# Anne-Sophie Mutter interrupts concert to admonish audience member who is filming her



## Tsaraslondon

https://www.thestrad.com/news/anne-sophie-mutter-interrupts-concerto-to-demand-audience-member-stops-filming/9553.article?fbclid=IwAR0AAbgODt5nIB4ZMpAc1OuK2h5ITuRiJbp0m_lOLwmN1KLpE6RF-uApiFo

Good on her, I say.

I cannot understand this infatuation with filming everything we do. People don't just experiece anything anymore. They have to film it. And what do they do with these mini videos? I'm willing to bet that after posting them on Facebook or whatever, they never look at them again, the performance completely forgotten as they never truly watched or listened to it in the first place.

Some of the greatest performances I have ever witnessed still live on in my mind. I do not need visual evidence to remember them.


----------



## Fabulin

Is there a video recording of this?


----------



## Merl

Read this earlier today. Well done ASM. About time we countered this crappy obsession with using phones, etc in concerts. It's irritating beyong belief. I'm certainly not against phones / technology in daily life but what is the point of subpar recordings of a gig? Stupid. went to a gig at Glasgow O2 last week and half the show was hidden behind a deluge of mobiles. It p*ssed me off no end.


----------



## Woodduck

If it were possible to more than agree with something, I would more than agree with Tsaraslondon. Brava! to Ms Mutter. Mobile phones are a plague worse than frogs raining on Pharaoh.


----------



## Manxfeeder

Isn't there an announcement before concerts to turn cell phones off? Still, I'm sorry the lady in the front row had to be escorted out. Public humiliation isn't the kind of thing you get over quickly. But making an example out of someone keeps bad habits from spreading.


----------



## Open Book

Phone-cameras are everywhere, right in someone's hand ready to use. I'm convinced they have been a factor in lowering the crime rate in the last couple of decades, because no one gets away with anything if they are caught on video.

But cameras are used without thought and with a sense of privilege. Bad enough to disrupt a concert, but how about in an ordinary setting? Do we have the right of privacy, to not be photographed against our will, especially by a stranger? Do we own our own images? I'm wondering what the laws are on this.

I don't think the person who took that concert video forgot about it, they probably bragged about it and showed it to a zillion friends before posting it online. It's a sport.


----------



## CnC Bartok

Thoroughly on Anne-Sophie's side here. If it says "no phones, no filming" duhhhhh! Don't!

Videoed memories are one thing, intrusion, including on possible copyright issues is another. It's no wonder that we end up with insane laws like laws on things like upskirting, that wouldn't even enter most people's mind that we'd need. Sadly, it appears we do.

I do wonder if whatever Ms Mutter was playing sounded a "good angry" afterwards?!


----------



## DaveM

Ever been to a big pop concert in a stadium and see all those flashes coming from the nosebleed seats? Like one day the person is going to treasure the video of these teeny-tiny figures on a tiny stage with lousy sound. And what do these people think a flash from a smartphone from 1/4 mile away is going to do?


----------



## Bwv 1080

But how do you know if you actually experienced something if it has not been shared on social media?


----------



## elgar's ghost

DaveM said:


> _Ever been to a big pop concert in a stadium and see all those flashes coming from the nosebleed seats?_ Like one day the person is going to treasure the video of these teeny-tiny figures on a tiny stage with lousy sound. And what do these people think a flash from a smartphone from 1/4 mile away is going to do?


I might be seeing Alice Cooper this Friday at a large venue in Manchester as the ticket holder might be unavailable - as nearly all of the rock gigs I attended took place before mobiles became _de rigueur_ I suppose I have that 'joy' to come.


----------



## Guest

DaveM said:


> Ever been to a big pop concert in a stadium and see all those flashes coming from the nosebleed seats? Like one day the person is going to treasure the video of these teeny-tiny figures on a tiny stage with lousy sound. And what do these people think a flash from a smartphone from 1/4 mile away is going to do?


Well, the flash is pointless, but the photo would be a memento, like a ticket stub. No, I didn't try to snap a picture when I saw Karajan conduct Bruckner 8 with the WPO, but I do still have the stub.


----------



## Fabulin

I cannot imagine an audience member using a phone during a classical concert. Where I come from, people on the neighbouring seats would just bully the insolence out of this son of Ham.


----------



## DaveM

Baron Scarpia said:


> Well, the flash is pointless, but the photo would be a memento, like a ticket stub...


Well maybe. I'm betting by far most of them are never looked at again (talking about those where the figures are teeny-tiny as opposed to front row seats).


----------



## Bluecrab

Manxfeeder said:


> Isn't there an announcement before concerts to turn cell phones off?


Well, at the venue at which we see all of our performances, yes. They announce that both cameras and cell phones are prohibited prior to every performance. I've never seen anybody try to defy the ban, so I can't say what they would do in that case.


----------



## mbhaub

I've played dozens of concerts in China and they don't put up with this behavior at all. In some venues they actually post people in catwalks above the proscenium with laser pointers. They watch the audience and if they see someone with a cell phone out they shine the laser light right onto their faces. As a performer it's kind of funny to watch as people get zapped.

In Beijing at the big hall, the audience must pass through metal detectors and surrender all electronics. They put your phone in a marked bag and give you a tag to recover it when you leave. They are very efficient and the process moves quickly.

I still have vivid memories of an angered, irate, furious Antal Dorati conducting the Mahler 5th with the Stockholm orchestra turning around in the 2nd movement to scold a stupid kid who was taking flash photos. "Stop that! Get your *** out of here!!!".


----------



## Duncan

Above: British guitarist Peter Frampton expresses his viewpoint on the subject -

On this second video jump to the 3:45 mark to see his initial warning which is disregarded - he then walks over - grabs the phone and flings it across the stage - which should be SOP for all performers...






Peter Frampton is best known for the 1976 release "Frampton Comes Alive". It was the best-selling album of 1976, selling over 8 million copies in the US (and at least two copies here in Canada) and becoming one of the best-selling live albums to date, with estimated sales of 11 million worldwide.

I was the one who bought the two copies sold in Canada - one album (which I still have) and one cassette (which I no longer have as it was thrown out the window of my car by someone who claimed to love me more than life itself and who warned me - repeatedly - not to play it "one more time, eh?" - advice which I rather foolishly disregarded probably out of pure spite as honestly it wasn't really worth hearing once much less three times in a row - and who then popped it out of the deck and flung it out of the window where it landed somewhere upon the Trans Canada Highway between Montreal and Ottawa... It may still be there to this day.. If you find it - keep it, eh? - Despite the passing of over four decades - it's still "too soon"...)


----------



## Open Book

Fabulin said:


> I cannot imagine an audience member using a phone during a classical concert. Where I come from, people on the neighbouring seats would just bully the insolence out of this son of Ham.


By me some people think it is acceptable to play games or read email on their phone during concerts as long as the sound is off. I don't like to be near it. I hate to see a lighted screen next to me in a dark room and I keep tensing for the phone to make a sound. Plus I'm a control freak who would like to control other people's behavior if I think it's idiotic. I can't understand wanting to bury your eyes in a phone at a live concert.

Another place this is done a lot is tennis matches. The more elite the event, the more it happens. Watch a world class tennis match on TV between "Rafa" and "Joker" and see how many people in the audience are peering into their phones, bored, and missing great shots.


----------



## Guest

DaveM said:


> Well maybe. I'm betting by far most of them are never looked at again (talking about those where the figures are teeny-tiny as opposed to front row seats).


I can't speak for what people are thinking, but for me it wouldn't be the tiny figures on stage, it would be the view from the seat that would be memorable, the sense of being there. Of course, that has nothing in common with disrupting a classical concert by pulling out a cell phone and filming from the front row.


----------



## Fabulin

Open Book said:


> By me some people think it is acceptable to play games or read email on their phone during concerts as long as the sound is off. I don't like to be near it. I hate to see a lighted screen next to me in a dark room and I keep tensing for the phone to make a sound. Plus I'm a control freak who would like to control other people's behavior if I think it's idiotic. I can't understand wanting to bury your eyes in a phone at a live concert.
> 
> Another place this is done a lot is tennis matches. The more elite the event, the more it happens. Watch a world class tennis match on TV between "Rafa" and "Joker" and see how many people in the audience are peering into their phones, bored, and missing great shots.


I've heard that in America people also behave loud in cinemas instead of... you know, watching what is being projected. I don't think I would visit one there...


----------



## fluteman

DaveM said:


> Ever been to a big pop concert in a stadium and see all those flashes coming from the nosebleed seats? Like one day the person is going to treasure the video of these teeny-tiny figures on a tiny stage with lousy sound. And what do these people think a flash from a smartphone from 1/4 mile away is going to do?


I brought my daughter to see Eric Clapton as a birthday gift, and up in the nosebleed but still very expensive seats, there were TV monitors. Some people were not only looking at the TV monitors rather than the stage, they were recording the monitor with their smartphones.


----------



## Bulldog

Fabulin said:


> I've heard that in America people also behave loud in cinemas instead of... you know, watching what is being projected. I don't think I would visit one there...


That hasn't been my experience, but I don't attend many movies where a lot of young people are present.


----------



## Fabulin

mbhaub said:


> I've played dozens of concerts in China and they don't put up with this behavior at all. In some venues they actually post people in catwalks above the proscenium with laser pointers. They watch the audience and if they see someone with a cell phone out they shine the laser light right onto their faces. As a performer it's kind of funny to watch as people get zapped.
> 
> In Beijing at the big hall, the audience must pass through metal detectors and surrender all electronics. They put your phone in a marked bag and give you a tag to recover it when you leave. They are very efficient and the process moves quickly.


Sounds awesome


----------



## Guest

mbhaub said:


> I've played dozens of concerts in China and they don't put up with this behavior at all. In some venues they actually post people in catwalks above the proscenium with laser pointers. They watch the audience and if they see someone with a cell phone out they shine the laser light right onto their faces. As a performer it's kind of funny to watch as people get zapped.
> 
> In Beijing at the big hall, the audience must pass through metal detectors and surrender all electronics. They put your phone in a marked bag and give you a tag to recover it when you leave. *They are very efficient and the process moves quickly.*


...and of course they scan all the phones for images of Whinnie the Pooh, and if found the owner is whisked away for "re-education," perhaps never to be heard from again...


----------



## DaveM

Mollie John said:


> Above: British guitarist Peter Frampton expresses his viewpoint on the subject -
> 
> On this second video jump to the 3:45 mark to see his initial warning which is disregarded - he then walks over - grabs the phone and flings it across the stage - which should be SOP for all performers...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peter Frampton is best known for the 1976 release "Frampton Comes Alive". It was the best-selling album of 1976, selling over 8 million copies in the US (and at least two copies here in Canada) and becoming one of the best-selling live albums to date, with estimated sales of 11 million worldwide.
> 
> I was the one who bought the two copies sold in Canada - one album (which I still have) and one cassette...


But I have a third copy (the LP) bought in Canada.


----------



## flamencosketches

Fabulin said:


> I've heard that in America people also behave loud in cinemas instead of... you know, watching what is being projected. I don't think I would visit one there...


I don't know where you heard that, but it's not true. Americans hate noisemakers in the movie theater as much as anyone else.


----------



## Fabulin

flamencosketches said:


> I don't know where you heard that, but it's not true. Americans hate noisemakers in the movie theater as much as anyone else.






There are tons of videos. Can't bother to find the most egregious ones. I've also had discussions on this topic on other fora. Some Americans aven praised this behaviour and claimed that it's better than "dead silence" of European audiences. And that going to the cinema is attending a social event, like a rock concert. Some theorized that a bunch of dummies vocalizing like shocked chimpanzees is the essence of cinema. I've even heard tales of people "talking to the screens"---for example "giving advice to characters"---in a... downtown New York theatre, if my memory serves me.


----------



## flamencosketches

Fabulin said:


> There are tons of videos. Can't bother to find the most egregious ones. I've also had discussions on this topic on other fora. Some Americans aven praised this behaviour and claimed that it's better than "dead silence" of European audiences. And that going to the cinema is attending a social event, like a rock concert. Some theorized that a bunch of dummies vocalizing like shocked chimpanzees is the essence of cinema. I've even heard tales of people "talking to the screens"---for example "giving advice to characters"---in a... downtown New York theatre, if my memory serves me.


Don't believe everything you read on the internet. I can tell you from a lifetime of personal experience that this is not a common thing.


----------



## Fabulin

flamencosketches said:


> Don't believe everything you read on the internet. I can tell you from a lifetime of personal experience that this is not a common thing.


You are on the internet also. :tiphat:


----------



## Dimace

FFF the smartphones! Instruments which make us slowly but steady their slaves. I see people crossing the street, without look right and left for coming cars, other who are drinking a coffee in a local, without speaking, with their eyes and whole attention to their smartphones. A plague of our modern civilization, a decrease for human intellectuality. You ask someone a simple question and immediately he turns to his cellphone to search for the Wikipedia. In 20 years the school examinations will be with tablets and smartphones. The one with the best cellphone, wins a place in the university. Bravo Sophie!!!


----------



## Rogerx

flamencosketches said:


> Don't believe everything you read on the internet. I can tell you from a lifetime of personal experience that this is not a common thing.


Post of the day .


----------



## MatthewWeflen

It's a well known fact that everything you read on the internet is a lie.


----------



## KenOC

MatthewWeflen said:


> It's a well known fact that everything you read on the internet is a lie.


Yes, even that post.


