# BBC Orchestras:What do you think of them?



## anshuman

Hello Everyone
I was reading the thread on the best orchestras. However many times I hear music not by the 'best' but by others such as BBC philharmonic,BBC Symphony, BBC SCO, BBC national orchestra of Wales,Ulster etc. I have got recordings of Beethoven symphonies by the BBC philharmonic conducted by Gianandrea Noseda. Are they good, mediocre or plain bad? Infact on this thread you can start a discussion on the lesser known(not the 'Best') orchestras of the world like the radio orchestras of Poland ,Finland,Slovenia etc rchestras of Australia,Ukraine,Russia,Bulgaria,Slovakia etc


----------



## Mayerl

Since when have the BBC Orchestras been relegated to not among the "best"? I'm fairly certain that a few hundred highly trained, accomplished, dedicated, oh and yes, very well regarded musicians, not to mention a long list of conductors who consider it an honour to appear with these orchestras, would be pretty pi***d off at being so arbitrarily reduced to the ranks of "also-rans"
Cheeky sod.


----------



## Toccata

Mayerl said:


> Since when have the BBC Orchestras been relegated to not among the "best"? I'm fairly certain that a few hundred highly trained, accomplished, dedicated, oh and yes, very well regarded musicians, not to mention a long list of conductors who consider it an honour to appear with these orchestras, would be pretty pi***d off at being so arbitrarily reduced to the ranks of "also-rans"
> Cheeky sod.


What do you expect? You can't get the staff these days.

Seriously, some of these threads get more and more laughable.


----------



## Mayerl

Unfortunately Opal, that's exactly why my contributions are not very great in number. We seem to ne inundated with requests to " name that song(???)" or questions such as " what is your favourite piece in C sharp minor".


----------



## Toccata

Mayerl said:


> Unfortunately Opal, that's exactly why my contributions are not very great in number. We seem to ne inundated with requests to " name that song(???)" or questions such as " what is your favourite piece in C sharp minor".


A lot of the more knowledgeable and interesting posters have evidently packed up and gone. I suspect the main reason is that this Forum is far too prone to being hit by rubbish threads of the type you mention. Such threads have cheapened the place, but the Mods have done virtually nothing to control them. The vacuum appears to have been filled by people of a far more juvenile nature, and the quality has accordingly been dragged down yet further. The situation is made worse by the fact that many newcomers can't be bothered to check out previous threads to see whether there is anything of relevance to answer their questions or to link up their views, and hence duplication runs rife all over the place.


----------



## Krummhorn

Mayerl said:


> Unfortunately Opal, that's exactly why my contributions are not very great in number. We seem to ne inundated with requests to " name that song(???)" or questions such as " what is your favourite piece in C sharp minor".


At least they are coming to a classical site like ours ... and maybe, they will have a look around here and start to have a better appreciation for classical music? One of our missions here is to further educate people about classical music, not turn them away or have them believe that classical music is only for the "elite!" (?)



Opal said:


> . . .
> I suspect the main reason is that this Forum is far too prone to being hit by rubbish threads of the type you mention. Such threads have cheapened the place, but the Mods have done virtually nothing to control them.


And why should we control them? They haven't violated any forum rules or regulations ... they are seeking information, and we should be educating people about our chosen music likings. The very fact that they actually posted on a classical site is certainly a step in the right direction.

Membership in this forum is free and open to anyone on the internet ... and Frederik Magle wants it that way and will keep it that way. Who are we to say so and so can't join and ask any question about classical music? Our answers may very well be their very first introduction to classical music, which may help them to appreciate classical music. Or it may turn them away for good.



Opal said:


> . . . The situation is made worse by the fact that many newcomers can't be bothered to check out previous threads to see whether there is anything of relevance to answer their questions . . .


Maybe if our members are proactive (in a nice way) in pointing out an existing discussion, we could help the situation some. Be part of the solution, not the problem. Although we try to keep up with all posts made, we are only human and do not catch every nuance ... so, we rely upon our most active members to help out with that ... when we see a reference to an existing thread, we wil try to merge them together.

And now, back to the topic


----------



## anshuman

Mayerl said:


> Since when have the BBC Orchestras been relegated to not among the "best"? I'm fairly certain that a few hundred highly trained, accomplished, dedicated, oh and yes, very well regarded musicians, not to mention a long list of conductors who consider it an honour to appear with these orchestras, would be pretty pi***d off at being so arbitrarily reduced to the ranks of "also-rans"
> Cheeky sod.


 I was only asking information about some of these orchestras from some of the more learned members of this forum. If members so so offended and are prone to be rude I can only say that I am sorry. I was not being cheeky but curious. To rubbish it is not in my view very encouraging for a new person. I did not say that BBC orchestras were not among the best. In most of the lists of 10 best or 20 best the BBc orchestras hardly make an appearance. What is the rationale behind excluding them if members take such lists seriously? Personally I feel that rating orchestras is not very helpful without a fuller exposition of the reasons for which they are chosen. The fact remains that passing judgements without a debate is not healthy.


