American Orchestras' Dismal Future

[Alan Howe]

I tend to agree with Giles that this thread may be nearing its natural end. Let's see, but unless someone has something fresh to say, it may be time to call it a day.

[minacciosa]

I argue that musicians are paid not only for practice, but for the years they previously labored to again the requisite skills by the generous packages offered at the top level organizations. It should be so several rings down the ladder, but it's not simply due to supply and demand.

That will change.

[MartinH]

You bet it will change. I don't see how these major orchestras can keep paying such high salaries when the public demand just isn't there. The principal bassoon in LA makes over $300,000 a year. That salary alone is more than the entire budget of many small orchestras. I think it's unsustainable. Maybe they have endowments and donors so they don't worry about it. But I would.

[Alan Howe]

The principal bassoon in LA makes over $300,000 a year

That is totally unsustainable. The principal bassoon of the Hallé over here earns £41,470 ($60,507) - which is sustainable, but much too low.

[minacciosa]

When you play like the principal in LA, you deserve $300,000, particularly because it is in LA; remember that their salaries reflect the cost of living in Los Angeles, and the COL in that area is significantly higher than in most places in the USA. Really, California is just crazy, and not just politically. I would bet that it's much higher than the location of the bassoon player you mentioned in the UK.

[semloh]

Q: What is someone's skill worth?
A: What someone else will pay for it!

However unjust it may seem, this is an inescapable fact. The bassoonist's expertise is simply not worth $300k to the paying public, and if he/she insists that it is, they and/or orchestra will not survive.

Getting back to UC's remit... if it is the 'second tier' orchestras that are in trouble, this might be a concern for us because, as someone pointed out, they are perhaps more likely to venture into the territory of the UCs. However, although I don't know about live concerts, this isn't borne out when it comes to recording.

The American series in the Naxos range is either familiar material or (what I would regard as) avant garde, and not a lot in the romantic or neo-romantic genres. Albany comes to the rescue of some American UCs but, as we've noted before, they use European orchestras as much as American. So, in terms of recordings maybe the difficulties that US orchestras are in isn't an issue specifically relevant to UCs. In any case, although fewer mid-range orchestras means fewer concerts in total, it also means greater competition for membership and perhaps higher standards. Surviving orchestras will be able to sustain an active concert programme, and provide plenty of opportunity for their members to gain the expertise that comes with regular 'live' concerts.

This in no way alters my abhorrence at the attitudes and claims that popped up in the article by Kennicott. Goodness knows what music they will perform! 

[eschiss1]

semloh, I'm a little confused; it should be even easier to find out what these orchestras are performing than what they are recording, since they usually post their yearly schedules on the web... it rather helps them get customers and subscribers and that and etc. Or I don't know what I'm talking about, which is, I confess, usually the case.

[eschiss1]

Hrrrm. Later this month (1/19/16) I see that Jeremy Denk is joining the part of the San Diego (California, US) Symphony for a familiar and avant-garde work, namely Janacek's Capriccio for Piano (left-hand) and Winds. Intriguing, though since I have Firkusny's fine recording (with Kubelik) and haven't enough money for a plane flight anyway, for myself I'll just have to note it...

(Hrm. Both the American Symphony and the Jupiter Chamber Players, both based in New York City, are featuring, or have featured, works by Adolf Busch recently- the former will do so on March 17 2016; the latter did so a few months ago, trying to remember- concert also had Meyerbeer, Schulhoff, Prokofiev, Shostakovich, theme was "Against Tyranny"; was quite good in my honest if not likely to be shared -here- opinion...) . Anyway, neat.)

[sdtom]

Heard many concerts from the San Diego Symphony when I lived there.

[minacciosa]

Semloh, LAPhil clearly believes their principal bassoon is worth it, and one can infer from the orchestra's lack of financial distress that their supporters and community are in agreement. This varies from place to place, as it should. Perhaps you would be unwilling to pay him what he's worth, but there isn't an established standard for necessarily subjective judgements.

[semloh]

One can not infer from the healthy state of the LAPhil's finances that the bassoonist is actually worth $300k - simply that they can afford to pay it. However, since the LAPhil is willing to pay that much and, as I said, the value of anything is what people will pay for it, he has every right to claim that he is worth it. Whether the average music lover in LA agrees is a quite different matter, of course.

I don't think any of this really matters for UC though, so perhaps this is the time to draw the thread to a close?

[Alan Howe]

Agreed...

[J Joe Townley]

I wanted to chime in on MartinH's post of December 30th, specifically on the issue he raises of greed. If I may here is a response to a question I posted elsewhere: "What is the going rate to give a premiere of a half-hour-long major work for piano and orchestra with a top pianist and top orchestra?" I asked in reference to my piano concerto no 2 in c minor which I have commented on in earlier posts. It is a half hour, for full Romantic period orchestra and here is a reply from someone who plays in an orchestra:

You're going to be looking at a big number.

