# How To Make Concert Programming More Interesting



## superhorn (Mar 23, 2010)

So many orchestras today stick to the same old familiar warhoses of the orchestral repertoire .
The problem is that too many people in their audiences know what they like and like what they know, and 
are appallingly reluctant to hear anything they are unfamiliar with . These people are set in their ways, unfortunately . They would rather be waterboarded than hear anything by a contemporary composer, even a conservative one ! Orchestra managements fear audiences voting with their feet . And who can blame them ?
Year after year, you will generally tend to hear the same limited number of warhoses by Beethoven, Brahms, Tchaikovsky, Rachmaninov, Schubert, Mendelssohn, Rimsky-Korsakov, etc. Now this is nothing against these works themselves; the are wonderful music and deservedly popular . 
But just think how more interesting things would be at concerts if orchestras would play these works at concerts. Some of the audience members might love them if they just gave them a chance :
Dvorak: symphonies 1-6 , instead of just the last three . The symphonies of Franz Berwald . The first of Mily Balakirev . The one by Paul Dukas. The other four Saint-Saens symphonies beside the familiar "Organ" symphony. The four symphonies of Albert Rpussel . The Korngold symphony . The "Sinfonia India" of Carlos Chavez. The six Nielsen symphonies (they're startng to be done a little more often now,) Bliss, a "Color" symphony, !),Myaskovsky 6,8. Bax, 3rd . 4 of Franz Schmidt .
the three of Max Bruch , the symphony no 4 of Sergei Taneyev, the first of Vasssily Kallinikov, or the first of 
Norwegian composer Johan Svendsen , the six Martinu symphonies . The Glazunbov symphonies. The two by Carl Maria von Weber .
the four of Szymanowski, the three of Zdenek Fibich . 
Concertos : piano: three by Medtner, the Busoni , Sir Arthur Bliss, Carlos Chavez, 2 by Wilhelm Stenhammar,
1 by Roussel, 2 by Glazunov, Violin : Nielsen. Myaskovsky. Szymanowski, Hans Pfitzner . Cello : Myaskovsky.
MIscellaneous orchestral; Roussel : Evocations. Spider's Feast ballet, Bacchus & Ariane ballet .
Richard Strauss : Josephslegende ballet . Nielsen : Pan&Syrinx, Helios overture, Rhapsodic overture ,
Saga Dream, Stenhammar: Serenade in F major, Dvorak : Slavonic Rhapsodies(not to be confused with the Slavonic dances), Hussite overture, symphonic variations, The Golden Spinning Wheel, Water Sprite ,
Noonday Witch, Othello overture, Heroic song . Prokofiev: The Buffoon ballet suite. Suites frm the "Stone Flower " ballet , Balakirev : Tamara . Granville Bantock : Fifine At The Fair, Arnold Bax, Tintagel.
Rimsky-Korsakov, "Antar", Tchaikovsky: The 4 orchestral suites.
Choral : Bruch : The Song Of The Bell . Dvorak: The Spectre's Bride . Franz Schmidt: The Book of the Seven Seals . All this is just the tip of the iceberg .
As the late Harold C. Schonberg said of orchestra programming "There's so much which could be played, and so little which is ".


----------



## Vaneyes (May 11, 2010)

With respect to time restraint for some regional symphonic organizations, I think it's important to program four works, instead of the usual 3, or two or one, if Mahler is on the card.

Four gives much more flexibility in introducing new works and modern works. I think it's better to nurture with shorter 'n sweeter, eventually progressing to the more challenging. It's quite amazing, that this sort of thinking is still revolutionary in some cities. Probably due to no effort, or clumsy effort.


----------



## DrKilroy (Sep 29, 2012)

Here are a few propositions I sent to Warsaw National Philharmony. Note that this is a list of pieces that are not often played at this particular philharmony, so it does not apply to all philharmonies.