----------



## DavidA

Where ever you go people are on their cell phones. I have been in the movie where the person in front of me has been constantly on their cell phone and has looked most agrieved when I’ve asked them politely to turn it off. I don’t know why they bother to go to a movie if they’re going to watch their cell phone instead! Now of course we have ignorant people who distracted others by recording the concert instead of experiencing it. ASM was right in making an example of such people. Such recording is illegal and also highly distracting to other people who have pay good money to hear the concert


----------



## Tsaraslondon

Open Book said:


> By me some people think it is acceptable to play games or read email on their phone during concerts as long as the sound is off.


A couple of years ago I was at a Prom at the Royal Opera House. We had seats in one of the boxes. And a guy in the neighbouring box spent the whole concert watching a football game on his phone - sound off, but clearly in my view. Quite aside from being totally distracting, I just couldn't see the point of being there at all. If the football match is more important to you, then stay home and watch it.


----------



## Enthusiast

Manxfeeder said:


> Isn't there an announcement before concerts to turn cell phones off? Still, I'm sorry the lady in the front row had to be escorted out. Public humiliation isn't the kind of thing you get over quickly. But making an example out of someone keeps bad habits from spreading.


I do like your comment. Obviously she shouldn't have done it and I, too, don't get the current obsession with filming everything, but the lady's humiliation is also something I thought about.


----------



## elgar's ghost

Tsaraslondon said:


> A couple of years ago I was at a Prom at the Royal Opera House. We had seats in one of the boxes. _And a guy in the neighbouring box spent the whole concert watching a football game on his phone - sound off, but clearly in my view. Quite aside from being totally distracting, I just couldn't see the point of being there at all. If the football match is more important to you, then stay home and watch it._


Perhaps he was there on a subsidised jolly - people being invited to an event and then going just for the booze and/or food is one of the downsides of corporate hospitality.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

Enthusiast said:


> I do like your comment. Obviously she shouldn't have done it and I, too, don't get the current obsession with filming everything, but the lady's humiliation is also something I thought about.


Serves her right. Name and shame is what I say. :devil:


----------



## Eva Yojimbo

OK, I guess I get to be the contrarian here; I don't see what the big deal is. Given where I live, I see more pop/rock concerts than classical concerts (latter are always a good drive a way; former tend to be really close), and in the former pretty much everyone is recording the performance with their cell phones. I don't do this myself, but I don't find it bothersome that others do, and I don't really understand why anyone would (I find tall people directly in front of me more annoying). So I'm trying to imagine what the difference would be at a classical concert. People filming concerts are just doing it to have the memory of being there, the same way people make home movies of vacations and birthdays. They don't watch the videos back to enjoy the concert (the sound/video sucks), but to enjoy the memory of being there. Maybe someone can explain to me how/why this would be distracting either for the performer or the audience; if you're a performer, why aren't you focused on what you're playing, and if you're the audience, why aren't you focused on the performer and not on the person with a phone?


----------



## Enthusiast

Tsaraslondon said:


> Serves her right. Name and shame is what I say. :devil:


Fair enough but she might not have known the expectations and requirements of her. It might have been her first (and now last) classical concert. Requiring her to put her phone away would have been humiliating enough.


----------



## fluteman

Eva Yojimbo said:


> OK, I guess I get to be the contrarian here; I don't see what the big deal is. Given where I live, I see more pop/rock concerts than classical concerts (latter are always a good drive a way; former tend to be really close), and in the former pretty much everyone is recording the performance with their cell phones. I don't do this myself, but I don't find it bothersome that others do, and I don't really understand why anyone would (I find tall people directly in front of me more annoying). So I'm trying to imagine what the difference would be at a classical concert. People filming concerts are just doing it to have the memory of being there, the same way people make home movies of vacations and birthdays. They don't watch the videos back to enjoy the concert (the sound/video sucks), but to enjoy the memory of being there. Maybe someone can explain to me how/why this would be distracting either for the performer or the audience; if you're a performer, why aren't you focused on what you're playing, and if you're the audience, why aren't you focused on the performer and not on the person with a phone?


As someone has mentioned, the phones are an unwelcome distraction if the person is next to you or right in front of you even if the sound is off. If you want a souvenir, keep the program.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

Eva Yojimbo said:


> OK, I guess I get to be the contrarian here; I don't see what the big deal is. Given where I live, I see more pop/rock concerts than classical concerts (latter are always a good drive a way; former tend to be really close), and in the former pretty much everyone is recording the performance with their cell phones. I don't do this myself, but I don't find it bothersome that others do, and I don't really understand why anyone would (I find tall people directly in front of me more annoying). So I'm trying to imagine what the difference would be at a classical concert. People filming concerts are just doing it to have the memory of being there, the same way people make home movies of vacations and birthdays. They don't watch the videos back to enjoy the concert (the sound/video sucks), but to enjoy the memory of being there. Maybe someone can explain to me how/why this would be distracting either for the performer or the audience; if you're a performer, why aren't you focused on what you're playing, and if you're the audience, why aren't you focused on the performer and not on the person with a phone?


I actually can't believe you even have to ask this.


----------



## Eva Yojimbo

fluteman said:


> As someone has mentioned, the phones are an unwelcome distraction if the person is next to you or right in front of you even if the sound is off. If you want a souvenir, keep the program.


So what's the distraction? Maybe I'm just too used to watching concerts through people's arms and heads by this point that I find it normal.


----------



## Eva Yojimbo

Tsaraslondon said:


> I actually can't believe you even have to ask this.


Well, nobody's really answered it.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

Eva Yojimbo said:


> Well, nobody's really answered it.


Quite aside from the fact that filming a performance is illegal, whether it's classical or pop, the two experiences (pop concerts and classical concerts) are entirely different. At pop concerts the music is amplified, the audiences are huge, people come and go, they eat and drink. At quite a few of them the section closest to the stage is standing rather than seated and people move around. The whole experience is full of distractions and that can be part of the fun, though personally I prefer it if people are concentrated on the performance rather than getting their drinks from the bar.

At a classical concert there is no amplification. Audiences are, or should be, more committed to listening to the music. Mutter herself once made the observation that different music, even within the classical repertoire, can require different levels of commitent, making the point that the Beethoven concerto, for instance, asked for a much greater level of concentration than a Vivaldi concerto. If you're an artist on stage, looking out at a darkened auditorium, a sudden flash of light can be extremely distracting and can interrupt concentration. A professional learns to ignore the distraction, but it can still be annoying.

And, apart from anything else, it is plain rude, both to the artist and the audience. It shows a complete lack of consideration for anyone else. It's saying my wanting to capture this on video is much more important than anything or anyone else.


----------



## Open Book

Eva Yojimbo said:


> Well, nobody's really answered it.


I mentioned above that the lighted screen of a phone being used beside me in a dark hall is distracting even when the user is just playing games. If a phone is on there is always a chance it will make noise no matter how well the user thinks he has secured the sound.

And those responsible for the concert *don't want videos taken*. They own every aspect of that concert including images of it. That's reason enough.

Of course there is other distracting behavior that doesn't involve phones. Rattling paper programs, for instance.


----------



## fluteman

Open Book said:


> I mentioned above that the lighted screen of a phone being used beside me in a dark hall is distracting even when the user is just playing games. If a phone is on there is always a chance it will make noise no matter how well the user thinks he has secured the sound.
> 
> And those responsible for the concert *don't want videos taken*. They own every aspect of that concert including images of it. That's reason enough.
> 
> Of course there is other distracting behavior that doesn't involve phones. Rattling paper programs, for instance.


Yes, all quite right, especially the first point. But for my part, I didn't mean to imply that people using their smart phones during the concert are the worst distraction. For me, even worse are those who eat candies or cough drops, then keep playing with the empty plastic wrappers. JUST. THROW. THEM. AWAY.


----------



## Open Book

Fabulin said:


> There are tons of videos. Can't bother to find the most egregious ones. I've also had discussions on this topic on other fora. Some Americans aven praised this behaviour and claimed that it's better than "dead silence" of European audiences. And that going to the cinema is attending a social event, like a rock concert. Some theorized that a bunch of dummies vocalizing like shocked chimpanzees is the essence of cinema. I've even heard tales of people "talking to the screens"---for example "giving advice to characters"---in a... downtown New York theatre, if my memory serves me.


In the U.S. it has been a cultural thing to talk to the screen if the audience is African American majority. I don't know if it's still as common, but I experienced this 30 years ago in a movie theater. The mostly black audience participated in the movie, commenting freely, addressing the characters, all loudly and meant to be heard and shared. I wasn't too happy with this and I didn't like the movie anyway, so I bid my friends goodbye and left.

At least one black comedian has commented on this phenomenon and worked it into his routine.


----------



## fluteman

Open Book said:


> In the U.S. it has been a cultural thing to talk to the screen if the audience is African American majority. I don't know if it's still as common, but I experienced this 30 years ago in a movie theater. The mostly black audience participated in the movie, commenting freely, addressing the characters, all loudly and meant to be heard and shared. I wasn't too happy with this and I didn't like the movie anyway, so I bid my friends goodbye and left.
> 
> At least one black comedian has commented on this phenomenon and worked it into his routine.


Don't know if he's the comedian you're thinking of, but Dave Chappelle did a hilarious routine about this. He goes to a movie in a black neighborhood with white friends who look at him with exasperation at all the talking in the theater during the movie, so Chappelle stands and addresses the audience: "Please! Can't you see we have guests?"

With the modern multiplexes with mini-theaters often equipped with comfortable reclining lounge chairs, I don't think this is much of an issue any longer. You're more likely to hear snoring than talking.


----------



## CnC Bartok

elgars ghost said:


> Perhaps he was there on a subsidised jolly - people being invited to an event and then going just for the booze and/or food is one of the downsides of corporate hospitality.


You've been to Henley Royal Regatta, then? Rowing's my sport, been attending Henley, with the finest racing on offer in this country for forty years now, and following the races, God forbid.

Then there are rows of hospitality tents on the other bank, people with their backs to the river, while the GB Eight are racing the Australian Eight. But the quarter finals at Wimbledon are a far greater draw, and they have that on the hospitality TV. What a waste.


----------



## elgar's ghost

CnC Bartok said:


> You've been to Henley Royal Regatta, then? Rowing's my sport, been attending Henley, with the finest racing on offer in this country for forty years now, and following the races, God forbid.
> 
> Then there are rows of hospitality tents on the other bank, people with their backs to the river, while the GB Eight are racing the Australian Eight. But the quarter finals at Wimbledon are a far greater draw, and they have that on the hospitality TV. What a waste.


No, I've never been to Henley but I've seen numerous examples of disinterest at various cricket and rugby fixtures.


----------



## Eva Yojimbo

Tsaraslondon said:


> Quite aside from the fact that filming a performance is illegal, whether it's classical or pop, the two experiences (pop concerts and classical concerts) are entirely different. At pop concerts the music is amplified, the audiences are huge, people come and go, they eat and drink. At quite a few of them the section closest to the stage is standing rather than seated and people move around. The whole experience is full of distractions and that can be part of the fun, though personally I prefer it if people are concentrated on the performance rather than getting their drinks from the bar.
> 
> At a classical concert there is no amplification. Audiences are, or should be, more committed to listening to the music. Mutter herself once made the observation that different music, even within the classical repertoire, can require different levels of commitent, making the point that the Beethoven concerto, for instance, asked for a much greater level of concentration than a Vivaldi concerto. If you're an artist on stage, looking out at a darkened auditorium, a sudden flash of light can be extremely distracting and can interrupt concentration. A professional learns to ignore the distraction, but it can still be annoying.
> 
> And, apart from anything else, it is plain rude, both to the artist and the audience. It shows a complete lack of consideration for anyone else. It's saying my wanting to capture this on video is much more important than anything or anyone else.


I'm not disputing the legality, and if a venue/performance says "no cellphones/recordings" that's their right and the audience should comply; I was discussing more the idea of it being a big deal besides that. Your statements about pop concerts are only sometimes true depending on the act and venue (last concert I went to was extremely small; I've been to plenty with all assigned seating, no coming-and-going--except, perhaps, between sets--and no movement, etc.).

Your point about a performer seeing the light from the phone is a fair point only if the person uses/has such a light when recording, and if the performer can see it among the lights that are actually lighting the stage (I'd think a cell phone light would be much smaller/less distracting by comparison).

As for the rudeness, again that's under the assumption that people have a problem with it. My whole issue is that I don't know why they would/do. So far the possible reasons for the problem would be it being distracting for the performer (compared to stage lights?) or for the audience--for the latter I can only imagine that being so for those directly behind the phone, and then only if they were holding it up with their arms fully outstretched. As for being distracted by the screen, they could always turn the brightness way down (to the point it's almost off). Smart people do this to conserve the battery anyway in already-dark rooms.


----------



## fluteman

Eva Yojimbo said:


> I'm not disputing the legality, and if a venue/performance says "no cellphones/recordings" that's their right and the audience should comply; I was discussing more the idea of it being a big deal besides that. Your statements about pop concerts are only sometimes true depending on the act and venue (last concert I went to was extremely small; I've been to plenty with all assigned seating, no coming-and-going--except, perhaps, between sets--and no movement, etc.).
> 
> Your point about a performer seeing the light from the phone is a fair point only if the person uses/has such a light when recording, and if the performer can see it among the lights that are actually lighting the stage (I'd think a cell phone light would be much smaller/less distracting by comparison).
> 
> As for the rudeness, again that's under the assumption that people have a problem with it. My whole issue is that I don't know why they would/do. So far the possible reasons for the problem would be it being distracting for the performer (compared to stage lights?) or for the audience--for the latter I can only imagine that being so for those directly behind the phone, and then only if they were holding it up with their arms fully outstretched. As for being distracted by the screen, they could always turn the brightness way down (to the point it's almost off). Smart people do this to conserve the battery anyway in already-dark rooms.


