my eyes, I have many opportunities to do that. So when I listen with the help of my eyes and zone in on different instrumentalists, I don't really find the experience to be objectionable.

I'm personally not a big fan of the tight close-ups favoured by most orchestra video editors. I'd rather see more wider shots so I can decide who I want to watch, or witness the interaction between musicians.

As a string player, I'm content with having just the section in the shot, however I don't like it when half of the section is not visible (eg 2nd violins or violas) because of the back of the conductor.