Through These Ears

Behind The Scenes With Andreas Scholl

Countertenor superstar Andreas Scholl has produced a very nice short film of interviews and rehearsal voyeurism.  Scholl hosts a behind-the-scenes look at rehearsals for Handel's Partenope at the Danish Royal Theater.  Even though they're brief, he gets some good insights into the work from both Music Director Lars Ulrik Mortensen and scenic designer Lous Désiré.

I suppose Scholl wanted to reach as wide an audience as possible with this, so everyone speaks English.  Although you may have to turn the volume up a bit to hear all the rehearsal chatter.

(From il giornale della musica)

Scholl makes an interesting point about Handel possibly adapting to the new (for his day) style simply to satisfy the public.  He ran his own company in London, and had to constantly struggle to turn a profit.  Handel's fortunes went through many boom and bust cycles, and it was a tough scene.  Sometimes the fad was for oratorios, sometimes for opera in the Italian style, sometimes it was something else entirely. Partenope was premiered at the King's Theatre, Haymarket, London, in 1730. 

This was just a couple of years after Handel had to shut down the company he ran for about ten years, the Royal Academy of Music (no relation to today's RAM).  He dissolved his company because everyone in London wanted to see John Gay's The Beggar's Opera, and similar works.  So his response was to start a new Academy, and Partenope came along soon after.  Small wonder he was trying to strike a new pose with the music.

So London has been a tough scene for almost 300 years.  No wonder Daniele Gatti was looking for a break.

The short film is well worth watching.  The short-haired brunette is Tuve Semmingsen and the blonde singer we see briefly is the Partenope, Ingrid Dam-Jensen.  Also, it turns out that Scholl's doing three of these behind-the-scenes films, and he has a link to the first two on his own website. And is it just me, or does Scholl's speaking voice sound like a cross between Placido Domingo and Mandy Patinkin?

Danish radio station DR P2 will be broadcasting the performance live on October 11.

Daniele Gatti, Stravinsky, and Medici.TV

I just saw this terrific video of Daniele Gatti's debut concert as the new Musical Director for the Orchestre National de France on Medic.tv (always linked on the left).  I've mostly enjoyed Gatti's work, and I remember when he was starting to make a name for himself.  He used to be in the conversation whenever major US orchestras were looking for their next MD, but I don't know if that's been the case lately.  Maybe it's because he's in that limbo area between young hotshot and accomplished elder statesman.  I certainly enjoyed the broadcast of his Parsifal at Bayreuth this summer, even if the brass and a few audience members didn't.  In any case, he was in fine form here, as was the orchestra.

The program was mostly French, and I think all Paris premiers:  Debussy, more Debussy, Messiaen, and, probably the most famous premier of them all, Le Sacre du Printemps.  The full program is available through the menu here. Everything was quite good.  Personally, I would skip the Messiaen because the flute seemed to be too loud against the strings, and was ahead in too many changes. In fact, I'm really interested only in talking about the Stravinksy.

This is one of the best-directed concert videos I think I've ever seen.  Obviously this particular piece has a visual element - all that rhythmic scrubbing and thrashing - that most other works just don't have, so it's going to be more exciting to watch no matter what.  I've been in and seen a number of performances of this work, and there's always plenty of action no matter who's involved, but it's the video direction that makes this work.

There are, of course, the usual stationary shots, and we get a handful of the same angles over and over again.  For practical reason, that's how these things go, and handled well it's not a drawback.  Here, the choice of shots and edits were simply brilliant.  Judiciously timed, with an eye for that extra detail which really emphasizes the sound being made, the direction really made this performance memorable.

In addition to the usual section shots and soloist close-ups, we got to see some extra expressions and movements that I don't think the audience normally gets to see.  Now, the Stravinsky is one of those pieces that looks rough on paper the first time, but is really quite doable, especially with modern players who grew up with it.  Even with the tricky rhythms, many conductors will say that anyone can do this so long as they can keep a beat.  As for players, it gets to the point where there's really no need to constantly count - it's a groove.  And I must say, it was quite refreshing to see some good, honest grooving from a professional orchestra.