What can I say? In a darkened concert hall, when someone near you is looking at a bright, colorful, and these days, usually quite large, smart phone screen, it is a pita. If it doesn't bother you, that's great for you. Of course, the idea of darkening the concert hall is to focus the audience's attention on the brightly-lit stage. If that tradition was discarded and the entire hall was kept brightly-lit during the concert, then I suppose the smart phones wouldn't be so great a distraction. But then I think American audiences, anyway, would just get too restless and noisy.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

I just noticed that this article was shared here, I want to give you guys some extra perspective. That article really didn't cover what happened. I'm a local of Cincinnati, so I had friends attend that concert.




























I'd consider that Strad article a bit of fake news mixed in. I don't blame you guys though. I read that article and immediately thought it was a statement of true events, that this girl was trying to argue with Mutter about it. But no, that wasn't the case.


----------



## howlingfantods

Mutter's totally within her rights of course, but it seems odd to me to see people in this thread who I know have enjoyed bootlegged recordings slam the practice of audience members taping concerts. Like, where do you think those bootlegs come from?

Of course, if this particular audience member was so clumsy with her taping technique that she was bothering the performer, that's obviously bad. But the problem isn't the taping, it's the clumsiness.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

Reading some of the comments in this thread, it's clear to me that I am old and very old fashioned. I was taken to the theatre and to concerts from a very young age. I was taught, as a mark of respect for the performers and for other people in the audience, to sit still and concentrate on the performance. I was advised to go to the toilet before the performance started to make sure I didn't have to go during, and my parents made sure we were all there in plenty of time to be seated before the curtain went up. I don't remember any of this marring my appreciation of it. Quite the reverse, in fact. I loved going to the theatre. If I enjoy it less now, it's because the behaviour of increasingly more audience members irritates me like mad. 

I still do not understand this current obsession with capturing every minute of our lives on video. A couple of years ago I went down to the Thames to see the New Year's Eve fireworks. I'd say 80% of the crowd got out their phones and tablets to record the event. They weren't actually seeing the fireworks but watching them through their tiny screens. What was the point? They'd have got a better view by staying home and watching them on TV.


----------



## howlingfantods

Tsaraslondon said:


> Reading some of the comments in this thread, it's clear to me that I am old and very old fashioned. I was taken to the theatre and to concerts from a very young age. I was taught, as a mark of respect for the performers and for other people in the audience, to sit still and concentrate on the performance. I was advised to go to the toilet before the performance started to make sure I didn't have to go during, and my parents made sure we were all there in plenty of time to be seated before the curtain went up. I don't remember any of this marring my appreciation of it. Quite the reverse, in fact. I loved going to the theatre. If I enjoy it less now, it's because the behaviour of increasingly more audience members irritates me like mad.
> 
> I still do not understand this current obsession with capturing every minute of our lives on video. A couple of years ago I went down to the Thames to see the New Year's Eve fireworks. I'd say 80% of the crowd got out their phones and tablets to record the event. They weren't actually seeing the fireworks but watching them through their tiny screens. What was the point? They'd have got a better view by staying home and watching them on TV.


You may be old and old fashioned, but you also listen to bootleg recordings. Are you mad at the taper of the Lisbon Traviata for not sitting still and concentrating on the performance?


----------



## Woodduck

Tsaraslondon said:


> Reading some of the comments in this thread, it's clear to me that I am old and very old fashioned. I was taken to the theatre and to concerts from a very young age. I was taught, as a mark of respect for the performers and for other people in the audience, to sit still and concentrate on the performance. I was advised to go to the toilet before the performance started to make sure I didn't have to go during, and my parents made sure we were all there in plenty of time to be seated before the curtain went up. I don't remember any of this marring my appreciation of it. Quite the reverse, in fact. I loved going to the theatre. If I enjoy it less now, it's because the behaviour of increasingly more audience members irritates me like mad.
> 
> I still do not understand this current obsession with capturing every minute of our lives on video. A couple of years ago I went down to the Thames to see the New Year's Eve fireworks. I'd say 80% of the crowd got out their phones and tablets to record the event. They weren't actually seeing the fireworks but watching them through their tiny screens. What was the point? They'd have got a better view by staying home and watching them on TV.


I'm of your generation, and I can only sigh repeatedly in sympathy. Perhaps the solution to living in a mad world is to go mad oneself. With every day's news I wonder why that hasn't happened to me. Maybe I need to spend more time on TC arguing over threads like these:

Are You getting rid of any Placido Domingo CDs because of his recent actions?

Opera is stupid - The Guardian


----------



## Larkenfield

Recording a concert is a way to experience it in a way that you weren’t able to when you first heard it because you were too distracted recording it.  It’s also proof of one’s mortal existence that one was there and being a distraction by changing the atmosphere of the concert.


----------



## Open Book

I have wished that the ticket price of a live performance, for more money, would include a CD or DVD of the performance mailed out later. I particularly have felt this at the modern dance recitals I have seen over the years. Some were so wonderful that they bear repeat viewing for their unbelievable physicality and artistic quality. They seem to be filmed, but I have no idea what happens to these films, I don't think the public ever sees them. Without such mementos the memories of these performances all blend into each other for me.

But musicians and dance companies have every right to dictate the terms that their audiences must follow.


----------



## fluteman

Huilunsoittaja said:


> I just noticed that this article was shared here, I want to give you guys some extra perspective. That article really didn't cover what happened. I'm a local of Cincinnati, so I had friends attend that concert.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd consider that Strad article a bit of fake news mixed in. I don't blame you guys though. I read that article and immediately thought it was a statement of true events, that this girl was trying to argue with Mutter about it. But no, that wasn't the case.


OK. I, for one, didn't intend my comments to imply Anna-Sophie Mutter's conduct was appropriate or not. My guess is, this has happened to her numerous times, increasing her irritation, and when this phone came into her line of sight, she finally lost her temper a bit. It happens. But I wasn't there. I do consider the phones at concerts a problem generally, regardless of the specifics of this incident.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

howlingfantods said:


> You may be old and old fashioned, but you also listen to bootleg recordings. Are you mad at the taper of the Lisbon Traviata for not sitting still and concentrating on the performance?


I think you completely (or deliberately) miss my point.

The taper of the Lisbon Traviata was, I believe, Kraus's wife and the majority of Callas bootleg recordings were actually of radio broadcasts, portable tape machines being somewhat in their infancy. In fact, I think the first instance of a Callas performance being recorded by a member of the audience was part of a London concert in 1959. The sound is pretty awful.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

Open Book said:


> I have wished that the ticket price of a live performance, for more money, would include a CD or DVD of the performance mailed out later. I particularly have felt this at the modern dance recitals I have seen over the years. Some were so wonderful that they bear repeat viewing for their unbelievable physicality and artistic quality. They seem to be filmed, but I have no idea what happens to these films, I don't think the public ever sees them. Without such mementos the memories of these performances all blend into each other for me.
> 
> But musicians and dance companies have every right to dictate the terms that their audiences must follow.


Of course some orchestras do this already. Many of the LSO's performances are recorded for their LSO Live label.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

Woodduck said:


> Maybe I need to spend more time on TC arguing over threads like these:
> 
> Are You getting rid of any Placido Domingo CDs because of his recent actions?
> 
> Opera is stupid - The Guardian


I've been deliberately avoiding them.


----------



## Guest

Tsaraslondon said:


> The taper of the Lisbon Traviata was, I believe, Kraus's wife and the majority of Callas bootleg recordings were actually of radio broadcasts, portable tape machines being somewhat in their infancy. In fact, I think the first instance of a Callas performance being recorded by a member of the audience was part of a London concert in 1959. The sound is pretty awful.


I had a friend who would routinely go to the Met with one of those walkman-style tape recorders in his jacket pocket. He had to have every Leontine Price performance for posterity. I can't imagine what he wanted with those tapes, but he was inconspicuous. Holding up your glowing phone in the front row to make a video is another thing entirely.

I don't fault Mutter for objecting. It is unfortunate that it seems to have turned into a traumatic experience for the person with the phone, who may not have realized how inappropriate it was.


----------



## fluteman

Tsaraslondon said:


> I think you completely (or deliberately) miss my point.
> 
> The taper of the Lisbon Traviata was, I believe, Kraus's wife and the majority of Callas bootleg recordings were actually of radio broadcasts, portable tape machines being somewhat in their infancy. In fact, I think the first instance of a Callas performance being recorded by a member of the audience was part of a London concert in 1959. The sound is pretty awful.


Yes. And these brightly shining cell phone beacons in what is supposed to be a darkened auditorium are an irritating distraction imo. The whole question of pirated or bootlegged recordings is an entirely different one.


----------



## howlingfantods

Tsaraslondon said:


> I think you completely (or deliberately) miss my point.
> 
> The taper of the Lisbon Traviata was, I believe, Kraus's wife and the majority of Callas bootleg recordings were actually of radio broadcasts, portable tape machines being somewhat in their infancy. In fact, I think the first instance of a Callas performance being recorded by a member of the audience was part of a London concert in 1959. The sound is pretty awful.


I see, it's ok to surreptitiously tape the recording if you're a performer's spouse. The hoi polloi however should keep their recording devices to themselves and meekly keep their hands folded on their laps.

Pretty sure the 1955 Andrea Chenier was an audience-created recording. Of course, that's pretty wretched sounding too, but I think you still appreciate it's existence, yes?


----------



## howlingfantods

fluteman said:


> Yes. And these brightly shining cell phone beacons in what is supposed to be a darkened auditorium are an irritating distraction imo. The whole question of pirated or bootlegged recordings is an entirely different one.


The problem isn't taping using a cell phone--you can tape a recording without having the screen visible to your neighbors. The problem here was the audience member's clumsiness, not the sheer fact of an audience member wanting to tape the performance.


----------



## fluteman

howlingfantods said:


> The problem isn't taping using a cell phone--you can tape a recording without having the screen visible to your neighbors. The problem here was the audience member's clumsiness, not the sheer fact of an audience member wanting to tape the performance.


I know all that. I've been going to concerts since the 1960s, so I understand your points, and the other points being made in this thread. I just don't want to be surrounded by bright blinking lights in an auditorium that is supposed to be dark.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

howlingfantods said:


> I see, it's ok to surreptitiously tape the recording if you're a performer's spouse. The hoi polloi however should keep their recording devices to themselves and meekly keep their hands folded on their laps.
> 
> Pretty sure the 1955 Andrea Chenier was an audience-created recording. Of course, that's pretty wretched sounding too, but I think you still appreciate it's existence, yes?


You continue to deliberately misunderstand me, and, like all the La Scala performnces, the *Andrea Chénier* was a broadcast. These broadcasts differ in quality, no doubt because of the differing equipment of people making the recordings, which is why two different releases of the same performance can sound so different. Warner's poor sounding *Anna Bolena*, for instance, is obviously from a different source from Divina's, which is clean and clear.

The reason we have no record of her La Scala *Don Carlo* or *Il Pirata* is because they were never broadcast.

Anyway, the whole question of bootlegs is a totally different subject and has nothing to do with what we are discussing here.

Admittedly some of the bootlegs were "in house" recordings, which is very different from someone messing around in the audience distracting their neighbours.


----------



## fluteman

On the subject of bootlegs, which none of my previous posts addressed: I try to steer clear of them. As a used LP collector, I often see them, usually in plain white covers and described as such, often selling for quite a premium. Of course, the CD era resulted in an explosion of bootlegs and counterfeits. As Tsaraslondon correctly says, the bootlegs are nearly always radio broadcast transcriptions, often from Eastern Europe, at least in the early days, and it isn't just opera. The pianist Sviatoslav Richter was a prime candidate, as not only did he dislike making studio recordings, he didn't even like seeing recording microphones or cables on stage as he was performing. Another I'm guilty of owning is of Annie Fischer, a perfectionist who wouldn't easily authorize the release of studio, much less live, performances. Though the one I have was released after her death and is perfectly legal afaik, a radio transcription from a live 1984 recital in Montreal released with the consent and participation of the relevant Canadian broadcasting authorities.

No doubt audience members have been smuggling recording equipment into concert halls as soon as the technology made it feasible. But the quality has always been poor and certainly still would be from a smart phone some distance from the stage. So legality aside, I have no interest in that kind of bootleg. I happen to own both the authorized BBC version and an East European released radio broadcast bootleg of part of a Richter performance from the Adleburgh Festival (sadly, the BBC chose not to release the entire recital), and the authorized version has vastly better sound. The Annie Fischer recital CD has compromised sound quality, too. So even those bootlegs are to be avoided as much as possible, imho.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

Most of my FB network is made up of fellow actors and musicians. A few days ago one of them posted the Anne-Sophie Mutter article (that's where I first saw it) and, with one accord, they all supported Ms Mutter, citing mobile phones as the bane of their lives, but they aren't the only problem for performers.

