Chad, I guess we are somewhat in disagreement on the level of degradation that has been suffered by the ears of the public. I agree that there is a real danger implied in what I believe has happened to popular entertainment in our society, but that danger is greater if we ignore reality. Don't attack the bearer of bad news, but please feel free to refute that news however you wish.
I do feel that you misinterpret the tenor of the article that I cite (yes - you are totally right that the press, including NYTimes, are completely owned by business interests, producers included.) I found it one of the few items covering the dispute that echoed my opinion about the amount of damage already wreaked by the producers (note, neither I or the article blames the musicians for this). I just feel that, based on my perception, it is somewhat missing the point to only consider this as a one-dimensional issue of artistic integrity. Yes, people are seriously ripped-off by virtual orchestras and should be upset about it, I just don't sense a great public awareness of how fake everything has already become. In the end, I really think we agree on most things; your point on how little of the budget package is devoted to musicians salaries cannot be emphasized too much and I do know plenty of people who would not like to hear tapes instead of live music (even if it is heavily "electronicized"). Another, unmentioned, black mark against the producers, not much noted in the media, is the fact(confirmed by someone I know who has years of experience working a both concertmaster and assistant conductor in numerous Broadway shows)that they dictate to arrangers how many musicians to score a show for and it is purely an economic decision that the composers and arrangers have no say in whatever. So, their contention that they don't want to be dictated to on "artistic matters" by the players is cynical, to say the least. Note that revivals of classic shows of the pre-amplified era almost invariably use smaller orchestrations than the original. I guess I just wish that I saw more enthusiasm among the players and their allies (of which I consider myself one) for turning back the tide at least a little bit so that audiences can hear some "real" music once again. Thanks for your time and maybe we should take this offlist if you wish to respond, this may be getting too protracted for general interest, Peter Hirsch =============================================================== >>date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 19:34:44 -0800 (PST) >>from: c y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>to: The Horn List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>subject: Re: [Hornlist] Re: /Broadway Strike (and veering slightly OT) >> >>""""I think that he says it as well as I could. I don't really think that >>live music on Broadway was the issue, but rather, job security. This is >>incredibly important and I believe that a return of unamplifed full-sized >>pit orchestras would be wonderful, but I think that the audiences of today >>could be presented with a hologram of a band in the pit and a synthesized >>soundtrack blasting out of mega-stacks of speakers there would be less than >>10% that would have any idea that something was "wrong with this picture"""". > >Assuming that 90 percent of the american public has no ears will lead to the downfall >of all art forms of live music. People care, I know I was on the streets of NY talking >to them. I think linking to one of the few articles in the media that try and justfy >the virtual orchestra and are likely in the back pockets of the producers(ny times) is >not a great way for any art lover to present the issue to the horn list. > >>"I don't really think that livemusic on Broadway was the issue, but rather, job >>security" > >For the musicians of NY it is about live music......but the "issue" was the producers >degrading the product to get more pure profit. The orchestra costs between 2-6 dollars >of a 100 dollar ticket....35-40 dollars is pure profit to the producers....wait until >the actors contract is up next year...they will be after them next..... >Your right people travel to NY to see a full broadway production and most people I >spoke with simply refuse to accept not having a full live orchestra when they come to >NY. Most said they would just see the touring version and not bother to come to NY at >all. I heard over and over again from random people on the street about how they saw >the show Contact on there last visit to NY and were very angry to find that there was >no live orchestra. (a musical that ran for 2 years back in 2000 that used tape) >People notice......and musicians care just as much about there art form and integrity >as they do about job secruity... >I better not say anymore :) or I will be typing all night..... >Chad >NYC >>>phirsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>Thanks John, >> >>Being also put in a grumpy state of mind by this issue, I could probably go >>on about it, but I think that Anthony Tommasini's Op-Ed piece that appeared >>earlier this week in the times lays the unfortunate truth about the nearly >>complete disappearance of unadulterated "live" music in the theater out >>pretty coherently. >> >>Go to: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/11/arts/theater/11PURI.html >> >>I think that he says it as well as I could. I don't really think that live >>music on Broadway was the issue, but rather, job security. This is >>incredibly important and I believe that a return of unamplifed full-sized >>pit orchestras would be wonderful, but I think that the audiences of today >>could be presented with a hologram of a band in the pit and a synthesized >>soundtrack blasting out of mega-stacks of speakers there would be less than >>10% that would have any idea that something was "wrong with this picture". >> >>My thesis: >> >>It is a fact of life that the Broadway musical theater is overwhelmingly a >>tourist attraction and not a particularly relevant part of the cultural >>life of New York theatergoers. This is not a criticism, just a fact. There >>is no way Les Miz, Chorus Line, Cats and so on can run for a decade or more >>without selling most of its tickets to groups from out of town. Now, the >>only other way most of these people hear these shows is either on CD at >>home or by way of a bus and truck production. In my days of halcyon youth >>(ah, the memories... don't worry, I'll spare you.....) I played numerous of >>these and the typical venue was a civic auditorium or arena so much more >>vast than a Broadway theater, that there was pretty much no choice but to >>boost the sound somehow. My guess is that the shows nowadays are playing in >>as large or larger locations and that these amplified shows and the >>earsplitting adrenaline and testosterone-drenched soundtracks experienced >>(endured?) at the local megaplex are the auditory benchmark. If they come >>to the Big Apple and plop down their $75 - 100 for a good ticket and hear >>(gasp) strings, winds, rhythm au naturel, you can bet they will be >>wondering "what happened - where is the rest of it?" I am not saying that >>loud is bad. I can listen to Mahler's 8th, Jimi Hendrix, Mossolov's "Iron >>Foundry", most of the opus of Jon Leifs, old Cleveland Orchestra recordings >>from the Mike Bloom era all at full blast with enjoyment. I am just >>convinced that what makes for effective theater (opera, film, etc.) is the >>ability to be drawn into what is in front of you and, in my case at least, >>electronics just serve to push me further away and hamper my willing >>suspension of disbelief. Until this disbelief is disengaged, I remain a >>spectator rather than a participant. >> >>Well, I guess that I've just presented the case that the battle is lost and >>nothing can be done about it. I hope that I am totally wrong about this. >> >>I did say I wasn't going to go on, didn't I? Well, so much for my >>credibility. >> >>Peter Hirsch _______________________________________________ post: [EMAIL PROTECTED] set your options at http://music.memphis.edu/mailman/options/horn/archive%40jab.org
