Page 1 of 2
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 3:08 pm
by burningchrome
There's a website that if you pay to join you can look through all the nonprofits' tax returns, but I'm not a member.
I think the most interesting case would be Cleveland. I recall reading that after their tours of Europe and residence in Miami they we're flush with cash. And this orchestra is from Cleveland, a city a mere shadow of what it was when George Szell was on the podium. Boston and New York are obvious, but what is Cleveland doing differently than Atlanta or Philly?
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Fri Oct 17, 2014 8:27 pm
by scottw
While I am not privy to the financials, Philly is doing very well after the chapter whatever number they went through just a year or so ago. The biggest reason for the turnaround in my opinion is Yannick Nezet-Seguin, the new music director. He is a superb conductor, young [40 this year], charismatic and both patrons and players adore him. Very innovative and willing and able to try something new. Astonishing really. Kind of like Harold Hill but with the goods!

Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 7:02 am
by imperialbari
burningchrome wrote:
I think the most interesting case would be Cleveland. I recall reading that after their….. residence in Miami they we're flush with cash.
Sorry, but I don’t like that Miami residence at all, because it took the death of the local orchestra to get there.
Klaus
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 8:56 am
by BopEuph
imperialbari wrote:Sorry, but I don’t like that Miami residence at all, because it took the death of the local orchestra to get there.
Was just talking to a buddy about this. The good thing, though, is I'm getting a lesson with Max Dimoff when he comes down here! Not much of an upside to Miami, but helping my bass chops along and all.
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2014 12:30 am
by eupher61
Kansas City is sitting pretty, St Louis is back from the brink of 10-12 years ago. Beyond those I can't comment much.
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2014 7:57 pm
by Sam Gnagey
Not mine.
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2014 10:46 pm
by bort
Baltimore had a rough stretch, but they are doing better in recent years... among other things, they sold the orchestra hall and now they lease it from the current owners. (I think that's how it works there?)
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:13 am
by Frank Byrne
Proud to say that the Kansas City Symphony is doing very well. Earned and contributed revenue up, very high sold capacity, posted a significant surplus last season, reaching new audiences via new series, making recordings...I could go on.
None of it happens automatically and it is all the result of an enormous amount of hard work that is directed toward connecting the orchestra to our community. We take none of it for granted.
Hard work, integrity, building strong relationships with our musicians are key elements of making it possible. Trust between all constituents must be earned and that is a missing element in some places. It does not have to be that way.
The American orchestra is not dead or dying.
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2014 4:22 pm
by BopEuph
Frank Byrne wrote:The American orchestra is not dead or dying.
It just smells funny.
I talked to Joe Kreines about this just last week. He said that while we hear about stuff like this, there are more orchestras now than there have ever been. More than that, the bar has been raising steadily over the years, making competition for a position that much more fierce.
That's not to say that symphony orchestras are always going to be around, but we do typically hear more about the bad than the good.
Then again, showing up to auditions and seeing guys that have no business being there from BOTH ends of the spectrum (i.e., guys that don't know what they're doing, as well as guys that should be getting much better gigs) usually fill up the audition roster these days. It's a pretty strange time for music.
I've lost on auditions at Disney to guys that 20 years ago weren't taking those gigs because they had much better ones. Those guys still have the chops, but nowhere to play any more. I'm not upset that I lost auditions to guys that can play circles around me, but it does speak of the times.
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:50 am
by BopEuph
bloke wrote:In the local paper yesterday, the story was headline news (rather than page 22, per usual regarding anything about the orchestra) that the "core" (about 35 folks) pay has been reduced from c. $35K to c. $18K. Many consider this a possible/probable extended "goodbye". The board can be blamed...I suppose.
Man, I don't know if I could stick around in an orchestra that ask me to take half my pay for a year.
I don't look into the politics of music enough, but it's sad that their solution to fix their finances are at the expense of the reason the money should be there in the first place.
Frank Byrne said it right a few posts back. It's not the community's responsibility to support something they're not interested in. It's the orchestra's responsibility to GET the community interested.
I've played for Video Games Live, Zelda: Symphony of the Goddess, Final Fantasy: Distant Worlds, and movie concerts that have scenes playing on a screen behind the orchestra. These seats were all full. And with youth. An orchestra could do this, and sneak in classics at these concerts. People would come hear Beethoven 3, and even enjoy it, if they knew they were getting
Baba Yetu in the concert, as well. And they'll go nuts if a video similar to the one linked was playing while the orchestra is.
Sad to say, but Schoenberg doesn't interest the community, no matter how much you want it to.
A thought that I've had for a while, was that an orchestra should try teaming up with a local video company, where the video company could come up with some interesting visuals to go with the music. I mean, what kind of amazing visuals could you imagine that could accompany The Planets? And that piece is familiar enough to the general public that it could interest them to check something like this out.
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 3:28 pm
by BopEuph
That's awesome! How'd it turn out?
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 5:34 pm
by Frank Byrne
Here's one way for an orchestra to demonstrate community spirit!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laQt8b1l ... e=youtu.be
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 5:51 pm
by BopEuph
Wow, that kind of thing is great!
I also can't help but notice how many young people are in your orchestra. The average age of the orchestras in central Florida are much higher; people don't tend to leave these spots when they get them.
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2014 10:12 am
by Uncle Buck
Business seems to be thriving in Utah.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhCZ0aDGvao" target="_blank
Re: What Orchestras are Currently Viable/Stable?
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2014 12:32 am
by BopEuph
It has been brought to my attention that Bobby McFerrin is doing conducting now. I want to check out one of these concerts.