Not so long ago, in an interview for the Radio Times, the actress Imelda Staunton bemoaned the lack of concentration in modern audiences, stating that eating in theatres should also be banned, a statement with which I whole heartedly agree. The majority of performers I know feel the same way. Personally I think some people here have been defending the indefensible. Perhaps I shouldn't be surprised as we now appear to live in a time where kindness and consideration of others is declining, in an age when the words "Deal with it" are much more likely to be heard than "I'm so sorry to have inconvenienced you". Perhaps it's a natural consequence of an overcrowded world.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

fluteman said:


> On the subject of bootlegs, which none of my previous posts addressed: I try to steer clear of them. As a used LP collector, I often see them, usually in plain white covers and described as such, often selling for quite a premium. Of course, the CD era resulted in an explosion of bootlegs and counterfeits. As Tsaraslondon correctly says, the bootlegs are nearly always radio broadcast transcriptions, often from Eastern Europe, at least in the early days, and it isn't just opera. The pianist Sviatoslav Richter was a prime candidate, as not only did he dislike making studio recordings, he didn't even like seeing recording microphones or cables on stage as he was performing. Another I'm guilty of owning is of Annie Fischer, a perfectionist who wouldn't easily authorize the release of studio, much less live, performances. Though the one I have was released after her death and is perfectly legal afaik, a radio transcription from a live 1984 recital in Montreal released with the consent and participation of the relevant Canadian broadcasting authorities.
> 
> No doubt audience members have been smuggling recording equipment into concert halls as soon as the technology made it feasible. But the quality has always been poor and certainly still would be from a smart phone some distance from the stage. So legality aside, I have no interest in that kind of bootleg. I happen to own both the authorized BBC version and an East European released radio broadcast bootleg of part of a Richter performance from the Adleburgh Festival (sadly, the BBC chose not to release the entire recital), and the authorized version has vastly better sound. The Annie Fischer recital CD has compromised sound quality, too. So even those bootlegs are to be avoided as much as possible, imho.


Some bootlegs are private in house recordings, made with the full knowledge of the performers, that have somehow leaked out into the public domain. Actually, though, the Lisbon Traviata wasn't leaked but offered to EMI, because of its huge historical importance as Callas never recorded the opera for the company . Though most people knew of its existence, it had never appeared before on any pirate label. Terrence McNally even wrote a play called _The Lisbon Traviata_ in which the quest to find a recording of it symbolises the futility of striving for the impossible. I suppose its message is somewhat dilluted now that the recording is so readily available.


----------



## Fabulin

Tsaraslondon said:


> Reading some of the comments in this thread, it's clear to me that I am old and very old fashioned. I was taken to the theatre and to concerts from a very young age. I was taught, as a mark of respect for the performers and for other people in the audience, to sit still and concentrate on the performance. I was advised to go to the toilet before the performance started to make sure I didn't have to go during, and my parents made sure we were all there in plenty of time to be seated before the curtain went up. I don't remember any of this marring my appreciation of it. Quite the reverse, in fact. I loved going to the theatre. If I enjoy it less now, it's because the behaviour of increasingly more audience members irritates me like mad.
> 
> I still do not understand this current obsession with capturing every minute of our lives on video. A couple of years ago I went down to the Thames to see the New Year's Eve fireworks. I'd say 80% of the crowd got out their phones and tablets to record the event. They weren't actually seeing the fireworks but watching them through their tiny screens. What was the point? They'd have got a better view by staying home and watching them on TV.


There is nothing old-fashioned about it. Attention to someone on stage and not bringing attention to oneself are timeless displays of respect and politeness. They would be appreciated by a person on stage in 2000 B.C. and they sure are in 2000 C.E.

While I didn't have unpleasant experiences of this sort at all in the concert halls, theaters, or cinemas, I was always furious when students did not respect the lecturers at the university, not to mention school teachers in small classrooms. It happened quite often that I, and someone I was sitting next to, exchanged looks of disbelief at the way some people disturbed the focus on whataver was being presented, by unwarranted commotion and noise.


----------



## Enthusiast

The worst audience experience I have had at a musical event was some 35 or more years ago. I was given a free ticket to a Royal Opera House production (I can't remember what but I think it was Verdi). The ticket was for a seat in the Stalls. These seats are the most expensive but not necessarily the best in terms of sound or view. I don't know how it is now but most of the people sitting around me were very posh and from snippets of conversation overheard did not appear to care much about the music. For some having to ensure the opera was the downside of being there. Throughout the opera a group of older school children sitting just behind me were whispering to each other and unwrapping sweets. No-one else seemed to care and I guess they must have gone to the right school. 

Incidentally, the audience around me had seemed to identify that I was not of their class and getting to and from my seat was something of a challenge as, on seeing me coming, people would position themselves to block my progress or even on one occasion to try to trip me up.

I would love to see such people shamed!


----------



## Fabulin

Enthusiast said:


> Incidentally, the audience around me had seemed to identify that I was *not of their class* and getting to and from my seat was something of a challenge as, on seeing me coming, people would position themselves to block my progress or even on one occasion to try to trip me up.
> I would love to see such people shamed!


What "class" were they from? Lumpenproletariat?


----------



## fluteman

Enthusiast said:


> The worst audience experience I have had at a musical event was some 35 or more years ago. I was given a free ticket to a Royal Opera House production (I can't remember what but I think it was Verdi). The ticket was for a seat in the Stalls. These seats are the most expensive but not necessarily the best in terms of sound or view. I don't know how it is now but most of the people sitting around me were very posh and from snippets of conversation overheard did not appear to care much about the music. For some having to ensure the opera was the downside of being there. Throughout the opera a group of older school children sitting just behind me were whispering to each other and unwrapping sweets. No-one else seemed to care and I guess they must have gone to the right school.
> 
> Incidentally, the audience around me had seemed to identify that I was not of their class and getting to and from my seat was something of a challenge as, on seeing me coming, people would position themselves to block my progress or even on one occasion to try to trip me up.
> 
> I would love to see such people shamed!


In America, people don't think so much about their 'class' as they do about themselves. It would never occur to these people flashing lights or making noise during a concert that their actions might have a negative impact on those around them, as those around them essentially do not exist. Only they exist, and only their own immediate needs and wants have any relevance.


----------



## Enthusiast

^ Yes, our British obsession with class is unique to us. By the accents (and the odd words I caught) the people I encountered were well-healed and educated at one of the "better" schools. I am sure they thought of themselves as upper class. They were certainly looking down on me.


----------



## howlingfantods

fluteman said:


> On the subject of bootlegs, which none of my previous posts addressed: I try to steer clear of them. As a used LP collector, I often see them, usually in plain white covers and described as such, often selling for quite a premium. Of course, the CD era resulted in an explosion of bootlegs and counterfeits. As Tsaraslondon correctly says, the bootlegs are nearly always radio broadcast transcriptions, often from Eastern Europe, at least in the early days, and it isn't just opera.


Perhaps my perspective differs since my favorite pianist is Grigory Sokolov, a performer who refuses to record in studio and lets precious few live performance tapings be released commercially. He also hasn't traveled outside Europe to perform in quite some time; so basically my only way of hearing his artistry is through bootlegs created by audience members literally recording with their phones. Not all, of course--a good number of his bootlegs are radio broadcasts tapings. But a very large number are of the phones-in-pocket variety.

And I'm personally hugely grateful to all of his audience members who have documented this great artist, whose reputation as possibly the greatest living pianist rests in large part due to these bootlegs. It's very peculiar to see these people, who are the most fanatic of the fanatics in our talking-about-classical-music-online community be described as inattentive--I would assume that they're about the most attentive, reading through the scores while listening variety.

I also have purchased a large quantity of recordings from Operadepot and Opera Passion. I don't believe it's remotely accurate to say that these are "nearly always" from broadcast recordings. A very large number are obviously taped from the audience.


----------



## Open Book

I've been tempted by something similar. There was a 2011 HD Met performance of Gluck's "Iphigenie en Tauride" with Domingo and Graham that I really enjoyed. It never went to DVD. It's not an opera performed very often so that there are many alternative performances, either. 

I found bootlegs of this performance for sale on a certain online site. Then they disappeared from the site. Then they came back, I guess always one step ahead of the law.

I couldn't bring myself to buy it but happily found that that performance of "Iphigenie" is available on demand with a Met subscription, so it can be rented if not owned. I can see how frustrating it is if a performer doesn't leave any permanent souvenirs for his fans like this Sokolov pianist.


----------



## fluteman

howlingfantods said:


> Perhaps my perspective differs since my favorite pianist is Grigory Sokolov, a performer who refuses to record in studio and lets precious few live performance tapings be released commercially. He also hasn't traveled outside Europe to perform in quite some time; so basically my only way of hearing his artistry is through bootlegs created by audience members literally recording with their phones. Not all, of course--a good number of his bootlegs are radio broadcasts tapings. But a very large number are of the phones-in-pocket variety.
> 
> And I'm personally hugely grateful to all of his audience members who have documented this great artist, whose reputation as possibly the greatest living pianist rests in large part due to these bootlegs. It's very peculiar to see these people, who are the most fanatic of the fanatics in our talking-about-classical-music-online community be described as inattentive--I would assume that they're about the most attentive, reading through the scores while listening variety.
> 
> I also have purchased a large quantity of recordings from Operadepot and Opera Passion. I don't believe it's remotely accurate to say that these are "nearly always" from broadcast recordings. A very large number are obviously taped from the audience.


Yes, I suppose Sokolov is the modern-day Richter. As for your comment, "I don't believe it's remotely accurate to say that these are "nearly always" from broadcast recordings. A very large number are obviously taped from the audience", well, I don't dispute that there are many audience taped recordings circulating about. But there are very, very, many mislabeled or unlabeled radio transcriptions, at least from the 78, LP and early CD eras. The number is staggering, as any longtime collector begins to realize. But I suspect the internet era has greatly cut down on the need or opportunity to make radio broadcast bootlegs. Maybe for the likes of your hero Sokolov, audience-made audio and/or video efforts make it online and have now become the preferred form of bootleg.


----------



## Open Book

Enthusiast said:


> The worst audience experience I have had at a musical event was some 35 or more years ago. I was given a free ticket to a Royal Opera House production (I can't remember what but I think it was Verdi). The ticket was for a seat in the Stalls. These seats are the most expensive but not necessarily the best in terms of sound or view. I don't know how it is now but most of the people sitting around me were very posh and from snippets of conversation overheard did not appear to care much about the music. For some having to ensure the opera was the downside of being there. Throughout the opera a group of older school children sitting just behind me were whispering to each other and unwrapping sweets. No-one else seemed to care and I guess they must have gone to the right school.
> 
> Incidentally, the audience around me had seemed to identify that I was not of their class and getting to and from my seat was something of a challenge as, on seeing me coming, people would position themselves to block my progress or even on one occasion to try to trip me up.
> 
> I would love to see such people shamed!


My God. Whatever class they belonged to, you had far more class than they.


----------



## PlaySalieri

Eva Yojimbo said:


> OK, I guess I get to be the contrarian here; I don't see what the big deal is. Given where I live, I see more pop/rock concerts than classical concerts (latter are always a good drive a way; former tend to be really close), and in the former pretty much everyone is recording the performance with their cell phones. I don't do this myself, but I don't find it bothersome that others do, and I don't really understand why anyone would (I find tall people directly in front of me more annoying). So I'm trying to imagine what the difference would be at a classical concert. People filming concerts are just doing it to have the memory of being there, the same way people make home movies of vacations and birthdays. They don't watch the videos back to enjoy the concert (the sound/video sucks), but to enjoy the memory of being there. Maybe someone can explain to me how/why this would be distracting either for the performer or the audience; if you're a performer, why aren't you focused on what you're playing, and if you're the audience, why aren't you focused on the performer and not on the person with a phone?


Couldnt agree more.

I had a guy next to me at a Thomas tallis recital dressed as a clown pulling all sorts of weird faces and silent lip diddling

didnt bother me a bit - I focused on the wonderful singing

dont understand all the fuss against cell phone recording at concerts etc if someone got an easel out and started an oil painting of the performer - it makes no difference to my enjoyment.

live and let live


----------



## Open Book

PlaySalieri said:


> Couldnt agree more.
> 
> I had a guy next to me at a Thomas tallis recital dressed as a clown pulling all sorts of weird faces and silent lip diddling
> 
> didnt bother me a bit - I focused on the wonderful singing
> 
> dont understand all the fuss against cell phone recording at concerts etc if someone got an easel out and started an oil painting of the performer - it makes no difference to my enjoyment.
> 
> live and let live


Seriously, you sat next to a guy who was clowning and you had no reaction and could still concentrate of the concert? I hope he was part of the program. If it was an opera or other dramatic program rather than strictly musical and they wanted some audience involvement, I can see (though I don't like) planting people like this in the audience. But not during an instrumental concert.

I admire your ability to not get distracted, but not everyone is like you. If people are being a visual distraction it's usually a small step to their being an auditory nuisance, too.


----------



## Guest

The problem in this case was the girl in the front row holding up the phone had distracted the _performer_. Somewhere I saw an account from Mutter herself, saying that she had been distracted by the person in the first movement of the concerto, thought she had shamed her into putting it away by glaring at her, then the girl pulls out the phone again in the second movement. At that point she lost it. I don't blame her.


----------



## gardibolt

Chicago Symphony performances, as one might expect, always begin with an admonition not to photograph or record. I wasn't there but I expect this was no exception. Not only disregarding that instruction, but doing it in a manner that distracts the performer, seems to me to be bordering on narcissistic sociopathy.


----------



## Bulldog

Baron Scarpia said:


> The problem in this case was the girl in the front row holding up the phone had distracted the _performer_. Somewhere I saw an account from Mutter herself, saying that she had been distracted by the person in the first movement of the concerto, thought she had shamed her into putting it away by glaring at her, then the girl pulls out the phone again in the second movement. At that point she lost it. I don't blame her.


Reminds me of my wife. She loves her cellphone. When we are watching tv together, she holds it as if it was a precious piece of art. She gets hundreds of facebook entries every day. I asked her why she receives so many per day - her answer was that she has tons of friends.