There are flashes of captivating personal moments, and sometimes the best moments are when the musicians aren't playing.  After playing his riff, we see a trumpet player still wagging his head, mouth half open, totally focused yet still free.  There's also the moment where the shot switches to the classic "behind the timpani" angle.  The timpanist isn't playing just that second:  he's dancing on his stool.

I found the whole thing exhilirating and fun.  Good playing everywhere, Gatti in complete control, also enjoying himself (which helps).   He also knew when to luxuriate in the orchestral colors when the time was right.  I know those spots are usually obvious to everyone - any time it gets slow, really.  But too many conductors make things sound too much the same as the rest of it, only slower.  In my mind, that misses the point of those sections.

There's also an interview with Gatti, and lots of other stuff on Medici.tv.  The video starts as soon as you click through to the site.

Internet Radio Royalty Payments Not Settled Yet - Contrary To Reports

Today's news that the RIAA, DiMA, and the National Music Publishers Association (and other publishing groups) seem to have reached some sort of agreement on music over the internet is apparently not all it's cracked up to be.  Some good will come out of this, should the Copyright Royalties Board (CRB) approve the settlement these groups submitted to them, but, contrary to how this is being portrayed in some circles, it doesn't fix the problem with internet radio.

Here's a good explanation at the Broadcast Law Blog of what's really going on.

This agreement deals with limited-time downloads and interactive streaming.  The latter is becoming increasingly common, so it's good to get that out of the way finally, although since that's mostly about "on-demand" streaming, it doesn't cover anything else.  But how many people really do limited-time downloads?  I wonder if this move is intended to push that to the forefront a little more?  It's certainly a good marketing ploy if they can swing a useful price differential.

One thing this agreement does do, though, is allow people like me to record a stream without being chased down for royalties by the RIAA as if I were an illegal file-sharing college student.  I don't make copies of anything I record off the internet, I don't post it on the torrents, and I don't do anything else except listen to it again once in a while.  So I'm certainly happy about that.

Still, this does not deal with everyday internet radio, which is the real problem.  Live365 and Rhapsody are still in limbo, and this is the biggest obstacle right now for those who want to start new internet radio stations.  I suspect the CRB will want to get the biggest bang for the buck, and stick with the SoundExchange (an unincorporated division of the RIAA, naturally, and a near monopoly) deal they struck last year.  While this year's figure - $.0018 to stream one "performance" to one listener - doesn't look like much, this adds up in a hurry with lots of listeners, tuning in 24/7.  Unless we're talking about an internet radio station that operates for one hour a day, and they only tell their friends about it.

And let's not forget that this configuration is based on the pop music format, i.e. one "performance" = one song. Classical Music gets screwed in places like iTunes, because a four movement symphony counts as four different tracks.  Internet radio has the same problem.  In one sense, this is okay, because Classical works are generally longer than rock tunes, and should cost more.  That's fair enough for direct sales of a recording.  But radio stations can get killed if they handle it this way.

What will happen is just what this commenter on the Broadcast Law Blog said after last year's punt by the CRB:

Strategically, we'll withstand the increase by doubling the minimum length of each selection we play, creating less numbers of "performances", as well as aggressively seeking out marketing deals with labels housed outside the U.S. that are willing to provide airable product and waive U.S. performance rights fees on behalf of their orchestras in exchange for preferred treatment on our station and website.

Guess what this means?  Fewer US records being played, and fewer listeners for US labels, which usually means US artists and composers get shaft as well. And nobody should even bother making a recording of, say, Chopin Waltzes or Preludes, because nobody will play it if they have to pay a royalty for every single short work.

Here's the official press release, if it helps.  I believe the CRB has until Oct. 2 to make a ruling.  Let's hope cooler heads prevail.

Life Beyond Corporate Sponsorship

With the latest news of Lehman filing for Chapter 11 and Merrill Lynch apparently selling itself to Bank of America, the question uppermost in everyone's minds is surely, "What will happen to all that corporate sponsorship upon which orchestras and music organizations rely so heavily?"

Large corporations and foundations subsidize a huge chunk of the concerts we go to.  Yes, the big boys tend to have their own endowments and funds, but so many groups have concert series sponsored by corporations that one has to wonder how that's going to work in the future.  Sports stadiums have occasionally had to change their names when the original sponsor failed to live up to the agreement (for instance, Enron Field became Minute Maid Park), and a couple years back a few arts organizations had to scramble a bit when Alberto Vilar failed to meet his promises.  These things happen often enough, but this year is probably going to be worse than most.

