Feedback Day
Having just spent the day rehearsing the seven pieces that will make up our FutureClassics concert tomorrow night, I can now confidently say that the audience (which you're planning to be a part of, right? I mean, c'mon, the tickets are ten bucks...) will be in for quite an array of styles and sounds.
Composer Aaron Jay Kernis, who runs the Composer Institute along with MN Orch staffer Beth Cowart, seems to make a point of selecting participants who come from very different backgrounds and musical points of view. So this year, we've got a minimalist, a couple of hardcore atonalists, one fan of electronica, one storyteller, and a couple others that I can't begin to categorize. I'd be lying if I said I loved all the pieces, but that's exactly the point of a concert like this. We all listen with different ears, and a work that leaves me cold might just make your night. (And for the record, there were a couple of pieces that so impressed me that I'm hoping we get a chance to play them on a subscription concert in the near future.)
Part of the rehearsal process for this concert that differs from our normal routine is that each member of the orchestra is given a feedback form for each composer, and we're asked to comment on everything from the overall feel of the piece, to how the writing works (or doesn't) for our individual instruments, to whether the parts we're working off of are laid out well. I always struggle a bit with these forms, because I'm sure the composers get a lot of contradictory advice - musicians aren't known for our group-think abilities - and I don't want to add to any confusion or frustration they may have on reading our reactions to their work.
So I try to make my comments as specific as possible. If I don't think a piece works, I try to figure out exactly what would need to change to make it work. (Much of the time, my advice tends to be, "Thin out the orchestration!" Composers used to writing for small ensembles frequently try to do too much at once with a full orchestra, which is when you wind up with a cacophony. 98 musicians make a lot of noise in full cry.) Today, I advised one composer to change the register of some high pizzicatti in the viola part (they were so high up the fingerboard that they sounded like pitchless clunks,) suggested that another reformat the parts to make some of his rhythmic figures easier to understand on the fly, and wondered whether some orchestrational choices had caused a third piece to be more difficult than necessary to hold together rhythmically.
The harshest thing I wrote was this: "There is nothing inherently wrong with atonality, but you can't just use it as a weapon against your listeners. When you give the audience nothing at all to grab on to aurally, they'll simply shut down in defense, and won't bother coming along to wherever you're trying to take them." Tough, yes, but I wouldn't have bothered if I didn't think the composer on the receiving end was an obviously intelligent individual, capable of writing great music.
The bottom line is that we should have quite a show tomorrow night, with each of the composers appearing on stage to talk about their work before we perform it. And if you really can't make it out to Orchestra Hall (seriously, people - ten bucks), the concert will be broadcast live on the classical stations of Minnesota Public Radio (99.5 KSJN in the Cities,) and streamed live on MPR's website.
Composer Aaron Jay Kernis, who runs the Composer Institute along with MN Orch staffer Beth Cowart, seems to make a point of selecting participants who come from very different backgrounds and musical points of view. So this year, we've got a minimalist, a couple of hardcore atonalists, one fan of electronica, one storyteller, and a couple others that I can't begin to categorize. I'd be lying if I said I loved all the pieces, but that's exactly the point of a concert like this. We all listen with different ears, and a work that leaves me cold might just make your night. (And for the record, there were a couple of pieces that so impressed me that I'm hoping we get a chance to play them on a subscription concert in the near future.)
Part of the rehearsal process for this concert that differs from our normal routine is that each member of the orchestra is given a feedback form for each composer, and we're asked to comment on everything from the overall feel of the piece, to how the writing works (or doesn't) for our individual instruments, to whether the parts we're working off of are laid out well. I always struggle a bit with these forms, because I'm sure the composers get a lot of contradictory advice - musicians aren't known for our group-think abilities - and I don't want to add to any confusion or frustration they may have on reading our reactions to their work.
So I try to make my comments as specific as possible. If I don't think a piece works, I try to figure out exactly what would need to change to make it work. (Much of the time, my advice tends to be, "Thin out the orchestration!" Composers used to writing for small ensembles frequently try to do too much at once with a full orchestra, which is when you wind up with a cacophony. 98 musicians make a lot of noise in full cry.) Today, I advised one composer to change the register of some high pizzicatti in the viola part (they were so high up the fingerboard that they sounded like pitchless clunks,) suggested that another reformat the parts to make some of his rhythmic figures easier to understand on the fly, and wondered whether some orchestrational choices had caused a third piece to be more difficult than necessary to hold together rhythmically.
The harshest thing I wrote was this: "There is nothing inherently wrong with atonality, but you can't just use it as a weapon against your listeners. When you give the audience nothing at all to grab on to aurally, they'll simply shut down in defense, and won't bother coming along to wherever you're trying to take them." Tough, yes, but I wouldn't have bothered if I didn't think the composer on the receiving end was an obviously intelligent individual, capable of writing great music.
