Manny Laureano

What a brilliant point!

I absolutely believe that it does. My wife recently conducted a conference orchestra made up of all the little "stars" of a certain school district. I looked at the program and there was not, in the band portion, one single transciption! It was the transcriptions of great music that spurred my interest in classical music just as was the arrangements of fiddle solos and opera melodies that Mendez played that spurred my interest even further! Look at the British brass repertoire: New music and transcriptions.

I think you've hit onto something very real, ProAm. Great music well arranged for band and taught to kids by great teachers would do, I think, a lot to keep kids motivated and playing.

ML

CGUM

I'll add a few more names to Mazzrick's list.

extension ensemble- brass quintet

Alarm Will Sound - made up of eastman alumni

Fulcrum Point - Stephen Burn's project based in chicago

Present Music- Milwaukee's new music org. Very limited performances during the year and not all instrumental ensembles.

California E.A.R. Unit

eighth blackbird

LA Philharmonic New music ensemble - I don't know how many times a year they get together but they did release an album of Revelutas pieces.

Maverick Ensemble - Based in Chicago

tpter1

ProAm and Manny- Here are my thoughts, for whatever their worth:

There is some great music being written for younger bands now. Composers like Holsinger, Melillo, Tichelli, Broege and Gillingham are writing very meaningful works that really challenge kids musically and emotionally and are very satisfying. Not to mention the great works and warhorses by Vaughan-Williams, Holst and Reed. It develops their ears to be able to discern good music from just notes. Not to say that bands should not be doing transcriptions either, but there is a real wealth of good music available for our idiom. There are also a good many great transcriptions of Bach, Copland, and even some Beethoven, so I think directors are most definitely remiss to not do them as well. As long as they don't take something and chop it up and turn it into some meaningless thing that loses its relevance just so directors can say "We did Mahler this year." Learning great music creates a taste for great music and an understanding of what great music is. Regardless of the idiom. Great love of music evolves out of exposure to great music.

I think today's band students, if exposed to much of this literature in addition to thoughtful and well-constructed transcriptions, will develop keen and sophisticated musical taste and awareness. If there is no exposure to the greats of the past via good transcriptions, they may well not have the thirst for them that they do modern literature. But I think they would still appreciate something as moving as a Mahler symphony or as balanced and sublime as Mozart. It would certainly be a shame if students left school and never experienced that music in a performance setting.

ProAm

tpter1 -

If my post sounded like I was disparaging modern band music then I sincerely apologize! I very much like the new music and now own many professional band CDs. I wish there were more professional wind ensembles like the one in Dallas. And there is indeed a much greater collection of fine, challenging, musical works for young ensembles.

But as I go to All Regional and All State concerts, I don't hear the Holst Suites, the Vaughn Williams, and the other "chestnuts" being played. This may be the only time that many of these students will be in a group of high enough calibre to perform these works. I don't want to dwell on the past but neither should we chuck it out altogther.

My point was simply that it was through playing a transcription that I made the transition to orchestral music. Even though I like band music and attend band concerts often, I still view the orchestra as the ultimate musical instrument (especially when coupled with a full choir, eg, Verdi Requiem, Mahler 8, Beethoven 9). If we hadn't played a band arrangement of 1812 in high would I have still discovered the orchestra? Probably, but I can definitely point to playing that piece as what got ME started. And I've not been hearing bands play transcriptions at all anymore.

(Aside: my 1st post on TM gets tagged ""brilliant" from Manny!! Man, I'm full of myself now...)

tpter1

I guess what I was trying to say was this: the quality of the music, I think, selected and performed, has a huge impact on how students percieve and appreciate music in the long run, be it a transcription, chestnut, new work or whatever. I'm sorry I came off as defensive- that was not my intent. Coffee?

So to work this back around to the future of symphony orchestras, if we expose kids to music of the highest calibre and make them think critically, then I think we will generate a base of consumers of classical music.

ProAm

Now this is what I perceive the problem to be. Classical music requires thought and study. Our schools today seem to be more concerned with "how do you feel about this" rather than teaching students how to think.

(I'm somewhat biased because I taught high school math for a while. Math is like playing an instrument in this regard - it takes hands-on practice. Which takes time and effort.)

For the vast majority of the high school students that I saw, effort was not on their "To Do" list. And it was not required for most of their courses, either.

It's much easier to listen to Britney or Eminem than Schubert.

I think we need to increase exposure. Free concerts in schools or malls; many of the big symphonies do this during the summer. But it's tough to find the money for this -- players in lesser symphonies rarely make enough to live on and the symphony association itself usually doesn't have any extra money. You really can't expect the players who are barely making ends meet to volunteer their time.