Even in the ticket sales department, orchestras and opera companies will feel the pinch.  If some company goes south, there are probably ten others waiting to buy that skybox at their local football stadium.  That's probably not the case with the opera house or concert hall.  The same thing goes for sponsorship of concert series, and possibly even the money some group might need to bring in that one big name of their season.

Ticket sales account for barely 15% of the average orchestra's annual budget.  The rest is made up from fund-raising campaigns, grants from various government and arts organizations, and random individual gifts.  If they're very, very lucky, an orchestra can make a few pennies from merchandising and CD sales.

It's hard to tell whether this will affect major ensembles in big cities more than other groups.  If nothing else, this season will be a good indication of just how engaged communities are with their local orchestras, large or small.  Obviously everyone needs to find more revenue streams, but that's easier said than done.

Fortunately, technology now allows for a whole lot more of the concert experience to be made available outside of the concert hall.  I've spoken before about online broadcasting, and the potential there.  Peter Gelb's greatest contribution during his tenure at The Metropolitan Opera may very well turn out to be those live opera broadcasts in movie theaters.  That idea has already been taken up by the San Francisco Opera, and Glyndebourne did this last year as well.  For years now, groups like the London Symphony Orchestra and the San Francisco Symphony have been selling their own concert CDs.  Other orchestras such as The New York Philharmonic have arrangements with labels to release a few live recordings.  All these ideas can be adopted by an orchestra or opera company of just about any size, and, depending on how they do it, without a massive up-front cost.

These ideas can apply to any program a group wants to offer, even the non-Classical ones.  Kiddie concerts and holiday celebrations can be tapped for merchandising and souvenir recordings just as well as any serious concert.

Of course, all of this will require some seriously intelligent negotiation with the players and unions.  It's certainly in everyone's best interests to be smart and not greedy, with the long term firmly in focus.  I hope everyone on both sides of those discussions will keep these things in mind.

Help Save Concertzender From Short-Sighted Bureaucrats

I just noticed this post at On An Overgrown Path that Concertzender, the terrific Dutch Public Radio broadcaster, is in danger of being shut down.

It seems that the Classical Music channel is getting more action on the cable networks than another popular music channel, the coordinator of which wants the bosses at Dutch Public Radio to simply kill the competition. That other channel has a much higher budget, and I'm sure some bureaucrats are going to look at this from the wrong end.

Enough letters of support came through to make them to temporarily postpone the decision, but Concertzender is still apparently on death row awaiting a phone call from the governor.  Rolf den Otter (who works on their webiste, I believe) sent a message to Pliable at On An Overgrown Path asking for help getting the word out.  And a tip of the hat to him for posting about it.

Here's the Concertzender main page, where you can check out all the channels they offer. They also have a blog, where they follow concerts and the music scene.  They just finished blogging about last week's Utrecht Early Music Festival.  It's in Dutch, of course, but there are plenty of translator apps available for web browsers these days.  (I like to try to struggle through it on my own first, but if I can't hack it I always use Mozilla's Firefox browser with the FoxLingo Add-on, which can handle a good number of languages.)

den Otter also asks for people to send an email to:  mening - AT - concertzender.nl  (I'm not posting the real spelling because letting the spambots have at him won't help anyone.)

Say something like "Please don't pull the plug," and mention where you're from, so they know they have more international support.

Now here's a link to send a message of support to the people who do the good work, to become a Friend of the broadcaster, or even make a small donation. 

Tired of the Latest Pop Tunes? Try Boosey & Hawkes Ringtones!

Well, why not?

booseytones

But will they let composers submit new ones?  How would that look?  "Get the latest ringtones from today's hottest composers!"

NewMusicBox Doesn't Seem to Get It

There was a discussion over the weekend over at NewMusicBox about the Bayreuth Festival's new scheme to broadcast live performances online.  Colin Holter made a blog post about it, reacting to Anne Midgette's WaPo article about it (my post on the matter is here).