G. Gershwin - Rhapspody in Blue, Second Rhapsody, American in Paris, Cuban Ouverture, Catfish Row, Variations on 'I Got Rhythm'.
E. Satie - Parade.
R. Vaughan Williams - all syphonies, especially the 1st and 7th, Tallis Phantasia, Greensleeves Phantasia, The Lark Ascending, Five Variants on Dives and Lazarus, In The Fen Country, Norfolk Rhapsody, Flos Campi, oboe and tuba concertos.
J. Sibelius (surprisingly, he is not very often played there) - all symphonies, Karelia and Lemminkainen suites.
N. Kapustin - I did not specify anything.
I. Stravinsky - as above, but I mentioned "jazzy" works, so perhaps they will think of Ebony Concerto
D. Milhaud - as above, but I had _La creation du monde_ in mind.
J. Adams - The Chairman Dances, Harmonielehre, Short Ride in a Fast Machine, Tromba Lontana, Slonimsky's Earbox. 
A First World War commemoration concerto - I suggested RVW's Pastoral Symphony and Ravel's Piano concerto for the left hand and his _Le tombeau de Couperin_.

Best regards, Dr


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

Sorry, but I don't think this addresses the issue. A lot of people want hear familiar works. You cannot just assume that away, or if you can, then we all have lists of works we would like to hear. There's no magic list.

What do you do about audience members who only want war horses? Or am I overestimating their numbers? Is it an issue of risking some of your current audience o find a new one?


----------



## DrKilroy (Sep 29, 2012)

I think we should use 'cross-reference'. I mean that on one concert there should be a more known piece (a 'warhorse') and pieces in some way similar, that the audience may like. For example, if the audience likes Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue, it will probably also like his other works, as well as other jazzy works in my list: Kapustin, Milhaud, Stravinsky and also possibly Satie and some Adams. 

Best regards, Dr


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

With so much of the music after 1900 being under copyright, the costs to perform those works becomes a real consideration, royalty fees per performance, broadcast, etc.

Then there is the matter of actually buying the score and parts, so often not in the staple of the band's library, or renting the same, to be returned.

Some of this is literally like coercing a child to try a new food, and those bands do not have enough funding to keep themselves running if they just insistently put these less familiar and the newer on their programs.

If there were enough funding, they could use the 'eat your vegetables or no dessert' tactic, but would have to run a year or more before those who realized they were hungry would return to the table.

I agree with Vaneyes, i.e. put a shorter piece on a program with four works total, and _regularly continue to program like that._

Those who 'know what they like and like what they know' would not feel 'cheated,' nor tooo imposed upon anyway, and it might help others who only 'know what they know' find new pieces to know and like.

There is another option, call those programs with 'all the usual' Popular classical music concerts, and run a shorter subscription package with the newer works on them. Subscribers would not be lost, perhaps a few, single ticket or subscriber, could be gained.

Expensive guest soloists are a draw, but cutting back on one or two appearances per season might allow for the costs of the royalties for the newer works.


----------



## aleazk (Sep 30, 2011)

I think conductors and orchestras should start to program more and more twenty century music. That's the only way the audience will become familiar with modern and contemporary trends in music. This should be complemented with informative lectures, discussions, radio programs, etc., if possible with the composers themselves. Simon Rattle, for instance, has been adding some modern and contemporary pieces in the repertoire of the Berlin Philharmonic and playing these pieces in the BBC Proms, for example.
I agree with PertB about the copyright issue, it is a problem. In that case, big orchestras, like the Berlin Philharmonic, should take the initiative.
Another problem is the audience who is only interested in the warhorses, which, apparently, is a considerable amount of the audience actually. I think that some of these people will still be interested in the new music if it is explained to them, by "explained", I mean exposing these people to the modern music in a more "gentle" framework (e.g., with informative lectures, discussions, radio programs, etc., if possible with the composers themselves). The people not interested will have the possibility to hear their favorite warhorses anyway, nobody is saying that they should be banned, and since they are currently overplayed, I don't think that a reduction in the programing of these pieces is something "bad", instead, it is necessary. In fact, given the amount of times those pieces are played now, even with the reduction, they will be played regularly anyway.


----------

