# Programming contemporary orchestral music



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

There has been some talk here - and not for the first time - about orchestras not really wanting to programme contemporary music or, when they do so, putting a new piece in a programme with very popular pieces to ensure tickets sell. This seems silly as, if the presence of the New World symphony is what convinces you to buy tickets you are probably not ready for the contemporary piece. Not that there is anything wrong with the Dvorak. It is a fine work. But it makes me wonder: if an orchestra _wants _to programme some contemporary music how should they do so?

One option might be to programme an entirely or mostly contemporary programme. But many fans of contemporary music like a lot of classical music and would be attracted to a varied programmes that fitted together well. I know I would. Some old works might throw new light on newer pieces. What if you just want to treat contemporary pieces as normal pieces of classical music. How would you programme, say, Boulez, Carter, Widmann or Benjamin in a mixed programme that is designed to be enjoyed as a whole and to fill a hall?

Do some Classical and Romantic composers go well with some contemporary composers? Or would you only mix only older modern music like Stravinsky, Prokofiev and Bartok with more recent and avant garde works? *Maybe you can suggest some exciting programmes that treat the relatively new as normal and belonging in the tradition? *You might want to avoid the very popular warhorses as they can fill a hall on their own with an audience that would mostly not enjoy the really modern.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

I did half expect this thread to die. Perhaps those who know and enjoy the contemporary composers I mentioned are not given to fantasising about the concert programmes they would create if they had the opportunity? I think it would be easy to programme relatively popular Stravinsky and Bartok pieces (say Stravinsky's Symphony in 3 Movements or Symphony of Psalms and a Bartok piano concerto) with a major piece on the cusp of some popularity by, say, Boulez (say, Sur Incises) and some Beethoven (perhaps the 8th). I'd pay to go to that with a conductor I was happy to hear. Or, why not Widmann's Violin Concerto in the company of some Debussy and Schumann? The trick may be to avoid any works that are very regularly programmed so that the concerts targeted more experienced listeners.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Mussorgsky (any orchestration other than Ravel to increase interest) - Pictures at an exhibition
c/w
Rautavaara - Symphony 6 'Vincentiana'


----------



## Tikoo Tuba (Oct 15, 2018)

I believe modern music needs its own venue , an architecture more spare . Depart from grandeur . Symphonic glory can be sacrificed .


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

The Mussorgsky/Rautavaara is a good idea IMO. 

Obviously it's quite easy to combine thematically - I'd find a programme of Nystroem's 'Ishavet', Debussy's 'Printemps', Delius' 'A Song of Summer', Langgaard's 4th Symphony 'Leaf Fall' and Dlugoszewski's autumnal fantasy 'Fire Fragile Flight' appealing, for example.

Or Poulenc's Concert Champetre, Ravel's Piano Concerto in G, Valen's Violin Concerto, Keuris' Double Concerto for 2 Celli.

etc. ...


----------



## Boludo (Apr 4, 2019)

Enthusiast said:


> There has been some talk here - and not for the first time - about orchestras not really wanting to programme contemporary music or, when they do so, putting a new piece in a programme with very popular pieces to ensure tickets sell. This seems silly as, if the presence of the New World symphony is what convinces you to buy tickets you are probably not ready for the contemporary piece. Not that there is anything wrong with the Dvorak. It is a fine work. But it makes me wonder: if an orchestra _wants _to programme some contemporary music how should they do so?
> 
> One option might be to programme an entirely or mostly contemporary programme. But many fans of contemporary music like a lot of classical music and would be attracted to a varied programmes that fitted together well. I know I would. Some old works might throw new light on newer pieces. What if you just want to treat contemporary pieces as normal pieces of classical music. How would you programme, say, Boulez, Carter, Widmann or Benjamin in a mixed programme that is designed to be enjoyed as a whole and to fill a hall?
> 
> Do some Classical and Romantic composers go well with some contemporary composers? Or would you only mix only older modern music like Stravinsky, Prokofiev and Bartok with more recent and avant garde works? *Maybe you can suggest some exciting programmes that treat the relatively new as normal and belonging in the tradition? *You might want to avoid the very popular warhorses as they can fill a hall on their own with an audience that would mostly not enjoy the really modern.