Holter complains about the cost (as did I) and what he presumes was the suboptimal quality of the feed. At least he does agree that getting Wagner to the general public outside of the mystical shrine is a good thing, as with the Met's broadcasting in movie theaters.  But then he admits that he has "mixed feelings" about Wagner, and denigrates Wagnerians (his remark about them isn't entirely innacurate, but still...).  He does suggest that "a good, well-publicized, widely broadcast, unapologetically glacial production of Parsifal (the first minimalist opera?), for instance, could change some minds."  I wonder if he heard Daniel Gatti's interpretation from a couple weeks ago?  But these broadcasts aren't about opening minds about Wagner.

So his main point seems to be that Bayreuth's scheme isn't good enough, and Wagner and Wagnerians might not be worth the effort.  And he'd never really sit in front of his computer to watch streaming live opera anyway unless it was something he wrote himself, performed by non-Wagnerian singers.  Then he happily admits that he'll be downloading Tannhäuser illegally later on.  Charming.

Broadcasting over the internet (or on movie screens or on tv) isn't going to "de-mystify" anything.  That's missing the whole point of Bayreuth's scheme, which is to allow more people to see and hear the music they are already interested in.  Not only that, but this could potentially be a new revenue stream for lots of music organizations.  Reading the responses from commenters shows that at least this segment of the NewMusicBox audience doesn't get it, and they seem to be caught up in more parochial, emotional ideals.

The comments shift the topic gradually from discussing the Met's own, more successful and affordable, version of this scheme, to how opera and the arts are more affordable in Europe due to government funding.   More affordable than the Met, anyway, I guess.

But then the comments get a little more contentious.  One commenter finds it ironic that there's an article about this in the Washington Post, when Washington, DC, doesn't even have it's own proper opera house.  Huh?   Of course his next sentence reveals a political axe to grind, but his comment is followed immediately by someone else asking why an opera house is even relevant in the 21st Century.

The rest of the comments vary from people saying Wagner was an anti-Semite so we shouldn't be listening to his music anyway, to how opera houses in general are now bad because they are reminiscent of European nobility and the power of wealthy people and are just stuffy old museums now.  And naturally someone has to mention that there are anti-Semitic elements in the music and Wotan's Farewell always evokes images of Nazi marches.  (At some point I will do a post on how to overcome these feelings.)  Then somebody combines a lecture about the anti-Semtic symbolism inherent in Wagner's work (much of which is true), and then protests that the US shouldn't let Europeans dictate our cultural agenda.  Again - Huh?

At least Holter chimes in again to remind them that Wagner wrote some good music. 

One commenter even said that broadcasting the concert is just dumbing down the music.  By allowing people to see and hear this music in less than high fidelity, it somehow gives them the idea that the music isn't worth much, and the audience won't be able to grasp that a live performance might be better.  This, of course, is part of the same argument people have been making since the early days of wax cylinders, and got worse once CDs came out.  It's also foolish because one could just as easily say that no one should ever go to concerts by regional orchestras, or amateur societies, or by anything less than world class artists, lest one think the music being performed isn't worthy of respect. 

This all seems to be a bit out of touch with reality.  As one commenter mentions, there is a ridiculously long waiting list for tickets.  They are also very expensive, since it's a private, family-owned operation.  It's also a specialty act, as it's the place Wagner built for this music, and the later operas were written for this venue and this kind of orchestra.  This means that most of us will never have the opportunity to go to Bayreuth ever.  So the Festival's scheme to broadcast the performances opens up a special treat that would otherwise never be available to so many people who actually like Wagner's music.  It almost seems like some of the commenters think it's a bad idea to let Wagner out of Bayreuth at all.  Even Holter appears to be more concerned about how this will get new audiences to like Wagner.  Which misses the point entirely.

How many people are there who follow The Ring around?  Back when James Levine did that big Ring Cycle at the Met, I made sure to get the VCR set up.  I lived in Arizona at the time, and certainly couldn't afford to go to New York for it.  The only way I could ever see and hear this performance was because the Met has been broadcasting over the radio and tv for decades.  The quality was, of course, nothing like as good as it could have been live.  But so what?  The music reaches a vastly wider audience this way, which is why the movie theater deal is probably going to be the best result of Peter Gelb's tenure.