----------



## Fabulin

1) Ignore the messages and / or signs that recording is forbidden
2) Record anyway
3) Cease this behaviour when Mutter is looking at you
4) Do it again after a while
5) Mutter is angry
6) Cry and apologize profusely, tell Mutter that you respect her, then go to your room crying

How old was she, five?


----------



## PlaySalieri

Open Book said:


> Seriously, you sat next to a guy who was clowning and you had no reaction and could still concentrate of the concert? I hope he was part of the program. If it was an opera or other dramatic program rather than strictly musical and they wanted some audience involvement, I can see (though I don't like) planting people like this in the audience. But not during an instrumental concert.
> 
> I admire your ability to not get distracted, but not everyone is like you. If people are being a visual distraction it's usually a small step to their being an auditory nuisance, too.


yeah it was I paliaci - they thought it would be cool to have a clown in the audience mucking about

idiotic really


----------



## Open Book

PlaySalieri said:


> yeah it was I paliaci - they thought it would be cool to have a clown in the audience mucking about
> 
> idiotic really


I thought it was Thomas Tallis.


----------



## Open Book

Bulldog said:


> Reminds me of my wife. She loves her cellphone. When we are watching tv together, she holds it as if it was a precious piece of art. She gets hundreds of facebook entries every day. I asked her why she receives so many per day - her answer was that she has tons of friends.


It's nice to have tons of friends. But what the phone does is connect you to your friends _continuously_. I don't understand why anyone wants that, but obviously some people are much more social than I am.


----------



## fluteman

This is a somewhat depressing thread for me, but it really does illustrate a point I have tried to make in other contexts here. In our electronic, internet era, the idea of an audience going to a concert hall and sitting still, quietly, and in darkness, while all focus their attention on the stage for two hours or up to as much as four hours, with only one or at most two short intermissions, is no longer appealing to many people, however much they may be interested in classical music or opera. Even some posters in this thread seemed to have abandoned this way of listening or watching.

It does demonstrate that the aesthetic world of Wagner, Bruckner, Mahler et al. is in our past, a past that is fast becoming distant and all but unrecognizable.


----------



## Bluecrab

fluteman said:


> This... does demonstrate that the aesthetic world of Wagner, Bruckner, Mahler et al. is in our past, a past that is fast becoming distant and all but unrecognizable.


I hope you're wrong, but my sample size is too small for me to say.

Last Sunday, we saw a performance by a really good string ensemble called Sphinx Virtuosi in an intimate (499 seats) theater on a local university campus (see details here). As they always do in this venue, they announced just before the performance began that the use of cell phones and cameras was prohibited. Including the encore, the performance lasted over 90 minutes. There was one 10-minute intermission. While the crowd was largely over 60, there were a fair number of students there. Not one person tried to use a cell phone or camera during the performance, and you could have heard a pin drop the whole time.

Perhaps my experience is not representative of what one normally encounters. As I say, my sample size is to small for me to draw any meaningful conclusion. But I've never been disappointed in this little theater.


----------



## fluteman

Bluecrab said:


> I hope you're wrong, but my sample size is too small for me to say.
> 
> Last Sunday, we saw a performance by a really good string ensemble called Sphinx Virtuosi in an intimate (499 seats) theater on a local university campus (see details here). As they always do in this venue, they announced just before the performance began that the use of cell phones and cameras was prohibited. Including the encore, the performance lasted over 90 minutes. There was one 10-minute intermission. While the crowd was largely over 60, there were a fair number of students there. Not one person tried to use a cell phone or camera during the performance, and you could have heard a pin drop the whole time.
> 
> Perhaps my experience is not representative of what one normally encounters. As I say, my sample size is to small for me to draw any meaningful conclusion. But I've never been disappointed in this little theater.


Sounds like a great concert, wish I could have been there. Still, a series of relatively short pieces, and a total time, with intermission, of 90 minutes? A Wagner opera would need lots of cuts. (Edit: Notice only one movement from a Schubert string quartet, and other very short pieces.) But that may well be a good template for the modern classical concert.


----------



## Open Book

I followed the link Bluecrab's link to see the details of the concert he attended. And discovered a whole new area of the forum I had never much noticed:

Musicians and Listeners Community > News, Concerts and Events 

And what do I see under this link but a thread entitled "Post a picture of your concert" exhorting people to post a photo of a live concert they've attended. Looks like an awful lot of people are OK mixing cameras and live concerts.

I wonder how the majority of the performers feel. If the younger ones are predominately OK with this, then that's how it's going to be.


----------



## Enthusiast

fluteman said:


> This is a somewhat depressing thread for me, but it really does illustrate a point I have tried to make in other contexts here. In our electronic, internet era, the idea of an audience going to a concert hall and sitting still, quietly, and in darkness, while all focus their attention on the stage for two hours or up to as much as four hours, with only one or at most two short intermissions, is no longer appealing to many people, however much they may be interested in classical music or opera. Even some posters in this thread seemed to have abandoned this way of listening or watching.
> 
> It does demonstrate that the aesthetic world of Wagner, Bruckner, Mahler et al. is in our past, a past that is fast becoming distant and all but unrecognizable.


Glass half empty or even worse. The story is about the behaviour of one person and the disdain of the rest of the audience for that behaviour. And who in this thread has actually recommended behaving in the same way? I found some who were less than horrified but no-one who said "I do that, so what?".


----------



## Tsaraslondon

fluteman said:


> This is a somewhat depressing thread for me, but it really does illustrate a point I have tried to make in other contexts here. In our electronic, internet era, the idea of an audience going to a concert hall and sitting still, quietly, and in darkness, while all focus their attention on the stage for two hours or up to as much as four hours, with only one or at most two short intermissions, is no longer appealing to many people, however much they may be interested in classical music or opera. Even some posters in this thread seemed to have abandoned this way of listening or watching.
> 
> It does demonstrate that the aesthetic world of Wagner, Bruckner, Mahler et al. is in our past, a past that is fast becoming distant and all but unrecognizable.


I agree with you and now feel thoroughly depressed.


----------



## NLAdriaan

Depressed? Come on, no need for depressions

In my very long career as visitor of classical concerts, it only happens very rarely that something really embarrassing happens. I only recall two incidents, one similar to the one described here, with John Eliot Gardiner, raging at a visitor who took a flash photo in his face from the choir tribune. The other one was a hearing aid (how appropriate) that was beeping the entire first half of the concert.

Remember that back in the days, there wouldn't even be seats in a concert hall and visitors would just treat the music as background music. And didn't Haydn compose the symphony with the "Paukenschlag", to wake up his snoring audience.

As if Mahler, Bruckner and Wagner were all completely understood in their days and auditioned in awe and devoted silence, NOT. 

So, let's not romanticize the past, which is a regular habit here, and let's not generalize incidents to illustrate a supposed downfall of musical culture. I guess we can say that political culture is in some countries falling down rapidly, but the concert hall is still a good place to be!:clap:


----------



## Tsaraslondon

NLAdriaan said:


> Depressed? Come on, no need for depressions
> 
> In my very long career as visitor of classical concerts, it only happens very rarely that something really embarrassing happens. I only recall two incidents, one similar to the one described here, with John Eliot Gardiner, raging at a visitor who took a flash photo in his face from the choir tribune. The other one was a hearing aid (how appropriate) that was beeping the entire first half of the concert.
> 
> Remember that back in the days, there wouldn't even be seats in a concert hall and visitors would just treat the music as background music. And didn't Haydn compose the symphony with the "Paukenschlag", to wake up his snoring audience.
> 
> As if Mahler, Bruckner and Wagner were all completely understood in their days and auditioned in awe and devoted silence, NOT.
> 
> So, let's not romanticize the past, which is a regular habit here, and let's not generalize incidents to illustrate a supposed downfall of musical culture. I guess we can say that political culture is in some countries falling down rapidly, but the concert hall is still a good place to be!:clap:


I think you're both right and wrong. For the most part, I'd agree the classical concert hall is still a haven of peace, in which the vast majority of the audience, both young and old, listen attentively and behave with respect for both their neighbours and the performers. However I have noticed a falling off of concentration in the theatre, where quite a few people these days seem to make constant trips to the bar or the toilets and chat to theircompanions throughout the performance . Admittedly this behaviour varies depending on the piece being performed. I find it's less likely to occur in a serious play than in a musical. I also notice that audiences for companies like the Royal National Theatre and the Royal Shakespeare Theatre are generally better behaved than they are for commercial theatre, though I'm not sure why that should be.

On a slightly different, but related, question, I do think that our relationship with the smart phone is beginning to cause social problems and is often bad for mental health. I have a psychotherapist friend who jokingly told me that the smart phone is going to keep him in business for years to come. He may have been half joking, but he made the point that people are losing the ability to communicate directly with one another, which is causing massive mental health problems. He notes that, at the gym for instance, people don't look at each other as they move from one machine to another, shutting themselves off by wearing headsets and looking at their phones. Smart phones are addictive. I admit I found I became quite addicted to mine at one point, and now make a point of not looking at it for long periods. I've turned off all push notifications, so that it doesn't continually demand attention in my pocket.

I admit it is wrong to romanticise the past and I think a longing for a past that never was is somewhat responsible for the political upheaval we are witnessing now both here in the UK and in other parts of the world, but technology can be a force for both good and bad and we should acknowledge that.


----------



## NLAdriaan

Tsaraslondon said:


> ... However I have noticed a falling off of concentration in the theatre, where quite a few people these days seem to make constant trips to the bar or the toilets and chat to theircompanions throughout the performance . Admittedly this behaviour varies depending on the piece being performed. I find it's less likely to occur in a serious play than in a musical. I also notice that audiences for companies like the Royal National Theatre and the Royal Shakespeare Theatre are generally better behaved than they are for commercial theatre, though I'm not sure why that should be.
> 
> ...On a slightly different, but related, question, I do think that our relationship with the smart phone is beginning to cause social problems and is often bad for mental health....
> 
> ... technology can be a force for both good and bad and we should acknowledge that.


Well, you sure go off topic.

On the commercial culture (TV, certain theatres and musicals), I also experience these media generally to be more pleasing and flat than the publicly subsidized market.

On the mobile phone, I fully agree with you. But internet has also brought us this forum, which amongst the sometimes hardheaded responses, also offers a lot of good musical ideas. But having said so, it still remains an artificial way of talking. Nothing beats face-to-face communications, but as you are all over the world, this will be impossible to arrange.

In fact, a good classical concert is a great way to communicate the same emotions all over the audience and as such a unique communication tool. Therefor, it will unlikely ever go away:tiphat:


----------



## fluteman

NLAdriaan said:


> Well, you sure go off topic.
> 
> On the commercial culture (TV, certain theatres and musicals), I also experience these media generally to be more pleasing and flat than the publicly subsidized market.
> 
> On the mobile phone, I fully agree with you. But internet has also brought us this forum, which amongst the sometimes hardheaded responses, also offers a lot of good musical ideas. But having said so, it still remains an artificial way of talking. Nothing beats face-to-face communications, but as you are all over the world, this will be impossible to arrange.
> 
> In fact, a good classical concert is a great way to communicate the same emotions all over the audience and as such a unique communication tool. Therefor, it will unlikely ever go away:tiphat:


Yes, all good points, but if the classical concert will never go away (and I hope you're right), surely it has changed and will continue to do so. And as we age, we have to cheerfully accept the possibility that younger generation does have some good ideas in this area as in others. The only alternative is to become a crabby old curmudgeon.


----------



## eljr

Tsaraslondon said:


> Anne-Sophie Mutter interrupts concert to admonish audience member who is filming her


Terrible reaction from her. She should be ashamed.


----------



## eljr

Merl said:


> Read this earlier today. Well done ASM. About time we countered this crappy obsession with using phones, etc in concerts. It's irritating beyong belief. I'm certainly not against phones / technology in daily life but what is the point of subpar recordings of a gig? Stupid. went to a gig at Glasgow O2 last week and half the show was hidden behind a deluge of mobiles. It p*ssed me off no end.


Crappy obsession? Well done?

Dude, we have the accumulated knowledge of the world in our hand wherever we go. We are in touch with our loved ones at all times. We are aware of news and business instantly.

Crappy obsession?

Maybe, just maybe your perspective is that of a crusty old man who fears change so he lashes out at it.

No one is taking my "crappy obsession" from me.

Dude, like it or not time is change so get over it.


----------



## KenOC

fluteman said:


> ...The only alternative is to become a crabby old curmudgeon.


If people want to talk about me, it would be far more polite to address me directly. Really!


----------



## millionrainbows

They oughta do like the Grateful Dead, and have a hub that people can plug their phones into, and record the whole thing.


----------



## Woodduck

eljr said:


> Dude, we have the accumulated knowledge of the world in our hand wherever we go. We are in touch with our loved ones at all times. We are aware of news and business instantly.
> 
> Crappy obsession?
> 
> Maybe, just maybe your perspective is that of a crusty old man who fears change so he lashes out at it.
> 
> No one is taking my "crappy obsession" from me.
> 
> Dude, like it or not time is change so get over it.


Dude, like it or not you're being marched out of the auditorium between two crusty, change-fearing old men in uniform for ignoring instructions not to take photographs of the performers during the concert, which will resume when your irksome presence has been removed.

But take heart! The accumulated knowledge of the world, including instant access to business and news, will be there to entertain you while you're standing out in the rain phoning your loved ones to come and take you home. Hopefully, they haven't gone to a movie and decided not to be in touch at all times.

Incidentally, your thirty-dollar ticket is nonrefundable, so get over it.


