symphonies - "Play it like the record", or...

[bearphonium]

My very pedestrian experience with this is not with any symphony, or great orchestra, or even great wind band...

Our rag-tag marching band director takes the last repeat of the last strain of "Manhatten Beach" starting at ff and by the end taking it down to pp. It is one of the few things he does that I like, and now my "record" just sounds wrong.

[Yane]

As for Manhattan Beach, I've heard that treatment of dynamics in the last strain explained as a depiction of a marching band marching up and down the beach past the audience. I like the subtle points of interpretation a conductor puts on things, sometimes they are difficult to for most of the audience to consciously notice, but they work!

[bort]

It depends.

One thing that comes to mind was seeing Lorin Maazel and the NY Philharmonic play Shostakovich Symphony No. 5, I think it was less than a year before he died. It was a very powerful and emotional performance, and some places (particularly the finale) were MUCH slower than I had heard in other recordings or performances. Seemed like it must have been exhausting to play it that way, and it was a bit exhausting to listen to it. The last minute or two were really pretty amazing though. I've heard performances where it speeds up to get to the end and finishes very quickly, and this version slowed down and sustained as long as it seemed was possible.

I've only performed it once, and can't remember what is actually written in the music. Also not sure if Maazel was known for lengthy interpretations of pieces.

[Z-Tuba Dude]

Seems to me that more than one conductors' tempi expanded, as they got older!

[barry grrr-ero]

If 'the record' is a great one, I have no problem with a conductor copying that which already works. I prefer that to ones who waste a ton of time fooling around over things that simply don't matter in the long run. Most conductors are great at torturing (messaging) a phrase - spending tons of time in the process - yet have no interest or idea as to how properly build a climax - or what to do with the percussion section.

I've heard so many conductors get all kinds of 'nuances' in the course of Mahler 2 or Mahler 8, yet it's apparent that they paid absolutely no attention to the balances at the end of those symphonies, where everything gets reinforced with organ and percussion.

In other words, I prefer conductors who choose the forest (the big picture) over the trees (small details), if such a choice is necessary in the limited amount of time given.

Think of "Carmina Burana". How many times have you heard a performance where there were lots of nice nuances, yet the conductor failed to tell the person covering the giant Wuhan tam-tam to 'man up' and play a true fortissimo in the outer two movements? . . . happens ALL the time, right?

It makes a huge difference in the overall impression.

[doublebuzzing]

The musical "interpretations" I don't like are those that drastically goes against explicit directions written in the score by the composer. Someone mentioned Maazel. He did some absolutely wacky things like slow down to half tempo in spots where there is no indication to slow down at all, etc.

[MaryAnn]

As someone who has a couple things in print, and other things that have been performed but I didn't bother to try to get them published, I can really get my panties in a bunch when I hear something of mine played and the point was missed entirely. It's like, if you want to improvise, then don't play printed, published music. Play charts and have a blast. But don't butcher the piece because you can't understand or disagree with what the composer put on the page. Don't go to an art museum and spray paint over the pictures on the wall because you don't like the way the artist painted them.

[barry grrr-ero]

"more-and-more often (even when the orchestra's music director is conducting an orchestra/choir work, and not the choir director), I see extraordinary amounts of time spent (yes, with orchestra musicians on the $1X,XXX clock) nursing along the choirs.
...I guess I'm really naive, but...
Shouldn't a choir be completely ready to perform by the time they and the orchestra are brought together (just as the orchestra is expected to be) ?
This observation ranges from churches - to Orff - to Beethoven - to Brahms to whatever.
(Probably, choirs in other regions of the country "rock" more than they do here...??...or maybe, it's just that more choir "ringers" need to be hired...??)"

This is exactly why I stopped singing in choirs decades ago. They just want to socialize and - as you put it - be 'nursed' along. It's bad enough in community bands, but far worse in choirs.

This brings me to another pet peeve. Years ago, I played in a community orchestra on the S.F. peninsula (and it's still there). The conductor liked doing extremely challenging works that required lots of winds and percussion (we did ALL of the Mahler symphonies, along with tons of modern stuff). Week after week, the conductor would stop for the same counting and entrance mistakes. It was absolutely maddening. Then I suggested that he spend the first rehearsal of each program playing a RECORDING of the work to the orchestra, with everyone looking at their parts. Guess what? . . . it greatly cut down on counting and entrance mistakes, which meant we had more time to actually rehearse the music. That conductor would NEVER acknowledge that it was my idea - not that I care - or that that idea cut down on our wasting time in rehearsal.