Now, it must be said (again) that the price of the Bayreuth broadcast was too high.  So that was a bad idea, and they could have started with higher quality.  The rest of the idea is solid. 

Finally, it seems that there is too much political emotionalism going on here, and less rational thinking about the music industry.  The negative views espoused about opera houses in general, as well as a bit of anti-European sentiment, reveal more about the commenters than about the relevant merits or flaws in Bayreuth's online broadcasting scheme.

It doesn't help when the topic of discussion is introduced by someone who is against the idea in the first place, and then misses the point about what it's for.

Classical Music Concerts - Who Wants Live Online Video?

Lots of people.  Anne Midgette has an article in the Washington Post about two different groups doing online video broadcasts of Classical Music concerts.  One seems to be successful and growing, the other one, well, not so much:

European music fests coming to the Web

Broadcasting live music video over the web is nothing even remotely new, of course.  And it's not just that pop music has been doing it for years.  I saw an early, low-res, low fps attempt at this at the New Directions Cello Festival more than ten years ago.  Which shows the irony in all this.

Years ago, it was the contemporary music scene that was experimenting with sharing their work with audiences through new technology.  The (now defunct?) Institute for Studies in the Arts at Arizona State University used to make a big deal about getting all their commissioned works on interactive dvds.  There was much talk about interactivity, sharing, online broadcasting.  Musicians would set up concerts in which performers would be in different cities, perceived as an ensemble only to those viewing the combo on screen.  A few music and media heavyweights in Europe tried to get something like this going several years ago, which died a quick death.

So there's nothing new at all about this idea in Classical Music.   The innovators stayed in the margins, and the big boys of the music business mostly stayed clear.  Overtures were made every now and then, but there were all kinds of reasons why it never went mainstream.

The basic reasons are money and technology.  Until three or four years ago, the technology to do online video to the satisfaction of (quite rightfully) finicky Classical Music fans with very high standards didn't really exist.  That is to say, even though broadcast capabilities existed, most potential audience members didn't have the technology themselves on the receiving end (It's so easy to forget that not everybody had high-speed internet connections and decent computers at home).  Even if it was mostly free, watching violin bows saw away at 12 frames per second - choppy and barely moving, like in the worst of the old Hanna-Barbera cartoons - whle listening to semi-decent quality audio - which may or may not freeze at the worst possible moment - just doesn't cut it.  And forget it if they're asking for a monthly subscription for it, and special software must be installed, etc.

Then one has to consider all the negotiated costs with the artists.  Musicians unions nearly prevented the BBC Legends label from getting off the ground, so it's no surprise that broadcasting rights and royalties would be a nightmare to work out.  It goes on and on, of course, with the end result that it's a pleasant surprise when the Bayreuth Festival announces that it's going to do a live broadcast of Der Meistersinger. 

What is not a surprise is the fact that Bayreuth didn't get anything like as many subscribers at they hoped.  At $75 each, no less.  If they wanted 10,000 viewers, they could have easily gotten three times that at $20 a pop.  That should have been at least worth their investment in the project, and is certainly far more than they made their way.

Equally unsurprising is that Medici Arts is doing extremely well with its free broadcasts on their own Medici.tv.

How did Medici Arts arrive at their successful (so far) formula?  Years of experience in the performing arts business, dealing with every single aspect of both live and recorded music, artist management, and everything in between.  The group was founded by Steven Wright, who used to be Managing Director of IMG Europe.  He was also the brains behind BBC Legends, along with John Pattrick, a long time EMI exec.  These guys had been through it all already, and the idea of combining a music label with broadcasting and distribution.  Although they started out making arrangements with the BBC for archived material, that led to similar arrangements with other European broadcasting organizations, which in turn has led to their involvement with live broadcasting of today's concerts.

This is how you do it.  Is there an audience for this?  Yes, and for a long time now.  Is the technology ubiquitous enough for this to work?  Absolutely.

Unfortunately, the summer festivals they're offering for free have ended.  But there is still more coming, and they still have highlight clips of the festivals showing online right now.   They also offer subscriptions at a more reasonable rate than Bayreuth.

I'm adding a link to this on the left, and I because of this I've had to change the list title to "Classcial Music Online".