What about live performances of music by UCs given with a view to CD release?

[pcc]

I had a question, and I don't know if this is the right forum to post this on (if at all) so I leave it to the moderators:

So much of what we hear in the repertoire we discuss is in CD form, and the phrase "never makes it to the concert hall" is in many posts. Has anyone suggested the idea to the companies of making a specific series of performing these works, with the often first-class orchestras they use, with an audience with the idea of issuing the recording, even if it does not meet absolute perfection?  This is frequently the case with opera recordings coming from festivals specializing in rare repertoire, and it may be that the promise of recording actually helps fund those recordings; why not for symphonic literature on a structured basis?

Many critics dislike hearing the audience on record, preferring to hear only the music itself.  This seems to remove an important element of the experience, like watching films only on video rather than in the cinema. You might argue that films are "dead", fixed media, but they were designed to seen by groups of people in communal venues, and film companies often adjusted films based upon audiences' initial reactions. Thus many films make a very different impression when watched in the cinema than when watched alone, no matter whether they are comedies or dramas.  Likewise, most music was intended to be performed and heard in the presence (and company) of an audience, and historically many performers behaved much differently in the concert hall than in controlled recording environments. For myself I have always preferred "live" recordings to studio based ones; I've recorded quite a bit myself, and I always feel better playing live than in the studio, even dropping more than a few notes occasionally, as the audience presence informs my performance.

Also,  I like the electricity and enthusiasm I hear from a responsive audience; one of my favourite opera recordings is a 1981 recording of Errico Petrella's JONE from Caracas, and although the performance isn't like one by the Met by a very long shot, Petrella's vigorous music is matched with a very enthusiastic audience that gives a real sense of the reaction the opera was supposed to elicit originally, and which at least some Central and South American audiences still give. I heard a similar audience response in an Italian performance of Apolloni's L'EBREO, and the conductor and singers gave the performance their all; I bought another live opera recording with the same conductor, and evidently the audience had been cautioned "this is for recording", what applause there was had been edited out, and it was a rather muted experience that I didn't enjoy half as much although the opera musically was rather more polished than Apolloni's rough-and-tumble work. (I wish I could remember off hand what it was.)

I know audiences have been cautioned strongly as to concert etiquette, and companies are always worried about money expended on something that isn't "perfect" within the strictures of current recording aesthetics, but what about the idea of just going out and doing this, announcing the intent, letting the audience be a regular audience, and let the chips fall where they may? Union regulations would have to be observed and/or adjusted, rights would have to be observed somehow, and maybe CD listeners expectations might have to be broadened. The most enjoyable performances of any works I've ever heard have been almost entirely in the company of other people, even if the performances themselves weren't spotless, because the reactions buoyed me up to appreciate the musicians more. If unsung repertoire is to make more of an impact with the public, maybe we should get the public in on it at the start.

These are just some thoughts, and I'd appreciate others' input if this interests them.

[Rob H]

Hyperion's RPC series started with the idea that the concertos would be played in concert around the time of the recording - I know this went up to volume 7 as I have Hamelin's Henselt being broadcast live on BBC r3 but I don't think the practice has continued. Was this from bitter experience of poor ticket sales? Were artists unwilling to chance a rare concerto in the concert hall?

[MartinH]

CD sales in general, classical especially, are down everywhere. The market for classical is very small, and the market for unknown, rare repertoire even smaller. The cost of recording, at least in the US, is so high (thanks to union rules) that it would be cost prohibitive. The only way it could be done is when everyone involved agrees to do it for the sake of the music and accept the loss of income. I play with an orchestra that made CD of all new music two years ago and everyone - conductor, composers, musicians, recording engineer - donated their services. The performances were less than perfect, but reasonable. These were done without an audience. So while there will occasionally be such recordings, there aren't going to be many. We're very lucky in a way about the breakup of the Soviet Union and the dire straits many East Europe orchestras found themselves in so that some companies (Marco Polo was one) could go in and make a lot of recordings of rare repertoire on the cheap. The Rubinstein symphonies otherwise wouldn't have been made, likely. Imagine what it would cost to have Berlin, New York, or London SO do those - they would never recoup costs.

Every now and then there are recordings made by amateur groups which range from the very good (Kensington Symphony) to the very poor (Portsmouth Symphony, anyone?). Some of those recordings fail to really convey the quality of the music not because of a valiant effort, but there is a quality that trained professionals bring that amateurs just can't match. I think that's what's behind some of the misgivings of the recent recording of the Leopold Damrosch symphony.

I don't mind live recordings with an audience, but there are at least two problems: big mistakes are very irritating and don't invite replay. Most of the larger orchestras at least have patch sessions or multiple takes to correct these problems. The other is that while some audiences are quiet and almost unnoticeable, that's not always the case. Listening to coughing, talking, paper rattling, babies crying is annoying enough in a hall, on recordings it's impossible.

[pcc]

Is there a difference in perception, then, of listening to broadcasts of works rather than recordings? Many of the irritations you mention would be present in those, though I don't notice them. Perhaps it is because of accepting things in certain circumstances, lowered sensitivity, or experience and tolerance of a wide range of listening media. What Mark Katz called "the phonograph effect", among many things, may have made many listeners very sensitive to performance ambience. I have the Symposium Thomas Beecham reissue set that has a 1930s broadcast of the Dvořák Fifth Symphony that is in excellent sound, with all the long pauses between movements that Beecham evidently allowed (with attendant audience noises), and there's a quite audible flub in the first trumpet (he undershot the partial), but it's still a great favourite of mine, especially for the electrifying last movement. To go past an irreversible broadcast performance, Sir Charles Groves's 1968 recording (presumably mastered to tape) of Sullivan's "Overture di ballo" with the Liverpool Philharmonic has a loud mistake in the piccolo during the recap that over the years I've conditioned myself to cough when it comes up.

I mentioned in another post that I never liked the Amy Beach symphony much until I heard a broadcast recording of it by our orchestra here under Armild Remmereit. What I didn't mention was I remember a bit of ensemble pulling-together in the last movement, but they got it and the result was thrilling.

Sometimes it's a lonely business experiencing large scale music principally in CD form, and I don't have much inclination to go out and spend money to hear standard repertoire played again. It's not just because of my own taste; I'd be rather interested to be in the midst of people who were really unfamiliar with what's on the programme, rather than necessarily who's doing it.  I follow very few soloists, but Stephen Hough came here in February and played with the Rochester orchestra (technically an "A" class orchestra - we're the smallest city in the US to have one) so I went to an all-Beethoven programme. CORIOLAN opened it, very tamely and dully, then Hough came on with the Third Piano Concerto. The orchestra played the intro as blandly as they had the overture, but after Hough's entrance it was completely different as they took their cue as to playing from him, and it was wonderful - poetic and energetic. The second half was the Fifth Symphony, and evidently the orchestra had retained something from the first half and whipped through it in well under forty minutes with great style.  However, the orchestra's repertoire since then hasn't induced me to go again.

Myself, I'd rather hear a lively imperfect live performance, extraneous noises, clams, and all, than many of the "perfect" studio recordings I've heard. And I wish Hyperion had gone on with their mission.

The old "open rehearsal" system of the 19th century had its drawbacks, but it might be interesting to try it again with unfamiliar works.