The current Honda robot thread inspired this question, as it's one I've always wondered about. I know they're important because every orchestra has one and they always seem to take top billing, but exactly what is it that they contribute? Timing? The "waving the stick around" part we laymen always see, obviously isn't all of it, but is it the most important contribution they make? To the untrained eye, it doesn't appear that the musicians are even paying all that much attention most of the time....it must be difficult to read music, play your instrument, and watch the conductor at the same time. Does this "conducting" give the music "soul"? Or is the conductor's biggest role to act as a sort of coach/general manager/director, who keeps order and creates the playbook during rehearsals?
Please enlighten me. I'm particularly interested in hearing what classical musicians have to say.
__________________
I wondered why the golf ball was getting bigger. Then it hit me.
The conductor is extremely important. He makes the difference between a lifeless or mechanical performance and a vital and alive one. Conductors have different styles, and some of the great conductors are instantly recognizable by sound (Stokowski in particular).
The best analogy for it I can come up with is, imagine the same basic "boy meets girl- boy loses girl- boy gets girl back" story directed by Hitchcock, Lubitsch, Chaplin, John Ford and Woody Allen. The differences would be as striking as the differences between Toscanini, Stoki, Karajan, Furtwangler, Bernstein and Szell all playing the same Beethoven symphony.
I highly recommend the DVD titled "The Art of Conducting". It has interviews and performance clips that illustrate exactly why a conductor is so important. It's one of the best documentaries I've ever seen.
Well, I haven't played for some years now, but my take on it was that the conductor did shape the performance during rehearsal while the orchestra was learning a piece. For a performance, we always used to joke that the conductor's sole function was starting and stopping the orchestra. Some truth to that...
A professional orchestra (as in one of the majors NYP, SFSO, CSO, etc.) probably do not spend that much time in rehearsal for any given concert as I am sure it is assumed that you pretty much know any piece that is going to be played; certainly not as much time as we had to. I would still say that the conductors main influence is felt during rehearsal however.
From a performer's perspective, the conductor is extremely important. You need someone to direct traffic, set tempos, balance and all those myriad details that the audience never sees. Playing for a weak, unskilled conductor is torture and kills the pleasure. But playing for a great, inspiring one is an incredible thrill. Mediocre ones just bore you. I've played with all three types. Sadly, the greats are in short supply.
As an audience member, important, but not more so than the composer and the music. I've heard sensational Mahler, Brahms, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky and others from conductors who are essentially unknown. That's ok with them, too.
As a cd collector it depends. But there are reasons why some recordings are called "definitive". So in that respect it matters. But there are many fine recordings by obscure conductors.
There is a popular misconception that all the conductor does is stand there and flap his/her arms. But ask anyone who has tried it and they'll confess it's the most difficult thing there is to do in music. You think it's easy to accompany recitative in opera? Hah, try it!
In undergrad, we didn't pay all that much attention to the conductor. Of course, I was in the tuba section and generally intoxicated. There was a lot of yelling.
But yeah, the conductor is terribly important to everyone else.
__________________
UNCLE ERIK Vinyl, Tubes & Grado
Orbe SE -> SME IV -> Fi Yph -> Zana Deux -> RS-1, HP-2, K-1000, HD-650, HD-600, K-501, DT48
as long as it's a *good* orchestra, basically the orchestra acts as the musical instrument for the conductor, "the artist". that's sorta the ideal-world scenario. like for example berlin phil are just about good enough (ok, so they're like the one of the best in the world period) to be able to be at that level where a top-class conductor can walk in and just make music just the way he pictures in his head.
there's more to it than that (enter soloists, singers...) but basically, the conductor calls the shots. he gives the musicians a "vision" to strive for. it's the players' responsibility to take care of the mechanics, including good ensemble etc.. ideally a conductor never has to worry about whether the winds are playing in tune, or whether the first violins are rushing ahead of everyone... but that "ideal" situation only happens in the best-of-the-best orchestras. definitely not the case with toronto symphony sadly... (they suck)
as for whether or not the baton waving actually matters in the actual concert, well not neraly as much as the stuff that happens in the background. sure the conductor might have a moment of inspiration and decide to take everybody by surprise (we all are hoping he doesn't do too much of that..), but i'd say most of the "plays" are created during rehearsal.
just the same as if you were just a solo pianist... all those musical ideas, technical perfection, all of it is "created" in the practise room. the concert is just an exhibition of all the hours of work the musician's put into the music.
of course that isnt' to say something magical doens't happen in a (good) live concert situation, stuff that doesnt' happen in rehearsals. its' impossible to explain properly... it's easy to picture a piano soloist having a moment of inspiration on stage and creating music like he's never made before. but sometimes that same very thing can take hold of an entire symphony orchestra. and in those moments the conductor can usually just stop beating, and the music will just flow out naturally without any more help required. it's the conductor that leads the musicians to that "aha!" epiphany moment, which hopefully takes place IN CONCERT rather than be wasted in the dress rehearsal!
so... no easy answer to this question!
__________________ "Ah! How sweet coffee tastes! Lovelier than a thousand kisses, sweeter than muscatel wine! I must have my coffee..." - J.S.Bach
I have relatively few works on CD for which I have multiple interpretations, but just occaisionally I get a work that I really dislike one version of and love the other. In my case Rattle's Mahler No 2 (which I do not get on with at all) and Mehta's Mahler No 2 which I really like. More often I get annoyed by soloists messing around....
The problem today is that resident music directors seem to have less influence in forging a sound with their orchestras than they did 30 or 40 years ago. Perhaps it's the limitations of the unions, financial constraints, limited contracts and the unwillingness of so many conductors to relocate to the cities in which they serve. Real formative directors like Szell, Reiner, Solti, Bernstein, etc. who really built a tradition seem less common these days Yet some of these guys today rake in $2 million dollar salaries. IMO, some are still worth it, especially compared to a lot of ball players.
Back in the early 20th century, when conducting style was at its most diverse and expressive, most of the focus was on live performance. A conductor could take a chance and try something different. If it didn't work, oh well, he could fix it in the next performance. This added a LOT of spontaneity to the proceedings, and the musicians had to be on their toes for the conductor's improvisations.
When recording became the primary focus, instead of live performances, it turned around completely. Stokowski was criticized for his occasional digressions from the score and Toscanini got it for being metrical or too driven. The connection with the orchestra that made for fireworks in the concert hall created aberrations in the recording studio.
Today, we are so concerned with producing "definitive" recordings, conductors are afraid to step out and try new things. This has led to a homogenization of stylistic approaches and a stifling atmosphere of "appropriateness".
Picasso once said that "Good taste is the enemy of all art."
I know they're important because every orchestra has one and they always seem to take top billing, but exactly what is it that they contribute? Timing? The "waving the stick around" part we laymen always see, obviously isn't all of it, but is it the most important contribution they make?
The best analogy I can think of is the director of a play. The director puts his stamp on everything. He works with each of the actors to set the tone and mood of the play. By directing the individuals, the interaction between the actors is shaped and the emphasis of the entire play can change completely. The director changes the pacing and even the script when warranted. There are countless ways the director can change the feel of a play.
If you've seen multiple performances of the same Shakespearian play, you know how each can be totally different depending upon the direction (not to mention acting). The script may be identical, but one performance can be heavy and maudlin while another crisp and fresh. Conducting can produce similar results.
Classical fans: How important is the conductor?
Linear Mode