----------



## Mayerl

I hear what you are saying, but what I can't get on with is the assumption (arrived at with or without research), that the BBC orchestras are not of "the best". What has given you grounds for making that statement and what in your opinion qualifies an orchestra to be among "the best". Look at the history of any of the British orchestras over the last 100 years or so, paying attention to the conductors who have had long and successful associations with them.
There are no "best" orchestras. If you like what you are hearing, it does not matter a damn which orchestra is playing it.


----------



## Toccata

anshuman said:


> ... I have got recordings of Beethoven symphonies by the BBC philharmonic conducted by Gianandrea Noseda. Are they good, mediocre or *plain bad*?


It was especially the bit I have emboldened that made me react with amazement at the naive nature of the question. I mean, as if the BBC would create and tolerate (for many decades even) an orchestra that is "plain bad".

Furthermore, in typical domestic home listening environments I bet that 99% of people wouldn't be able to tell the difference between any of the generally well regarded orchestras in any properly organised comparisons. It's generally only in forums like this where there is so much idle chatter about these sorts of things.


----------



## david johnson

i have never heard a recording of a bbc (nor cbc) orchestra that was not fine. i've been an active listener and performer for decades and i trust my own evaluations.

dj


----------



## Mayerl

Anshuman, you say
"In most of the lists of 10 best or 20 best the BBc orchestras hardly make an appearance. What is the rationale behind excluding them if members take such lists seriously? "

I should be most interested to see these "lists", to know who compiled them and on what basis their "judgement" was made.
Most of us spend our time making or listening to music and are more than capable of making our own judgement as to the merits of an orchestra without the need to get into what our friends in the USA would refer to as a pi***ng contest. Producing a league table of performers, orchestras, "best" symphonies etc, etc does nothing less than debase the whole genre.
As I said in an earlier post, and the sentiment seems to have been echoed by Opal, let your own ears decide what you like


----------



## anshuman

Mayerl said:


> Anshuman, you say
> "In most of the lists of 10 best or 20 best the BBc orchestras hardly make an appearance. What is the rationale behind excluding them if members take such lists seriously? "
> 
> I should be most interested to see these "lists", to know who compiled them and on what basis their "judgement" was made.
> Most of us spend our time making or listening to music and are more than capable of making our own judgement as to the merits of an orchestra without the need to get into what our friends in the USA would refer to as a pi***ng contest. Producing a league table of performers, orchestras, "best" symphonies etc, etc does nothing less than debase the whole genre.
> As I said in an earlier post, and the sentiment seems to have been echoed by Opal, let your own ears decide what you like


I guess that does solve the problem. Such lists are useless and we should decide what we like by listening.The Gramophone Magazine came up with such a list . The Vienna philharmonic and the royal concertgebouw orchestra topped the list. I'll get back with more details later.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly

anshuman said:


> The Gramophone Magazine came up with such a list.


Kind of felt all along that this was the one that was foremost in people's consciousness. The roster was a 'Top-20,' and perhaps the most visible omission was the BBC Symphony Orchestra. There were other prominent omissions, too- e.g.: the Philadelphia Orchestra, the London Philharmonic. The 'ensemble-that-performs-regularly' standard seemed kind of fluid, too. As an example, Japan's Saito Kinen made the list. If they're on there, quipped many, then what about Abbado's Lucerne Festival Orchestra- or Bayreuth?

One thing to remember is that the standard of orchestral playing- pretty much everywhere- is higher than ever. It takes a lot of ability to be a last-desk Violist in the Delaware Symphony Orchestra... to say nothing of the dozens of more famous ensembles all over the place.

So then- what separates the LA Philharmonic from the Utah Symphony Orchestra? the Utah Symphony Orchestra from the less-well-regarded New Jersey Symphony Orchestra? I guess the biggest part of the answer there is the Operating Budget. Still, sometimes an ensemble does stunningly remarkable things on a shoestring. Other times, a multi-million dollar budget isn't proof against a palpable rough patch.


----------



## Mayerl

Might have guessed it was Gramophone. It used to be a very good magazine, effectively the monthly bible for serious music lovers. It has unforunately over the last few years seen fit to go populist and we are now sinking to the depths of "crossover" and film music (sorry, should say movie, we are after all in modern England) and elevating such genres to the level of Schubert, Mozart etc. Now it appears we are offering lists of best orchestras. What Classic FM is for the ears, Gramophone has become for the eyes.


----------



## Moscow-Mahler

By the way, *BBC Scottish Orchestra* has a great recording of Shostakovich and Shchedrin piano concerts with Litton.