The bottom line is that we should have quite a show tomorrow night, with each of the composers appearing on stage to talk about their work before we perform it. And if you really can't make it out to Orchestra Hall (seriously, people - ten bucks), the concert will be broadcast live on the classical stations of Minnesota Public Radio (99.5 KSJN in the Cities,) and streamed live on MPR's website.
posted by Sam at
5:38 PM
3 Comments:
My thoughts on the Future Classics! 2008:
First of all, if it were possible to get into a fist fight over a blog, I very nearly did that last year. A couple of local bloggers made the comment that the Composer Institute & "Future Classics!" concert is not a good use of the orchestra's resources (same bloggers who tell us that Osmo Vanska is not a good Beethoven conductor). At any rate, this is such an amazing and worthwhile venture that it had me wanting to throw left-hooks at these people.
It's wonderful to be able to hear from the different composers - their personalities are as varied as the music they write, but they are all fascinating people. The public concert brings out an equally diverse audience. What would be really great is to have some of these people in the regular subscription audience, but as it is they feel like two distinctly separate groups of people.
This event is much more informal than a subscription concert, which unfortunately translated into some audience members minds as meaning it's okay to talk throughout each and every piece on the program (or it's quite possible the family behind me is ignorant of all manners). This is my only beef in what is an engrossing and enjoyable concert.
I decided to use this '08 concert as an opportunity to judge each piece and submit rankings, similar to what is done in an instrumentalist competition. In the end this proved much more difficult than I thought it would be. However, here's what I came up with:
1. David Schneider: Automation
2. Andrew McManus: Identity
3. Ming-Hsiu Yen: Yun
4. Antonio Carlos DeFeo: Four Portraits: por los ojos de los niños
5. Justin Merritt: River of Blood
6. Wang Lu: Wailing
7. Ted Hearne: Patriot
The Antonio Carlos DeFeo piece appeared to be the audience popular favorite. It's film music all-the-way, and I don't mean that in a derogatory sense. It's great music, and wonderfully written, but probably not my cup of tea - and perhaps a little less likely to be taken on by serious conductors in a subscription concert environment.
I really liked the David Schneider composition "Automation". I'll call it the minimalist's version of "Pacific 231". It kind of chucks along briefly at the start, somewhat reminding me of Honegger's masterpiece. Schneider's percussion instrumentation reminded me a lot of Steve Reich - no surprise then that I'm a huge Reich admirer. There were a few times in the piece where the composer goes in a more romantic direction - and it didn't seem to fit with the character of the music as I see it - but things always get back on course. Schneider brings back the automation theme at the close of the piece in an exceptionally witty and creative way.
It seems that the composers all seemed to be writing music that is exceptionally loud at some point in their compositions, even if very briefly. I realize that our current pop-culture environment seems to force loudness upon us, but some of this music was loud almost to the point where it is dangerous to our hearing. The composers that always seem to speak to me the best are the ones that learn how to say important things without the need to be blaring.
I really respected some of these pieces as creative vehicles more than I enjoyed hearing them. Clearly they were written by very talented people, whom I look forward to hearing from again down the road. Well done all!
...same bloggers who tell us that Osmo Vanska is not a good Beethoven conductor...
Ha! I believe I know exactly which bloggers you're referring to. I believe they've recently moved to Boston, so we don't have to be their primary target anymore...
...some of this music was loud almost to the point where it is dangerous to our hearing.
So you can just imagine how loud it was onstage! I think you raise an excellent point, and I think part of the problem is simply that composers who haven't written a lot for orchestra underestimate just how ear-splitting that "ffff" marking is going to be. A lot of the difficult atonality of some new music is just much easier to take in and think about when it's not threatening to deafen you.
I agree almost entirely with your rankings, though I would have put Ming-Hsiu Yen's piece at the top of the list. Many members of the orchestra commented that hers was the piece that immediately felt as mature and well-scored as the stuff we play on subscription concerts every week. I think we'll be hearing a lot more from her in the future...
I love, love, love the Composer Institute rehearsals and concert! I look forward to them with huge excitement and this year was no disappointment at all.
First off, congrats to Osmo for his "Champion of New Music" award. Well deserved. He works very hard.
Second, the orchestra deserves the highest of all possible kudos from me, i.e. you guys are pure chocolate! What an amazing two days.
Third, I decided this year to approach the rehearsals and concert with two things in mind: 1) how effectively does the composer use the orchestra as an instrument in itself and not just a grouping of different instruments? and 2) is the music exterior (listener-friendly) or interior (abstract). I didn't think so much about whether I enjoyed the music or not, although I had immediate emotional reactions to each piece.
Purely as a listener, I thought this group of composers did a much better job of writing for the orchestra as a whole than in previous years. Even the abstract atonal pieces had a coherence to them. Some of the best composing, though, came with music inspired by something more than ideas, I think. And I thought the abstract pieces were less successful at utilizing the orchestra as a whole instrument.
And for me, the more exterior pieces, were the more successful, and there was almost complete overlap with the successful pieces in the previous comment.
My rankings: first half -- DeFeo, Yen, McManus and Hearne. Second half -- Schneider, Merritt and Lu.
I loved seeing so many people in the hall last night. Congratulations to you, Sam, and the rest of the orchestra. I loved this concert (and I've written about it at my blog, too).
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home