# Differences Between "Big Five" Orchestras



## ormandy (Aug 9, 2015)

I have seen many discussions as to which of the "Big Five" orchestras (Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, New York, Philadelphia) is "best." That discussion is so subjective that it is not worth pursuing.

Aside from the general excellent play of these orchestras, there are differences. Back in the day (Reiner, Solti), CSO was renowned for its brass playing, Philadelphia (Ormandy) was renowned for its lustrous string sound, etc.

For those of you who currently listen to these orchestras, what characterizes each? How do they differ? Does one particular section set that orchestra apart from the others? Is it the result of the artistic sensibilities of its music director? Is it primarily the hall where each orchestra plays that dictates its sound signature? Thoughts?

ormandy


----------



## rumleymusic (Aug 14, 2015)

You are right to say "back in the day" These are very different orchestras today, and the "super sections" like Chicago's brass, Cleveland's winds, and Philly's Strings are just not prevalent any more. There is a lot more careful playing, especially in major recordings that make the best orchestras sound monotone and similar.

Chicago still has a gritty edge and an abundance of energy, unfortunately their live recordings are bright and harsh. Cleveland is brimming with some of the best players around and the technical mastery of both the winds and brass is impressive. Boston and New York sound similar to me, perhaps Boston has a little more energy while New York plays every concert like a recording session. Which it practically is. Last time I heard Philadelphia, I thought it was rather bland, not quite worthy of "top 5" recognition anymore. 

LA Phil should me a modern top 5 contender, as well as San Francisco IMHO.


----------



## scratchgolf (Nov 15, 2013)

This is hard for me to answer in current times. My experiences with these orchestras are based on old recordings alone. It's equally unfair to judge current Cleveland off Szell as it is to judge current LA off Mehta. I wouldn't feel right answering until I'd at least sampled current recordings from each, yet a live concert or 10 would really make it an easier answer. I certainly agree that west coast orchestras deserve stronger looks than they may have 50 years ago.


----------



## Admiral (Dec 27, 2014)

With so few true resident conductors who build an orchestra and conduct it 25 weeks a year, the house sound seems to be going away. 
I think it's likely more a question of how strong the principals are in a given section than a house sound.

As I write that, however, it comes to mind that I really do enjoy certain bands performing certain composers: for example, the Lahti Symphony playing Sibelius, the Chicago playing Bruckner, Detroit playing Russian, etc. but maybe that's more a function of the conductors.


----------



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

I don't agree with the widely held belief that all or most orchestras "sound alike " today " and that everything was so much more "individual" in the past . I haven't had as much chance to compare the big five orchestras in recent years as I used to , because unfortunately, they get far less exposure today because of diffiucult economic times .
They don't make regular CD recordings , appear on PBS anywhere near as often as they used to, 
nor are there as many pre-recorded radio broadcasts etc . 
But orchestras CAN'T sound alike or play with uniform styles because they consist of different musicians playing different makes of instruments in concert halls with different acoustics .
In particular, woodwind and brass players have markedly different timbres . What little I've heard of the Chicago symphony in recent years shows that they do not sound like what they used to in the glory days of Reiner and Solti - there is no one left from the Reiner era and maybe only a few who played under Solti , who stepped down in 1991 but continued to guest conduct until his death in 1997 .
It's a totally different orchestra in terms of personnel, but there are probably some who were students of former members , as this is common in orchestras .
I've had only a limited opportunity to hear them under Muti, but from all reports , the orchestra is thriving under him artistically .
It's the same with the others . Not too long ago, I saw the inaugural concert of Andris Nelsons 
with the Boston symphony, and they too did not sound anything like what they did under Charles Munch and other BSO music directors of the 50s and 60s . But even on television, they sounded wonderful to me ; rich and full . The rather strident, vibrato-ridden Frenchish brass sound of the orchestra under Much was replaced with a round and burnished timbre . 
But an orchestra should not have a uniform , one-size-fits-all sound and style which it applies to all or most music ; it should be like a chameleon and be able to adapt to music by composers of a wide variety of nationalities and eras . They haven't always ; Eugene Ormandy tended to reduce music in my humble opinion to generalized plush sounds rather than trying to change the sound according to the style of the music . It sounded superficially gorgeous but his interprtations weren't nearly as interesting as those of many other great conductors living and dead .


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

First of all as some have said in the US it is no longer just the five.

In spite of the current economy there are many fine orchestras beyond the five including LA, San Francisco and the Met Orchestra. I have just heard the LA at the Hollywood Bowl when I was just in LA on vacation and they sounded great.


----------



## phlrdfd (Jan 18, 2015)

While I generally agree with the sentiments on the Big Five orchestras not sounding the same as they did during the middle 20th century years, when those orchestral reputations were made for the most part, I have mentioned a couple times in comments about concerts I attended that Nezet-Seguin clearly makes a conscious effort to draw the traditional Stokowski-Ormandy Philadelphia Sound, in particular when he conducts Russian late Romantic music, and he succeeds to a remarkable degree. There was a concert that included less popular excerpts from the Nutcracker and Tchaikovsky's 5th. I could swear that if I didn't know what year it was and closed my eyes, I'd have thought I was listening to Ormandy's orchestra. And this was just within the past six or seven months.

For a taste of what I'm talking about, someone recorded portions of the Russian Romantic music festival that Yannick led in January or February and posted them on Youtube. The search words would be Nezet-Seguin, Philadelphia and either Tchaikovsky or Rachmaninoff.


----------



## Barbebleu (May 17, 2015)

I see we are discussing the big five in U.S. of A. If it was world then Berlin Phil, Vienna Phil, Dresden Staatskapelle, Concertgeboue Amsterdam and London Symphony might just have the edge!


----------



## Admiral (Dec 27, 2014)

I think the reality is that there are more great bands than there are great conductors. 

The RSNO can play anything the NY Phil can play, the question is who is in the pit. The reason the RSNO plays Slavic music so wonderfully is because Jarvi had so long to bring them to it. Does that equate to a "house sound"? I'm not sure one way or the other but for my listening I will gravitate toward known alliances like that.


----------