----------



## Sid James

I've got a couple of recordings of them, doing the C20th repertoire, and I think they are pretty good. I'm far more interested in what an ensemble plays rather than (necessarily) how they play it. Such subtleties I leave to musicians and composers (I am neither, just a listener). When going to concerts here in Sydney, I look at the program first, rather than who is playing. Often there is a huge discrepancy in regards to this. Like a few weeks ago I attended a concert of the Australian Youth Orchestra conducted by Mark Elder - they played Brett Dean (yes, a composer who is not currently decomposing for a change), Mahler and Shostakovich. Compare that to what the big guns here play & they lose on my account. I am not really interested in endless re-runs of _Daphnis et Chloe _and Beethoven's 5th, no matter how "good" they are played. I prefer to hear something that is less of a war-horse, and often the more better-known orchestras or ensembles here just don't play those kinds of things...


----------



## Mike Saville

This could be an interesting point - but bad not necessarily the right choice of words.

A problem I think that has affected not just the BBC but all the orchestras in this country is the homogeneity of sound we now have. 20 years ago there was a difference in sound between the BBCSO, LSO and Philharmonia. The conveyor belt of music colleges in this country has I feel left the orchestras devoid of individuality - they all do sound the same. 

Are they bad? No.

Is the fact that they all sound the same bad? Yes.


----------



## kchawki2

In the time that I have been listening to classical music on a regular basis, I've always found the BBC Orchestras to be very good. My favorite would have to be the BBC symphony, of course.


----------



## david.allsopp

Mayerl said:


> Might have guessed it was Gramophone. It used to be a very good magazine, effectively the monthly bible for serious music lovers. It has unforunately over the last few years seen fit to go populist and we are now sinking to the depths of "crossover" and film music (sorry, should say movie, we are after all in modern England) and elevating such genres to the level of Schubert, Mozart etc. Now it appears we are offering lists of best orchestras. What Classic FM is for the ears, Gramophone has become for the eyes.


So negative in every post. If anshuman is new to classical music you may have single-handedly given the impression that it is a world full of proud intolerance.

If you are a seasoned poster please explain to us lesser mortals what exactly differentiates a 'good' orchestra from a poor one - specifically. And how is one meant to tell them apart when there is such a cosmopolitan mix to today's bands?

Cheers
David


----------



## anshuman

david.allsopp said:


> So negative in every post. If anshuman is new to classical music you may have single-handedly given the impression that it is a world full of proud intolerance.
> 
> If you are a seasoned poster please explain to us lesser mortals what exactly differentiates a 'good' orchestra from a poor one - specifically. And how is one meant to tell them apart when there is such a cosmopolitan mix to today's bands?
> 
> Cheers
> David


Dear Sir,
thanks for your encouraging comments. But no. I'm not new to classical music. Been there for 20 years although it is hard to find kindred spirits at my place.


----------



## Moscow-Mahler

I'm curious, is there any difference in sound between them? Which one do you like most (maybe a stupid question): BBC S.O, BBC Scottish S.O, BBC N.O. of Wales or BBC Phil.? E.g. which has better strings section, in your opinion?


----------



## starthrower

For me, the more important aspect is how the conductor leads a particular ensemble in his interpretation of a work. This is why listeners like to collect different recordings. A favorite piece recorded by one conductor may not be my favorite interpreted by another. I usually get turned off by conductors who rush the tempos, especially with beautiful melodies. It sucks all of the charm out of it for my ears.

But it general, I wouldn't shy away from recordings by the BBC orchestras, or the Polish Radio Orchestra. They can be as fine as any of the more famous orchestras.


----------



## moody

Mayerl and Toccata appear to be right , I've just joined and am amazed. Which pieces of music make you cry ? which oiece of music makes you want to go to the toilet and which one gives you flu ?I am surprised to read that Krummhorn thinks that this site should educate people about our chosen music likings, how arrogant !
The British Broadcasting Corporation Symphony Orchestra was set up as a full-time orchestra in 1930 under Adrian Boult ( later "Sir") he was chief conductor until 1950 .Sir Malcolm Sargent, Antal Dorati,Colin Davis, Rozhdestvensky, Pierre Boulez, Rudolf Schwarz, Rudolf Kempe, Leonard Slatkin now Jiri Belohlavek. Appointed guest conductors have included Toscanini, Sir Charles McKerras, Michael Gielen, Gunter Wand and Jukka-Pekka Saraste.
It is the principal orchestra Of The Promenade Concerts Season ( the biggest in the world ). it broacasts many concerts throughout the year and these are free to the audience. The BBC Symphony is paid for bythe government and the public who pay an annual fee to the BBC, the orchestra also works commercially It is of a very high standard, as good as any in the world and has plenty of rehearsal time. There are Five other orchestras in the BBC colours: The BBC Concert Orch,BBC National Orch of Wales, BBC Philharmonic, BBC Scottish S.O. There were once The VarietyOrch, The Review Orch., several Light Orchestras and I thought there was still a Training Orch.
Have I helped educate somebody ? I think my facts are right ?

the Gramophone is now in the hands of the Phillistine.I first bought it in 1950 when I was 12 years old--the critics were amazing Compton MacKenzie, Christopher Stone Phillip Hope-Wallace. Now I know more than they do and they write what they are told I am sure, but it is good for listing of new releases if nothing else.


----------