----------



## KenOC

Perhaps famous violinists should emulate Spike Jones, who always kept a loaded revolver on his podium.


----------



## DavidA

There is of course the infamous case of Jon Vickers admonishing an audience member:


----------



## howlingfantods

Woodduck said:


> Dude, like it or not you're being marched out of the auditorium between two crusty, change-fearing old men in uniform for ignoring instructions not to take photographs of the performers during the concert, which will resume when your irksome presence has been removed.
> 
> But take heart! The accumulated knowledge of the world, including instant access to business and news, will be there to entertain you while you're standing out in the rain phoning your loved ones to come and take you home. Hopefully, they haven't gone to a movie and decided not to be in touch at all times.
> 
> Incidentally, your thirty-dollar ticket is nonrefundable, so get over it.


30 dollar ticket!! how long has it been since you've gone to a concert with a world-famous musician?


----------



## KenOC

howlingfantods said:


> 30 dollar ticket!! how long has it been since you've gone to a concert with a world-famous musician?


For $30 you're allowed to stand on your head on the sidewalk and listen using a genuine transistor radio.


----------



## fluteman

millionrainbows said:


> They oughta do like the Grateful Dead, and have a hub that people can plug their phones into, and record the whole thing.


Don't want to wander too far or long off topic, but the Grateful Dead (a famous American rock band with a large cult following that originated in the 1960s) well illustrates the profound difference between performance traditions in this area. The "Dead" famously allowed or even welcomed fans in the huge throngs they drew who wanted to tape the concerts. (Dedicated fans, known as "Deadheads", would often travel from city to city, following and taping the band.) Many proudly held their tape recorders high in the air for all to see. Of course, privately or semi-commercially circulated pirated recordings of live Grateful Dead concerts are legion and legendary, many insisting that their music cannot fully be appreciated without them.

Now, the band itself routinely recorded its own concerts with full, professional equipment. At one point they were releasing an official recording of some older material, including a concert in Kansas City from 20 years earlier. They discovered that due to a failure in their fancy professional recording equipment, there was a drop out in the middle of the concert (I forget how long, maybe a minute or two). So they made a public appeal for a pirated recording of that particular concert so they could patch it in to the recording they were making. Sure enough, several fans obliged, the dead spot was patched, and the recording was released with the full concert.

I don't suppose Annie-Sophie Mutter was thinking of this potential upside.


----------



## DavidA

howlingfantods said:


> 30 dollar ticket!! how long has it been since you've gone to a concert with a world-famous musician?


I paid thirty pounds each for a concert by the Tallis Scholars the other year - huge let down I'm afraid.


----------



## Woodduck

howlingfantods said:


> 30 dollar ticket!! how long has it been since you've gone to a concert with a world-famous musician?


Since they started asking $31.


----------



## fluteman

Woodduck said:


> Since they started asking $31.


If you live near a college or university town, you can still see famous professional soloists for very reasonable (and subsidized) prices. Alas, large-scale productions of the Wagner operas you favor may not be as inexpensive. Major full-scale symphony orchestras can still be seen at a reasonable price if you can catch them away from New York or other major cities, though less often, and less cheaply, in recent years, ime.


----------



## Larkenfield

Never sit next to a patron in the audience who has just had a bowl of chilli.:scold:


----------



## DaveM

eljr said:


> Terrible reaction from her. She should be ashamed.





eljr said:


> Crappy obsession? Well done?
> 
> Dude, we have the accumulated knowledge of the world in our hand wherever we go. We are in touch with our loved ones at all times. We are aware of news and business instantly.
> 
> Crappy obsession?
> 
> Maybe, just maybe your perspective is that of a crusty old man who fears change so he lashes out at it.
> 
> No one is taking my "crappy obsession" from me.
> 
> Dude, like it or not time is change so get over it.


I never suspected from your posts that you were among those who think that a classical music performance -that a lot of people have probably paid a lot to see, especially for a front row seat- is all about you and your stinking cellphone, but now I know. So in your mind, 'time is change' means you get to do whatever you want regardless of people around you. Well news flash, the world still works much the way it used to and you can count on your butt being kicked out or being made a fool of if you pull something similar to what that person did to Mutter, just like always.


----------



## Strange Magic

I find it difficult to believe that eljr is not putting us on with his "defense" of cellphone/camera use among classical music concertgoers. Such behavior, as I'm almost sure eljr agrees, in that setting is....indefensible.


----------



## Open Book

eljr said:


> Crappy obsession? Well done?
> 
> Dude, we have the accumulated knowledge of the world in our hand wherever we go. We are in touch with our loved ones at all times. We are aware of news and business instantly.


Don't you want separation from your loved ones sometimes? Phones are great in emergencies but they have made many people clingy, so that they want constant contact.

They write to advice columnists complaining that the new person they are dating doesn't answer their texts immediately and they wonder if something is seriously wrong.

They ignore the people in front of them in favor of the people in their phones. How do they ever make new friends? Ironic that these newfangled devices allow them to stick with the safe and familiar.

Phones are great for information but a person who constantly consults google on his phone for every last little thing while supposedly socializing with others is annoying to be around.

And you shouldn't take picture of everything just because your phone makes it easy. It may not be appropriate. The subject may not want their picture taken.

That's my take on the portable phone. A marvelous invention that has brought out rather negative aspects of human nature that I never suspected were there.


----------



## eljr

millionrainbows said:


> They oughta do like the Grateful Dead, and have a hub that people can plug their phones into, and record the whole thing.


This is why the Dead became so big. They helped their audience to enjoy their music. Very much the opposite of what we saw here.


----------



## eljr

Open Book said:


> Don't you want separation from your loved ones sometimes? Phones are great in emergencies but they have made many people clingy, so that they want constant contact.
> 
> They write to advice columnists complaining that the new person they are dating doesn't answer their texts immediately and they wonder if something is seriously wrong.
> 
> They ignore the people in front of them in favor of the people in their phones. How do they ever make new friends? Ironic that these newfangled devices allow them to stick with the safe and familiar.
> 
> Phones are great for information but a person who constantly consults google on his phone for every last little thing while supposedly socializing with others is annoying to be around.
> 
> And you shouldn't take picture of everything just because your phone makes it easy. It may not be appropriate. The subject may not want their picture taken.
> 
> That's my take on the portable phone. A marvelous invention that has brought out rather negative aspects of human nature that I never suspected were there.


With all respect, bulls$#t.

Shouldn't take pictures? Good grief.

Advise columns existed way before the smartphone.

Ignore the people around them? In all my years i have never had strangers in public engage me.

Listen, this stuff is obvious. People who did not grow up with smart phones nor seat to them don't like them because they represent change. People do not like change. It's makes them uncomfortable. I could ex plain the psychology of this but why bother?

I feel blessed to live in an age where I have a smart phone at my side. You dont. So be it.


----------



## eljr

KenOC said:


> For $30 you're allowed to stand on your head on the sidewalk and listen using a genuine transistor radio.


When I was young everyone had one of these held to their ear. They ignored the people around them . The horror!


----------



## eljr

DaveM said:


> I never suspected from your posts that you were among those who think that a classical music performance -that a lot of people have probably paid a lot to see, especially for a front row seat- is all about you and your stinking cellphone, but now I know. So in your mind, 'time is change' means you get to do whatever you want regardless of people around you. Well news flash, the world still works much the way it used to and you can count on your butt being kicked out or being made a fool of if you pull something similar to what that person did to Mutter, just like always.


Logical fallacy much?

I'll put you down as "old and in the way."

There is a difference between someone acting like they are at a rock concert and passively preserving a musical moment as this women was doing.

My God.


----------



## Gallus

eljr said:


> Listen, this stuff is obvious. People who did not grow up with smart phones nor seat to them don't like them because they represent change. People do not like change. It's makes them uncomfortable. I could ex plain the psychology of this but why bother?


Err, I go to techno nights all the time where using your phone on the dancefloor to take videos is frowned upon or banned. Some take your phone as you enter and put tape over the camera. So no, this isn't a problem of old people failing to adapt to "change", but about respect for music.


----------



## DaveM

eljr said:


> Logical fallacy much?
> 
> I'll put you down as "old and in the way."
> 
> There is a difference between someone acting like they are at a rock concert and passively preserving a musical moment as this women was doing.
> 
> My God.


My iPhone XR, iPhone 6+, iPhone SE, 2 iPad Pros, not to mention the #1 Gen iPad and practically every generation of iTouch says I have no problem with smartphone/tablet technology. The difference between you and I is I know how to and when to control them and myself. I'll put you down as someone who needs to grow up.


----------



## Open Book

eljr said:


> Logical fallacy much?
> 
> I'll put you down as "old and in the way."
> 
> There is a difference between someone acting like they are at a rock concert and passively preserving a musical moment as this women was doing.
> 
> My God.


Where is the logical fallacy?

What is DaveM "in the way" of? Is he impeding some great progress that will benefit the human race?

What's passive about taking a photo? That's an action, which makes it active. Did you mean "unobtrusive" rather than "passive"? That doesn't matter. When you buy a ticket to an event, you are signing a contract that you will conform to the code of conduct that its organizers want to impose. That includes no photos if that's what they wish.


----------



## Open Book

eljr said:


> With all respect, bulls$#t.
> 
> Shouldn't take pictures? Good grief.
> 
> Advise columns existed way before the smartphone.
> 
> Ignore the people around them? In all my years i have never had strangers in public engage me.
> 
> Listen, this stuff is obvious. People who did not grow up with smart phones nor seat to them don't like them because they represent change. People do not like change. It's makes them uncomfortable. I could ex plain the psychology of this but why bother?
> 
> I feel blessed to live in an age where I have a smart phone at my side. You dont. So be it.


You're missing the point about advice columns. It's not the column, I'm appalled that the advice seeker thinks there is something seriously wrong with a person who doesn't immediately answer every text they receive, like a trained monkey. As if that's supposed to make them uncaring and insensitive and not a good potential mate. I would find it oppressive to have to answer every text someone sends, every stupid little trifle. The person who expects that is overly clingy and demanding of attention.

If you were receptive to the people around you, you might have more interactions and you might find some of them to be positive experiences. You can learn some things from the person sitting next to you at a concert. The older they are, the more experience they have, and the more interesting their stories. Some of my best concert experiences were tinged with the memories of conversations with other concertgoers.

And never mind strangers, what about acquaintances? I belonged to book club. While waiting for everyone to arrive, half the people had their noses buried in their phones, shutting everyone out. Why not spend some time talking to the people in the group, you might develop a new relationship? You can play with the phone any time.

I, too, feel blessed to live in an age where I have a phone by my side. It's not the phones we don't like, it's certain behaviors that they bring out of people.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

Reminds me of this hilarious sketch.


----------



## Larkenfield

The person filming Mutter from the front row made the mistake of calling undo attention to herself. The irony is that she probably bought a front row seat just so she could film Mutter but never considered that Mutter would see her and find the filming objectionable as she was performing. That's how invasive such filming has become and it can be a terrible distraction to the performer when done from the front row and holding up an invasive recording device as Mutter was playing, as if the audience member was perfectly entitled to do so or was perhaps just being unconsciously thoughtless... If someone is going to film, don't do it from the front row where you can be seen. It's an intimate act and can bother the performer. It has nothing to do with embracing change, but it has a great deal to do with being socially considerate in a public setting... If I were performing publicly, I would find it a terrible distraction to play with somebody holding up a iPhone from the front row during the entire performance and then maybe have the concern that it will end up on YouTube as well... Mutter is reminding the audience that sometimes filming is not appropriate, though this particular audience member could probably have recorded the _sound_ of the concert easily and unobtrusively without holding up her phone and Mutter probably wouldn't have noticed anything. But evidently Miss Front Row filmer didn't do that, though I understand that she did try to apologize, so I'm glad Mutter stopped the concert and spoke out. I can understand her upsetment because filming that close is an intimate act whether one realizes it or not.


----------



## DaveM

Don’t do this in any row. Even if the performer can’t see it, it’s a major distraction to audience members, not to mention that one has to hold the phone up above heads in front which means the view of those behind is obstructed by the phone. As to recording the sound: does anyone think that a smart phone is going to record glorious stereo sound that one will treasure forever?


----------



## flamencosketches

She addresses the incident and much more in this great recent interview. Worth a watch I think.


----------



## Luchesi

Larkenfield said:


> The person filming Mutter from the front row made the mistake of calling undo attention to herself. The irony is that she probably bought a front row seat just so she could film Mutter but never considered that Mutter would see her and find the filming objectionable as she was performing. That's how invasive such filming has become and it can be a terrible distraction to the performer when done from the front row and holding up an invasive recording device as Mutter was playing, as if the audience member was perfectly entitled to do so or was perhaps just being unconsciously thoughtless... If someone is going to film, don't do it from the front row where you can be seen. It's an intimate act and can bother the performer. It has nothing to do with embracing change, but it has a great deal to do with being socially considerate in a public setting... If I were performing publicly, I would find it a terrible distraction to play with somebody holding up a iPhone from the front row during the entire performance and then maybe have the concern that it will end up on YouTube as well... Mutter is reminding the audience that sometimes filming is not appropriate, though this particular audience member could probably have recorded the _sound_ of the concert easily and unobtrusively without holding up her phone and Mutter probably wouldn't have noticed anything. But evidently Miss Front Row filmer didn't do that, though I understand that she did try to apologize, so I'm glad Mutter stopped the concert and spoke out. I can understand her upsetment because filming that close is an intimate act whether one realizes it or not.


Aren't there people hired to escort troublemakers out?