Recently I saw a chamber sized orchestra pairing Haydn's Symphony No. 80 with Schnittke's Concerto Grosso No. 1. This worked very well. Haydn 80 is the one with the simple harpsichord part, played by Haydn at the premiere. In this concert the composer was conducting from the harpsichord (although there wasn't much conducting in evidence). Then for the Schnittke piece the conductor was moving between the harpsichord in the centre and the prepared piano on the right hand side of the stage. Whilst these works are of course very different, they did not seem out of place when played one after the other. The audience responded enthusiastically to Schnittke's work. The headline in the concert was a full sized orchestra doing the Manfred.

So I would say that this is a good example of new works being programmed with old and is better than just starting a concert with a 10 minute piece by Ligeti before getting on with old war horses.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

I don't think programming less accessible contemporary music with Classical or Romantic warhorses is the way to go. The aesthetics of the music is too different. The more conservative audience members may only view the contemporary piece as a vastly inferior (rightly or wrongly) filler to the main work they came to see. Personally I don't want to go to a concert to watch those works I've never heard of before (I went to a world premiere of some work I've forgotten, it was catchy and well done but forgettable), and would prefer something in the same vein. Putting the contemporary music with something more canonic in the 20th century makes sense, because there is probably more similarity in aesthetics, and it is likely the older work had some influence on the new one, and is way more cohesive as a concert experience.


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

I agree with the point above that digesting contemporary works often takes time for the average listener, including myself. The examples I gave above are works that are quite immediately approachable, by content or atmosphere, though.


----------



## SuperTonic (Jun 3, 2010)

Last night I attended a Fort Worth Symphony concert where the program was Dvorak's Carnival Overture, followed by Andrew Norman's Switch percussion concerto, a contemporary work composed in 2015. After the intermission was Martinu's 1st Symphony.
This is most definitely NOT the typical concert program for the FWSO, but they do occasionally do adventuresome programs like this. I really enjoyed the concert and thought the program worked well. I would definitely spend more on concert tickets if these kinds of programs were more common.
I was actually pleasantly surprised at the size of the audience too. I was expecting a lot of empty seats, but there was a decent sized audience in attendance. I noticed a lot more young faces in the audience than is normal for a symphony concert as well.


----------



## Trout (Apr 11, 2011)

Here are a few programs that I've thought of, along with a title for each:


"The Birth of Modernism"

Debussy: Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faun
Boulez: Notations for Orchestra
Takemitsu: A Flock Descends into the Pentagonal Garden
Ligeti: Lontano
--------------
"The Origin of Life"

Debussy: La Mer
J.L. Adams: Become Ocean
--------------
"Spiritual Apocalypse"

Stravinsky: Symphony of Psalms
Ligeti: Clocks and Clouds
Scelsi: Uaxuctum
--------------
"Romantic Spectralism"

Brahms: Variations on a Theme of Haydn
Radulescu: Piano Concerto "The Quest"
--------------
"Those Four Notes"

Lutosławski: Symphony No. 3
Beethoven: Symphony No. 5
--------------
"Gradual Unraveling"

Haydn: Symphony No. 6 "Le matin"
Schubert/Berio: Rendering
Romitelli: Dead City Radio
--------------
"Organum in the Old and New" (not orchestral, but I think it's an interesting program)

Pérotin: Viderunt Omnes
Reich: Proverb
Reich: Music for Mallet Instruments, Voices and Organ
Byrd: Mass for 5 Voices


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

I suppose it proves as odd to program a Baroque work, such as a _Brandenburg Concerto_, in the same concert with, say, a Tchaikovsky Symphony. Even if it were the 4th _Brandenburg_ and the 4th Symphony! I would prefer works with similar sized ensembles in a concert, though this is purely a personal preference; I have no statistical/scientific reasoning behind my preference. But in such a venue, the _Brandenburg Concerto_ sits well with many a contemporary work which feature smallish, Baroque-like orchestras. One might even surmise, in such a concert, that there remains a relationship between the musical organization of a Baroque work and a contemporary work.