To start with, it's a premiere... nobody in the orchestra has played it before.  If you wanted to hire an orchestra to do a "warhorse" like Beethoven's Fifth Symphony, you have the advantage of familiarity: because the musicians will all have played the piece, they can get by with just a few rehearsals.  For a new work of significant length, you're probably looking at a minimum of 2-3 rehearsals with the soloist, and maybe another 2-3 with the orchestra and a rehearsal pianist.  On top of that, you'll have some sectional rehearsals.  So each orchestra member will have maybe 9 days of work prior to the performance, plus the performance itself.

Orchestra cost

Since you're talking about hiring the orchestra, this will be an "extra" performance, not part of their regular season.  That may mean your orchestra might not be the one you think you're hiring - because top orchestra members often have commitments for teaching, master classes, or solo work of their own, you'll end up with some substitutes.  Because of that, let's say you get the musicians at "scale", the union rate.  Union rates vary by the union local; I'm going to use the local 802 (New York) rates.

Each rehearsal will cost you a fixed rate for the first 2-1/2 hours, and an hourly rate after that.  Since your piece is a half hour, let's say it's rehearsed in the minimum.  Remember, it's six rehearsals plus three sectionals per musician - each one is going to cost you $137.50.  But the principal in each section gets more... they get $165.  You've got principals in each section - four for strings, four for brass, four for woodwinds, and one in percussion.  (If your orchestration isn't standard, you might end up with more in woodwinds and/or percussion).

Oh, and the concertmaster (usually the principal violinist) will get double scale - that's $275.

Orchestra sizes vary.  Your orchestration will determine the number of players needed; on the low end, let's say it's 70, and on the high end, 100.  So your per rehearsal cost is 1 concertmaster ($275), 12 other principals ($165 each), and 57-87 others at $137.50.  This gives you a per rehearsal musician cost of $10,092.50 to $14,217.50. 

Times six rehearsals and three sectionals each.  Assuming none of your rehearsals run into overtime, you're now in the $91-85K range, and you haven't counted the performance.  Scale for the performance is higher: $274 for each musician, $328.80 for each principal, and $548 for the concertmaster.  So the performance itself adds another $20,111.60 to $28,311.60.

So you've got the orchestra payroll covered with your first $111-156K or so.  Let's move on to

The soloist

I'll assume you're not looking to engage Lang Lang, and you'll settle for any old pianist who has won an international competition or two.  The ones I know get a performance fee of $5-10K, plus expenses.  You'll probably be flying them in, and you'll be putting them up in a hotel, feeding them, and getting them from airport to hotel to rehearsals.  Another 2-5 thousand should cover that stuff.

But it's a premiere.  So they're going to spend significant time learning the piece - you don't see soloists with sheet music in front of them.  That's going to cost you.  If they love the work, the premium for that might be a few thousand - or it might be tens of thousands.  With so many variables, let's budget between 30 and 50 thousand for the soloist, and we're now up to $141-206K.  But let's not forget

The conductor

Top conductors command about $2 million a year in salaries, give or take a million.  And that's for a season of about a hundred performances.  So you could say it's $20K.

But it won't be.

Because it's a new work, it demands a lot more of the conductor's time.  First is the score study, with marking up how they envision the work will be performed.  Then there's the rehearsals - remember all those sectionals?  The conductor will lead all of them.  The percussion section might not need any (it depends on your score), but another section might take up the slack.  So four sections (strings, brass, winds, percussion) times three each is twelve sectionals, plus six rehearsals, plus the performance.

The conductor is probably going to want 100-250K, maybe more.  Now you're up to $241-456K.

But we're not done yet.  Because you need a place for the musicians to rehearse.

Space costs

You could rehearse the orchestra in any space that can hold them, but they're going to be more comfortable in their usual environment.  And that environment has a small advantage to you too, because you won't be paying cartage for the tympani and piano, or needing extra piano tunings because it's being moved.

The cost will vary with the venue, but $6K per day is typical.  Twelve sectionals, plus six rehearsals and the performance means 19 days, or another $114K.

Now we're up to $355,000 on the low end, and $570,000 plus on the other.  And I haven't even considered the other costs, because they're quite low in comparison.  For just one example, you'll need an orchestra librarian - that's the person who takes direction from the concertmaster and conductor for the bowing in the strings, and marks the bowing instructions on each player's copy of the score.  (Haven't you ever wondered how they all know how to bow in the same direction at the same time?) 

I'd say this is in keeping with what others have told me, but never to this detail. It's no wonder very few works for larger ensembles get premiered these days. 600K for a half-hour work is bonkers and needless to say I will not be paying this amount anytime soon. But I think this points to the issue of greed in a major way. Funny enough, nobody addresses the revenue from ticket sales, concessions and alcohol to offset part of this cost. I doubt I would see a dime of that revenue if I actually paid the 600K to premiere my concerto.

[Alan Howe]

Bonkers isn't even close.

[matesic]

Indeed, well away with the fairies. Fortunately top orchestras just don't work like that - they aren't simply guns for hire who will do anything if the price is right. In practice, if you're a composer with no track record who wants to sponsor a vanity project you could offer it to a decent amateur orchestra who might put it on (provided it isn't complete rubbish) for a donation of 5 grand. As for the players each devoting 9 days of work to it, dream on!