----------



## Larkenfield

I’m not encouraging the recording of concerts, but there’s a middle ground of tact and consideration to the surrounding audience because some people are going to record the concerts they go to for their own personal and private collection and if it’s sound only it’s not necessarily intrusive. The sound can actually be acceptable from the examples that some have shared online. But holding up a phone in the front row that everyone can see by filming and drawing attention to yourself is not considerate or respectful to the performers. Nevertheless, some are not going stop cold turkey from making a recording if they just have to have it. Just do it untrusively. Still, I do feel it’s unfair to the artists to record their performances without their approval whether some people feel justified in doing so or not, and it can interfere with enjoying the moment at the concert and creating an indelible memory that’s not dependent on anything other than the experience. But to forbid under all circumstances doesn’t work any more; people are addicted to their phones and will always find a way around the restrictions if they want to and there is a way of doing it, if one must, that is not rude or inconsiderate by not holding up the phone and trying to film the concert. I doubt if a hard-nose approach will work that most likely can’t be enforced anyway unless the audience surrenders their cell phones at the door. The audience is learning through experiences like this what is acceptable to the performers, depending on the venue or circumstances. I doubt that most audience members want to upset the artists they are paying a great deal of money to hear and they’re learning what is appropriate and right for the occasion. They’re getting an education. The person at Mutter’s concert went too far but I doubt if she’ll ever do it again from a front row seat. I applaud Mutter’s stand.


----------



## Larkenfield

flamencosketches said:


> She addresses the incident and much more in this great recent interview. Worth a watch I think.


She comments on the front row cell phone incident around the 20 minute mark. I applaud her wisdom about creating a memory that's not dependent on anything other than having the experience itself and not trying to record it. I think what she's saying is very true. It's possible to remember the essence of the experience that can stay with one for a lifetime.


----------



## DaveM

Larkenfield said:


> I'm not encouraging the recording of concerts, but there's a middle ground of tact and consideration for the surrounding audience because some people are going to record the concerts they go to for their own personal and private collection and if it's sound only it's not necessarily intrusive. The sound can actually be acceptable from the examples that some have shared online. But holding up a phone in the front row that everyone can see by filming and drawing attention to yourself is not considerate or respectful to the performers. But some are not going stop cold turkey from making a recording if they just have to have it. Just do it untrusively. Nevertheless, I do feel it's unfair to the artist to record their performances without their approval whether some people feel justified in doing so or not, and it can interfere with enjoying the moment at the concert and creating an indelible memory that's not dependent on anything other than the experience. But to forbid under all circumstances doesn't work any more; people are addicted to their phones and will always find a way around the restrictions if they want to and there is a way of doing it, if one must, that is not rude or inconsiderate by not holding up the phone and trying to film the concert. I doubt if a hard-nose approach will work that most likely can't be enforced anyway unless the audience surrenders their cell phones at the door. The audience is learning through experiences like this what is acceptable to the performers depending on the venue or circumstances. I doubt that most audience members want to upset the artists they are paying a great deal of money to hear and they're learning what is appropriate and right for the circumstances. The person at Mutter's concert went too far but I doubt if she'll ever do it again from a front row seat. I applaud Mutter's stand.


How does one record unobtrusively using a cellphone in any row (and I'm specifically talking about a classical music concert)? The phone has to be held up to get any kind of video or sound. That means that the bright screen can be seen by people on either side.

This activity will be even worse the smaller the venue. Can you imagine a bunch of people holding up cellphones at a quartet? The environment of a CM concert is quite different from a rowdy rock/pop concert. Cellphones being held up for recording is not tolerated at any CM concert I've gone to. Is it at concerts you go to? Btw, cellphones are not tolerated in movies I go to either.


----------



## Haabrann

My sentiment is this:

If you can't keep a goddamn recording/filming cellphone away during a theatre play or a friggin' classical concert, you should never have attented in the first place.

It is just instinctual social knowledge, like not farting in public or spitting indoors.

If one is the kind of person not posessing such knowledge, I'm pretty sure one will at least have a suspicion about ones ignorance. Then, before attending such an event, on should give a good thought to the question: ''Am I the kind of person that sould really attend a theatre play or a classical concert?''. Pure and simple, it's got nothing to do with social background or any such.

Now, I'm aware that there are perfectly good and well-though out arguments aginst such a sentiment in this case. I just don't intend to argue, because I'll just never agree!


----------



## Fabulin

DaveM said:


> Don't do this in any row. Even if the performer can't see it, it's a major distraction to audience members, not to mention that one has to hold the phone up above heads in front which means the view of those behind is obstructed by the phone.


I would put it differently. The phone-holder lowered the worth of the seats behind her after other customers already paid for them.

Unless she discussed a proper compensation with all of them before the concert, she is a thief of their money.


----------



## Luchesi

Larkenfield said:


> I'm not encouraging the recording of concerts, but there's a middle ground of tact and consideration to the surrounding audience because some people are going to record the concerts they go to for their own personal and private collection and if it's sound only it's not necessarily intrusive. The sound can actually be acceptable from the examples that some have shared online. But holding up a phone in the front row that everyone can see by filming and drawing attention to yourself is not considerate or respectful to the performers. Nevertheless, some are not going stop cold turkey from making a recording if they just have to have it. Just do it untrusively. Still, I do feel it's unfair to the artists to record their performances without their approval whether some people feel justified in doing so or not, and it can interfere with enjoying the moment at the concert and creating an indelible memory that's not dependent on anything other than the experience. But to forbid under all circumstances doesn't work any more; people are addicted to their phones and will always find a way around the restrictions if they want to and there is a way of doing it, if one must, that is not rude or inconsiderate by not holding up the phone and trying to film the concert. I doubt if a hard-nose approach will work that most likely can't be enforced anyway unless the audience surrenders their cell phones at the door. The audience is learning through experiences like this what is acceptable to the performers depending on the venue or circumstances. I doubt that most audience members want to upset the artists they are paying a great deal of money to hear and they're learning what is appropriate and right for the occasion. They're getting an education. The person at Mutter's concert went too far but I doubt if she'll ever do it again from a front row seat. I applaud Mutter's stand.


You and I know that while playing or especially while improvising, any distraction will affect your thoughts and change the crucial instantaneous responses required to express a line. People who don't play in public can't know much about the mostly unconscious processes (if we do at all). Music-making is very mysterious, beginning at the breakout level into the first plateau of effortless playing.

It's not like learning to play. That's a different feeling in the brain.

The audience will get a different performance than what was a perfected concept in the artist's mind.

Jarrett is famous for his anger about audiences who don't want to just sit and listen, and help him with his task;


----------



## Haabrann

Luchesi said:


> You and I know that while playing or especially while improvising, any distraction will affect your thoughts and change the crucial instantaneous responses required to express a line. People who don't play in public can't know much about the mostly unconscious processes (if we do at all).


Like your post very much, but still I'd say that this isn't esoteric knowledge in this day and age, it is just basic knowledge everyone should relate to as homo sapiens specimens, a social species. Art and performance have been with us since the beginning. Even when it is a collective performance, as in tribal dance or tribal rituals, one would instinctively conform to the roles and the ritual. A modern classical performance is an individual experience of art, while it still draws on those ancient collective ritual experiences that is part of out evolution. Just to say how basic this should be. Even if one is completely new to the ritual and the society that performs it, one can simply read from the immediate social/cultural situation that ''pulling up my phone would be out of place here, both out of respect to the performer and to the collective experience''.

Now, if you get into how colonial powers acted with regards to native rituals and performances, it would maybe destroy the above reasoning. But even then, I'd think there would be a kind of innate behavioral programming kicking in, so that there would be an instinctual threshold to interrupting one would be consciously aware of trespassing, or they'd wait at least until the ritual was over before taking everybody away to slavery or whatever.


----------



## Fabulin

Haabrann said:


> Now, if you get into how colonial powers acted with regards to native rituals and performances, it would maybe destroy the above reasoning. But even then, I'd think there would be a kind of innate behavioral programming kicking in, so that there would be an instinctual threshold to interrupting one would be consciously aware of trespassing, or they'd wait at least until the ritual was over before taking everybody away to slavery or whatever.


That's a bizarre comparison. People interested in catching slaves or invading some territory don't and never did give a damn about such things unless it could have made the target group fight back harder, or have another result unfortunate for them. I don't know how it applies to politeness at a gathering within a cohesive society.


----------



## Haabrann

It is neither a comparison, nor bizarre.

It is an observation that would potentially counter what I said above it. Therefore I included it, to say that even in such a sitiation, I believe rituals are so ingrained in us that trespassing them would be a psychological threshold. To level this threshold, one would need psychological ''countermeasures'' like perceiving natives as inferior, ''other'', church sanctioning and so on and on.


----------



## Open Book

flamencosketches said:


> She addresses the incident and much more in this great recent interview. Worth a watch I think.


Any hint as to where the infamous incident was mentioned in this 40-minute interview?


----------



## Tsaraslondon

Open Book said:


> Any hint as to where the infamous incident was mentioned in this 40-minute interview?


About 20 minutes in. But the whole interview is worth listening to.


----------



## eljr

flamencosketches said:


> She addresses the incident and much more in this great recent interview. Worth a watch I think.


Proof, she is an *** hole.


----------



## eljr

DaveM said:


> My iPhone XR, iPhone 6+, iPhone SE, 2 iPad Pros, not to mention the #1 Gen iPad and practically every generation of iTouch says I have no problem with smartphone/tablet technology. The difference between you and I is I know how to and when to control them and myself. I'll put you down as someone who needs to grow up.


LOL,. you do that.

I'll put you down as someone who cannot wholly adjust to change.

Interesting how everything you have is Apple.

You could not pay me to be so duped by marketing.


----------



## DaveM

eljr said:


> LOL,. you do that.
> 
> I'll put you down as someone who cannot wholly adjust to change.
> 
> Interesting how everything you have is Apple.
> 
> You could not pay me to be so duped by marketing.


I wouldn't be surprised if no one is paying you to do anything.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

eljr said:


> Proof, she is an *** hole.


No. Proof, if any more were needed, that you are. Now go away and play with your phone.


----------



## Open Book

Mutter expresses herself beautifully. Since her initial reaction it looks like she has thought a lot about this incident. All her reasons for keeping recording devices out of the concert hall are sound. She's right that memory is the most beautiful souvenir of an event; memory is incomplete but even looking at the program years later can revive it. And she's right that the concert hall is the only place left to purely listen "without tools".

However, I'll bet there are people who taped their mate's first "I love you" and play it back every day. That's the way the world is going. Eljr doesn't try to refute her points, just calls her a nasty name for not giving him what he wants, like a spoiled child.


----------



## eljr

Tsaraslondon said:


> No. Proof, if any more were needed, that you are. Now go away and play with your phone.


Now that is just not polite, calling a fellow forum member an *** hole.

But, it is to be expected from those living in the last century.

Peace brother


----------



## eljr

Open Book said:


> Mutter expresses herself beautifully. Since her initial reaction it looks like she has thought a lot about this incident. All her reasons for keeping recording devices out of the concert hall are sound. She's right that memory is the most beautiful souvenir of an event; memory is incomplete but even looking at the program years later can revive it. And she's right that the concert hall is the only place left to purely listen "without tools".
> 
> However, I'll bet there are people who taped their mate's first "I love you" and play it back every day. That's the way the world is going. Eljr doesn't try to refute her points, just calls her a nasty name for not giving him what he wants, like a spoiled child.


Short signed, egotistical and pompous are the mutterings of Mutter.

"Refute" enough?

Folks, it's 2019. I detest people recording everything about them but ****, I am not so full of myself that I think "my way" is superior or somehow "better."

It is what it is. People record everything around them today. Learn to deal with it or remain an unhappy curmudgeon.

-----------------------

Sorry all, much respect to all, I just felt like rattling the cage.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

eljr said:


> Short signed, egotistical and pompous are the mutterings of Mutter.
> 
> "Refute" enough?
> 
> Folks, it's 2019. I detest people recording everything about them but ****, I am not so full of myself that I think "my way" is superior or somehow "better."
> 
> It is what it is. People record everything around them today. Learn to deal with it or remain an unhappy curmudgeon.
> 
> -----------------------
> 
> Sorry all, much respect to all, I just felt like rattling the cage.


Funnily enough the most dogmatically curmudgeonly person commenting in this thread is you.


----------



## DaveM

eljr said:


> Short signed, egotistical and pompous are the mutterings of Mutter.
> 
> "Refute" enough?
> 
> Folks, it's 2019. I detest people recording everything about them but ****, I am not so full of myself that I think "my way" is superior or somehow "better."
> 
> It is what it is. People record everything around them today. Learn to deal with it or remain an unhappy curmudgeon.


You seem conflicted or you're playing both sides against the middle. Why do you detest people recording everything around them? Or do you? Anyway, it's a little late in the game to backtrack; it hardly comes across as genuine, especially given the opening sentence of your post. Interesting that you say 'I am not so full of myself..' My guess is that some here would disagree.

Why should one learn to deal with something that is wrong? Everyone does it so it's okay? Cellphones are not allowed in movies and that is strictly enforced these days, not just because it bothers the audience, but also because it infringes on the rights of movie studios -not all that different from Mutter's audience and the rights to her performance (not to mention interfering with her performance).

Free use of cellphones whether used for recording or viewing is increasing limited in a number of situations. They are banned while driving in 47 states. In some performances, people have to put their phones in a lock bag.


