UKC

RIP Maestro

In reply to Trangia:

Could you explain what a conductor does while waving the wee stick around? Abbado has been called a genius. Really?

In reply to aln:


He/she conducts.

NEXT!

In reply to Blue Straggler:



Here's one for you.

What does a film director do?

He/she directs.

NEXT!

In reply to aln:


Er....it doesn't really work like that. You have to wait for me to ask a question and surround it with condescension in a vain attempt to mask my own ignorance. And that's not going to happen.

In reply to Blue Straggler:


Eh? What doesn't work like what? Some kind of UKC posting protocol? I didn't think you did that stuff.

So, anyway, what does a conductor do?

In reply to aln:

youtube.com/watch?v=tYkZSKHw7XU&

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Ah right, you don't know what you're talking about.

In reply to aln:


They rehearse, they help control tempo, dynamics, balance between the instruments, timing of entry and bring cues as well as energy to performances. They help keep what can be a geographically large dispersed group together. They act as an ear that has more of an audience perspective than one does hearing your own instrument voice as the loudest from within the orchestra or choir. Listen to Britten rehearsing the war requiem for example, available from Decca along with the full War Requiem recording.. ..a recording I think everyone should listen to anyway. Play CD2 track 5 onwards for clips of the rehearsals:
http://www.deccaclassics.com/en/cat/4757511

But here's a clip of Abbado:
youtube.com/watch?v=P56JLnQrS98&

For the alternative view see Nigel Kennedy.. ..personally I think he's talking rubbish.
http://www.theguardian.com/music/2013/aug/30/nigel-kennedy-interview-conduc...

In reply to aln:



No, you're right of course, it's all a big scam, conductors don't do anything. That must be why every major orchestra employs one.

I wonder, though, why all these different recordings of Figaro sound so different from each other?

In reply to Trangia:

Having conducted several brass bands and a couple of local youth orchestras the easiest way to explain the job is that you are a cross between a metronome and a mixing desk. Not an easy job but it requires totally different skills from playing an instrument; an ear for subtle intonation and a flair for understanding the emotional content of the music can help a technically brilliant group of players sound sublime.

In reply to Clarence:

There's an interesting article on the subject here:
http://www.theguardian.com/music/2012/jun/01/mystery-maestros-what-are-cond...

In reply to contrariousjim:

Thanks for that reply, that's the kind of thing I was looking for. I can see how they're important, but is "genius" maybe taking it a bit far?

In reply to Tim Chappell:


I didn't say that. Maybe, like contrariousjim, you could have answered my question instead of trying to be a smartarse.

In reply to aln:


Your initial question was somewhat smartarsed. Maybe you need to step back and consider how things can come across in plain text.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I didn't think it was but I've been taught a lesson in reading and interpretating other peoples reactions to things I write for a laugh.
My response to the OP led to argueing, falling out with my partner, an expensive taxi home and losing a day at work.

In reply to aln:


I don't think so. The impact a conductor can make to an otherwise underperforming orchestra or choir is huge. The variation in the quality of performances from otherwise on paper superb orchestras is also very marked. The only way you'll find out is by tuning your ear into orchestral and choral music. Listen to different recordings of the Ring (wagner) I was a chorister in St Pauls, and out conductor John Scott, desgined the sound we made specific for the building. We were the loudest in the world at the time (no laughing matter as my top frequency hearing is totally fecked!) But we made a very clean, pure, unaffected, loud sounds which filled St Pauls.

In reply to contrariousjim:


That was the whispering gallery f*cked.

In reply . Maybe you need to step back and consider how things can come across in plain text.

Maybe I don't. Maybe people need a sense of humour. Maybe they don't.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

You've disappointed me. Don't expect generic replies from you.

In reply to aln:


What in God's Holy Name are you babbling about?

So anyway yes, he was good. I shall break out his Firebird or Rite of Spring in a suitable hour this week.

In reply to aln:

The thing is, controlling tempo, dynamics, balance, phrasing etc doesn't sound like a massive thing ("okay, we'll play this one a bit faster with more clarinet..."), but in the course of a symphony, any of that stuff can vary at almost any time, which actually translates into enormous numbers of little tweaks over an hour or so of music. And a great conductor understands on some level the impact that any one of those little tweaks can have on the drama, the emotional impact and the structural integrity of a dense, complex piece of music, and can pull them all together (and communicate them to the players) to bring something out of the music that a less good conductor will fail to find.

I'd say that doing that well constitutes "genius".