You need money to develop an audience and you need an audience to create revenue...

PatN

Here's an excerpt from a provocative article. The point about making concerts a kind of theater to better connect with audiences is an interesting one and relevant to this thread. I would guess that someone like Daniel Barenboim would disagree since I remember he was quoted as saying the music itself should be enough to connect with the audience:

Article in the Los Angeles Times:

"We are not producing too many musicians," says Leon Botstein, a noted conductor and the president of Bard College. "We are producing too many musicians the wrong way, too many in a very old-fashioned, very out-of-date system of professional training. Conservatories are still training people to win the Queen Elisabeth Competition 50 years ago. And to that, nobody's listening."

Botstein thinks that every musician should be trained to improvise, "to write his or her own material the way pop musicians do and classical musicians used to do." He also feels they should rethink concerts as "a form of theater that is not reproducible on a recording" and learn to connect more immediately to audiences.

Last fall, to supplement these goals, Bard started a mandatory double-degree program requiring all its conservatory students to also earn a bachelor of arts with a major in a field outside music.

"We're not doing this because we think there will be no jobs and this will be a safety net," says Robert Martin, Bard's Conservatory of Music director and vice president for academic affairs. "We think it's what musicians should have, what young musicians deserve and need. Our view is that musicians need a broader education."

[by CHRIS PASLES, LA Times staff writer

cornetguy

i work as a substitute band director. i would love to see more transcriptions played, but the problem with doing a lot of them is when a school band as 5-6 clarinets, 1 trombone no tuba, 12 saxophones and 15 drummers (word used is delibrate, most of them can only bang drum loudly) this is not an exaggeration i have seen several bands at the junior and senior high like this. the kids all want to play sax, and drum. so manipulating the instrumentation becomes an issue. plus at least from what i see the kids aren't willing to put the individual time in to do a transcription right, and there is a limit on how much one can spoonfeed the kids

tpter1

The problem here is not the kids. It's the director, ultimately. They're just kids. Those drummers are doing what the director ultimately is letting them do. That last statement...spoonfeed the kids...that is the approach that causes that lack of spark.

A director must see to it that you don't end up with a dozen saxes and 15 drummers. Everyone wants to play sax and drums. So what? Limit that. Everyone wants to be center in hockey, pitcher in baseball and quarterback in foot ball. But there can only be one of those on the field or ice at a time.

You're a substitute and have no control over that, so please do not take that as though I'm blaming you. I'm blaming the directors that let that happen.

Band programs that have those problems actually do more harm to music than good.

beartrumpet74

What a great topic!
As a primarily jazz player I may offer a different perspective.
I live in Louisville, and as many of you may know, the orchestra is having MAJOR financial problems. The union hasn't helped other than to get in the way of solutions, but things are moving forward right now, and it looks like we will keep this wonderful part of our city!
I see the problem of audience for classical orchestras as twofold. I will just list them and see what you all think.
1. The problem isn't as much new music or old music, but how you present the music. Too often, going to an orchestra concert is like going to a ceremony or private function. I would advocate a little less protocol. Let poeple sit at tables and drink some wine. Get rid of the elitist attitude of some and replace it with the vibe I believe Manny is showing strongly. It's just a little too stodgy for todays general public. In addition, the orchesrta needs to be visible at events outside the concert hall. Schools and public parks. Community events...etc... I know this is already being done, but more more more!
The orchestra should be thought of as a huge and vibrant part of each city it resides in. It should have leasons(sp) with the local government so they can collaborate on as many community events as possible. Any good orchestra should be a source of pride for the city it resides in, and if it were more involved with local events that drew the public, it would create more exposure to a general audience.
2. If you are going to do new music, it has to be easily understood by the average listener whatever that means. Sometimes the new music is so confusing even to us educated listeners that it's a turn off. As I am not an expert on new music for orchestra that's all I will say about that.

I will say however, that when you take a living breathing art and reduce it to a constant reproduction of whats already been done, you create a museam piece. As much as I love Wynton and what he has done for awareness in jazz, the constant focus on Ellington and Armstrong has not helped galvanize the jazz community. it has largely served to alienate younger players who value change. i.e. all of the constant controversy you read in jazz magazines and jazz press about where the music is going. The past should be celebrated and kept alive, but not to the detrement of the future. The issues surrounding audience development for classical orchestras are many and very complicated, but thoughtful comments like the ones made in this forum by all the posters will only serve to help find the solutions we need. Much love to all of you for being so interested and well meaning and spoken about this issue. That alone should show us all that this wonderfu music will never go away!
Peace
Matt