----------



## eljr

DaveM said:


> You seem conflicted or you're playing both sides against the middle. Why do you detest people recording everything around them? Or do you? Anyway, it's a little late in the game to backtrack; it hardly comes across as genuine, especially given the opening sentence of your post. Interesting that you say 'I am not so full of myself..' My guess is that some here would disagree.
> 
> *Why should one learn to deal with something that is wrong? *Everyone does it so it's okay? Cellphones are not allowed in movies and that is strictly enforced these days, not just because it bothers the audience, but also because it infringes on the rights of movie studios -not all that different from Mutter's audience and the rights to her performance (not to mention interfering with her performance).
> 
> Free use of cellphones whether used for recording or viewing is increasing limited in a number of situations. They are banned while driving in 47 states. In some performances, people have to put their phones in a lock bag.


Wrong? Something that is wrong?

There is no right nor wrong. There are rules or no rules. (This is true of all of life.)

I strongly support rules when rules are in place. I firmly reject individuals trying to justify their wants when no rules are in place by claiming "past practice," etiquette or anything else.

You mistake me being "conflicted" with me seeing from many differing perspectives at once.

----------------------

To be specific to this incident, if there is a rule that people are not allowed to film or take a photo then the women who did so was in the wrong. 
That said, to stop a show and admonish a patron is worse. By far.

This is for theater personal to handle.

-------------------------

As with all threads on all boards the conversation as expanded and contracted. Gone down paths. 
To the greater conversation of smart phones and there proliferation, I just don't see how anyone educated can not applaud there arrival and how it has positively affected our lives.

------------------------

Peace


----------



## eljr

Tsaraslondon said:


> Funnily enough the most dogmatically curmudgeonly person commenting in this thread is you.


Thank you, we agree!

(but I do it tongue in cheek)


----------



## Luchesi

"The celebrated German violinist Anne-Sophie Mutter had just reached the most sublime moment of the Larghetto in the Beethoven Violin Concerto with the Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra on Saturday night when she suddenly stopped playing and pointed to the front row.

The orchestra ground to a halt. A young woman was shooting a video of Mutter's performance with an iPhone, just feet away and directly in front of the star.

A confrontation of several minutes ensued, with Mutter exclaiming, "Either I will leave, or you will put away your phone and recording device," while the person stood up and spoke to her, seeming to be pleading her case. Finally, CSO president Jonathan Martin appeared and escorted the disruptor out, to the applause of the audience."

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinn...w-star-violinist-remains-unruffled-after.html


----------



## DaveM

eljr said:


> Wrong? Something that is wrong?
> 
> There is no right nor wrong. There are rules or no rules. (This is true of all of life.)
> 
> I strongly support rules when rules are in place. I firmly reject individuals trying to justify their wants when no rules are in place by claiming "past practice," etiquette or anything else.
> 
> You mistake me being "conflicted" with me seeing from many differing perspectives at once.


There are some things in this world that are understood by adults without requiring a written rule. I have never been to a classical music concert of any size where cellphones were allowed or accepted either by the artists or the audience itself. On the other hand, rock/popular concerts often allow them.

You seem to think there is no implicit rule against what this woman did in front of Mutter. What if several people in the front row followed her example? What if dozens of people throughout the concert hall did? What if people decided to do a little flash photography? You think that's okay? Or do you need a written rule in front of your eyeballs to refrain from that sort of thing?



> To be specific to this incident, if there is a rule that people are not allowed to film or take a photo then the women who did so was in the wrong.
> That said, to stop a show and admonish a patron is worse. By far.
> This is for theater personal to handle.


Hmm, it seems you've set some rules of your own for Mutter. Are they written down somewhere?



> As with all threads on all boards the conversation as expanded and contracted. Gone down paths.
> To the greater conversation of smart phones and there proliferation, I just don't see how anyone educated can not applaud there arrival and how it has positively affected our lives.


This thread was never about some negative judgment of smart phones in general now was it.


----------



## Strange Magic

> eljr: "As with all threads on all boards the conversation as expanded and contracted. Gone down paths.
> To the greater conversation of smart phones and *there* proliferation, I just don't see how anyone educated can not applaud *there* arrival and how it has positively affected our lives."


Indeed, rules are rules. Words are correctly spelled a certain way, and when people abuse the proper spelling of words, or substitute clearly wrong words for correct ones, it is time for the thread to be stopped and the poorly-educated offender admonished.


----------



## Luchesi

Strange Magic said:


> Indeed, rules are rules. Words are correctly spelled a certain way, and when people abuse the proper spelling of words, or substitute clearly wrong words for correct ones, it is time for the thread to be stopped and the poorly-educated offender admonished.


He might be talking into his phone.

Until the technology gets a lot better humans can still feel superior. I definitely don't look forward to the day when humans lose that.


----------



## eljr

Strange Magic said:


> Indeed, rules are rules. Words are correctly spelled a certain way, and when people abuse the proper spelling of words, or substitute clearly wrong words for correct ones, it is time for the thread to be stopped and the poorly-educated offender admonished.


ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Once the spelling police arrive you know you have won on substance.

Thanks for the Freudian acknowledgement. lol, good stuff!


----------



## eljr

DaveM said:


> There are some things in this world that are understood by adults without requiring a written rule. I have never been to a classical music concert of any size where cellphones were allowed or accepted either by the artists or the audience itself. On the other hand, rock/popular concerts often allow them.
> 
> You seem to think there is no implicit rule against what this woman did in front of Mutter. What if several people in the front row followed her example? What if dozens of people throughout the concert hall did? What if people decided to do a little flash photography? You think that's okay? Or do you need a written rule in front of your eyeballs to refrain from that sort of thing?
> 
> Hmm, it seems you've set some rules of your own for Mutter. Are they written down somewhere?
> 
> This thread was never about some negative judgment of smart phones in general now was it.


You condone her pompous actions, I get that. I do not. I prefer a more mature approach. 
We are different.

I set no rules for her, I simply speak to her aberrant behavior.

and what if several people pulled out their phone? It would be FAR less disruptive than than stopping a ******* concert!

BTW, I have seen many cameras at classical concerts.

Davy, it's just not a big deal. I am simply anti arrogance.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

eljr said:


> You condone her pompous actions, I get that. I do not. I prefer a more mature approach.
> We are different.
> 
> I set no rules for her, I simply speak to her aberrant behavior.
> 
> and what if several people pulled out their phone? It would be FAR less disruptive than than stopping a ******* concert!
> 
> BTW, I have seen many cameras at classical concerts.
> 
> Davy, it's just not a big deal. I am simply anti arrogance.


I don't think it's arrogance at all. It's anger at the lack of respect for performers - all performers! Even if you do find her behaviour arrogant, which I do not, I think she at least has earned the right. She is one of the greatest violinists alive and has been at the top of her game now for around 40 years. What have you, or any of the people waving phones at her, done to give you that right? The mere purchase of a ticket does not give you that right.


----------



## Strange Magic

eljr said:


> ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> Once the spelling police arrive you know you have won on substance.
> 
> Thanks for the Freudian acknowledgement. lol, good stuff!


Freud says Too Many Exclamation Points above. Shows desparate need to "make a point". That will be $250 please, and you're not showing improvement. Would you like a second opinion?


----------



## Larkenfield

eljr said:


> You condone her pompous actions, I get that. I do not. I prefer a more mature approach.
> We are different.
> 
> I set no rules for her, I simply speak to her aberrant behavior.
> 
> and what if several people pulled out their phone? It would be FAR less disruptive than than stopping a ******* concert!
> 
> BTW, I have seen many cameras at classical concerts.
> 
> Davy, it's just not a big deal. I am simply anti arrogance.


You can't imagine any action yourself that you might feel self-conscious being filmed? How about some stranger coming into your office and filming you at work or having sex or dinner at home? You might feel self-conscious yourself. It's the artists' prerogative to set the conditions under which they perform. Nor does the audience have the legal right to make a recording though it's sometimes done if the person can do it without attracting undue attention to themselves. Imagine an audience filled with people with your rude and selfish attitude holding up cell phones in front row seats and not being a distraction to the soloist. You're there as a privilege and not as a right, and the final straw is referring her an a-hole and not looking at the situation from her point of view whether you agree with her or not. (Where are the moderators?) Show some respect for the artist! It's possible for the audience to be disruptive to the performers, such as by excessive coughing, and the performers have certain expectations of them. It's not just one-sided and I do not go along with this nasty, selfish attitude toward Mutter, one of the greatest violinists in the world for over 40 years. I find her perfectly within her rights as a performer, at least to express herself, and I find her views on listening to be enlightening and worth considering.


----------



## Luchesi

She was playing the Beethoven and it's very difficult to get the subtle nuances across even when the audience is WITH you.

When someone is 'aiming' at you like you're some animal in a zoo, I know it would be intolerable.


----------



## DaveM

eljr said:


> You condone her pompous actions, I get that. I do not. I prefer a more mature approach.
> We are different.
> 
> I set no rules for her, I simply speak to her aberrant behavior.
> 
> and what if several people pulled out their phone? It would be FAR less disruptive than than stopping a ******* concert!
> 
> BTW, I have seen many cameras at classical concerts.
> 
> Davy, it's just not a big deal. I am simply anti arrogance.


Interesting selective view of maturity, heaven forbid it applies to the front row miscreant.
Interesting conflict in terms: 'I set no rules for her', but she shouldn't respond the way she did.
Interesting view of 'anti-arrogance': apparently the arrogance applies to the victim and not the 'perp'.

Carry on EL jr.


----------



## eljr

DaveM said:


> Interesting selective view of maturity, heaven forbid it applies to the front row miscreant.
> Interesting conflict in terms: 'I set no rules for her', but she shouldn't respond the way she did.
> Interesting view of 'anti-arrogance': apparently the arrogance applies to the victim and not the 'perp'.
> 
> Carry on EL jr.


You seem bitter, unhappy, unfulfilled.

These are not reasons to engage in logical fallacies to try and avoid reasoned debate.

How is it arrogant to take out a phone to record an exciting time in one's life?

She stopped a concert! People paid to see a performance. It was needlessly interrupted by the person most responsible for making the performance work. 
.


----------



## eljr

Larkenfield said:


> You can't imagine any action yourself that you might feel self-conscious being filmed? How about some stranger coming into your office and filming you at work or having sex or dinner at home? You might feel self-conscious yourself. It's the artists' prerogative to set the conditions under which they perform. Nor does the audience have the legal right to make a recording though it's sometimes done if the person can do it without attracting undue attention to themselves. Imagine an audience filled with people with your rude and selfish attitude holding up cell phones in front row seats and not being a distraction to the soloist. You're there as a privilege and not as a right, and the final straw is referring her an a-hole and not looking at the situation from her point of view whether you agree with her or not. (Where are the moderators?) Show some respect for the artist! It's possible for the audience to be disruptive to the performers, such as by excessive coughing, and the performers have certain expectations of them. It's not just one-sided and I do not go along with this nasty, selfish attitude toward Mutter, one of the greatest violinists in the world for over 40 years. I find her perfectly within her rights as a performer, at least to express herself, and I find her views on listening to be enlightening and worth considering.


With all respect, a performers job is too be seen. In fact, it is most times the primary motivation someone to become an entertainer. Self conscious to be filmed? Come on man.

she conducted herself horribly and I have lost all respect I had had for her

I do not idolize, then make excuses for my heroine.

I respect you opinion on the matter, but I reject it as not object, biased toward an idol.


----------



## eljr

Strange Magic said:


> Freud says Too Many Exclamation Points above. Shows desparate need to "make a point". That will be $250 please, and you're not showing improvement. Would you like a second opinion?


Then you don't understand Freud.

The exclamations were straight forward excitement. A celebration ritual to having triumphed.

A most natural and wholesome reaction.

You may well benefit from enrolling in my class.


----------



## DaveM

eljr said:


> You seem bitter, unhappy, unfulfilled.


When something like that comes out of nowhere, it usually means there's transference from the writer to one's superior. Junior, here's something that might help you:


----------



## Tsaraslondon

I'm beginning to wonder if eljr is a parody account.


----------



## Strange Magic

Tsaraslondon said:


> I'm beginning to wonder if eljr is a parody account.


Likely a previous member under a new name. They come; they go.

[Edit] I stand corrected. Been a member since 2015, so offering similar material since then??


----------



## eljr

Tsaraslondon said:


> I'm beginning to wonder if eljr is a parody account.


How will we ever know?


----------



## eljr

Strange Magic said:


> Likely a previous member under a new name. They come; they go.
> 
> [Edit] I stand corrected. Been a member since 2015, so offering similar material since then??


I consider him a most valued poster.


----------



## Tsaraslondon

eljr said:


> How will we ever know?


There may be a clue here.


----------



## millionrainbows

The truth is, none of us really know who we are talking to on this forum.

I'm still in love with Mollie John's avatar, which increases my heart rate every time I see it.

As far as "friends" go, I think this has no real value, except as one wishes to show one's affiliation with other member as a "show of force" or intimidation.

"eljr will always have a soft spot in my heart..."...*sigh*...


----------



## eljr

millionrainbows said:


> The truth is, none of us really know who we are talking to on this forum.
> 
> I'm still in love with Mollie John's avatar, which increases my heart rate every time I see it.
> 
> As far as "friends" go, I think this has no real value, except as one wishes to show one's affiliation with other member as a "show of force" or intimidation.
> 
> "eljr will always have a soft spot in my heart..."...*sigh*...


LOL

Good post.

...


----------



## EdwardBast

Mutter was right to do what she did. For the distraction of aiming a phone at the performer from close range alone the idiot should have been dragged out. Perhaps this incident will inspire other vacuous boobs intent on fluffing their Facebook pages to go elsewhere.


----------