Too, the large Tchaikovsky-sized orchestra allows for many a contemporary work, too. The above-mentioned Mussorgsky _Pictures at an Exhibition_ c/w Rautavaara Symphony 6 _Vincentiana_ works beautifully well. And many, I'm sure, will delight in the orchestration similarities, the way the two pieces use instrumental "color" and organization to achieve ends. Heck, I will even settle for the Ravel version, though I, too, would appreciate an alternative. I know I've collected several for my own enjoyment.

I remain a fan of "new music" which, granted, can seem difficult to assess for quality against those "war horses" of the past. Because time and the considered assessment of society do count for something. But I suspect the Penderecki_ Threnody_ will someday be accepted as a classic alongside other string ensemble works such as Mozart's _Nachtmusik_, Grieg's _Holberg Suite_, and Britten's _Simple Symphony_; and if someone were to program those four works in a concert locally, I'd purchase a ticket!


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Trout said:


> Here are a few programs that I've thought of, along with a title for each:
> 
> "The Birth of Modernism"
> 
> ...


Where can I subscribe to your concerts?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

SONNET CLV said:


> I suppose it proves as odd to program a Baroque work, such as a _Brandenburg Concerto_, in the same concert with, say, a Tchaikovsky Symphony. Even if it were the 4th _Brandenburg_ and the 4th Symphony! I would prefer works with similar sized ensembles in a concert, though this is purely a personal preference; I have no statistical/scientific reasoning behind my preference. But in such a venue, the _Brandenburg Concerto_ sits well with many a contemporary work which feature smallish, Baroque-like orchestras. One might even surmise, in such a concert, that there remains a relationship between the musical organization of a Baroque work and a contemporary work.
> 
> Too, the large Tchaikovsky-sized orchestra allows for many a contemporary work, too. The above-mentioned Mussorgsky _Pictures at an Exhibition_ c/w Rautavaara Symphony 6 _Vincentiana_ works beautifully well. And many, I'm sure, will delight in the orchestration similarities, the way the two pieces use instrumental "color" and organization to achieve ends. Heck, I will even settle for the Ravel version, though I, too, would appreciate an alternative. I know I've collected several for my own enjoyment.
> 
> I remain a fan of "new music" which, granted, can seem difficult to assess for quality against those "war horses" of the past. Because time and the considered assessment of society do count for something. But I suspect the Penderecki_ Threnody_ will someday be accepted as a classic alongside other string ensemble works such as Mozart's _Nachtmusik_, Grieg's _Holberg Suite_, and Britten's _Simple Symphony_; and if someone were to program those four works in a concert locally, I'd purchase a ticket!


Yes the Baroque is effectively closed to symphony orchestras these days. Perhaps "big boned" Bach will make a comeback but, although I enjoy the odd Klemperer and Busch Bach recording, I will be happy for it not to. And Bach survives in those styles of performance better than most other Baroque composers. Alot of new music is for small ensemble and so probably doesn't belong in a symphony orchestra's repertoire. But a lot of new music draws on the tradition of large orchestral pieces.

I think our difficulty in comparing the merits of new music with old standards is a real one (even if it is linked to the difficult idea that we can achieve objectivity in this) but the first purpose of new music is presumably for us to enjoy it now and to leave its posterity to fate. If I enjoy a piece by, say, Boulez or Widmann (and I do!) that is enough. And, anyway, just as there is little point in looking for similar qualities in Haydn and Mahler, new music that will survive will do so with qualities that are not the same as the qualities that make Haydn or Mahler great. I do _feel _that new music will survive to join the repertoire and I am deeply suspicious of the taste (as a guide to me) of those who feel sure  that it won't. We can't really know what will survive from our times.


----------

