Originally posted by ferneyhoughgeliebte
View Post
-
But will they be free for Wombles? -
-
-
According to the Lord Mayor, it will be 'acoustically perfect'.
That'll make a nice change.Comment
-
We wait with abaited breath!Originally posted by gradus View PostDon’t cry for me
I go where music was born
J S Bach 1685-1750Comment
-
I can't wait - enough space for soloists, chorus and orchestra, an organ (no doubt, eventually). There are enough examples of good acoustic modern auditoriums, surely. (And the City of London Corp land/money and private mega funds being tapped would not have (otherwise) been spent on education and community music throughout the UK).Last edited by Cockney Sparrow; 12-05-17, 09:59.Comment
-
Yes, it's a great idea to concentrate yet more resources in London isn't it ?Originally posted by Cockney Sparrow View Post
It's going to be fantastic to see how, at last, we can eliminate music teaching from schools and spend the money on a nice shiny vanity hall for the folks of London.
We are also going to get St Lukes as a new centre for experimental noise music
It's a terrible idea
We could have about 14 of these https://saffronhall.com for the same £Comment
-
-
The City of London wooed the LSO when the Barbican Concert Hall was being designed, and invited the orchestra to submit their requirements.
The LSO was enthusiastic at the time, and even set up a supporter's club designed to show what a large and wonderful audience they had, but they showed little or no interest in the design. The LSO Club was very short lived, as it dawned on its members that the LSO's sole interest was in boosting its publicity without asking members what they wanted.
The result of all this was that we ended up with an auditorium which was the wrong size and shape with no space for an organ and which could not accommodate a large chorus
If the new hall does appear, let's hope that today's LSO takes a little more interest than it did before.Comment
-
The City of London won't be donating funds to music educators spread across England and Wales. The charitable / hedge fund / property / other mega wealthy class donors won't find that option attractive either. Having a name inscribed on an auditorium/plaque of donors, meeting the Royal that opens it, building up their points for a knighthood or honour - that's what will appeal. So, I'm in favour of building the New Hall to the benefit of London. And the many people in reach of London in a journey of an hour or so (Just like those, in relation to England and Wales - in similar reach of concert halls in Cardiff, Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Gateshead).
The New Hall is not likely to be funded by the government of England and Wales, and if there were choices available in the Treasury spending round it would not be a choice between music education and the New Hall. Even if the New Hall was up for such funding and it was rejected the money in question could be spent on anything - aircraft for the aircraft carrier, a few miles of motorway or high speed rail tracks.
My understanding is that the secondary school at Saffron Walden wanted to build a school hall (Seems to me that in school building funding, classrooms count, large school halls are unnecessary). The school found a private benefactor who was willing to come up with the necessary extra millions as long as the building had a wider community use. Which is fine & I wish the arts venue programme well. That benefactor chose to contribute to the building, but not music education in all Essex schools for a number of years. (And, BTW it serves an area where Cambridge is not far away, and is probably the biggest conurbation - and which has a similar music auditorium at West Road).Comment
-
.
... a piece in The Times today by Richd: Morrison supporting the project.
Of course, for some people, the fact that it is supported by Richd: Morrison and The Times is more than enuff to damn it...
But at least he points out that it wd be funded by London money not national money - and that that London money wd not be available for non-London things. I don't think that will satisfy some...Comment
-
Don't get me wrong, i'm not against concert halls, I spend much of my time in them and some new ones (Harpa Hall last month was wonderful) are fantastic.Originally posted by Cockney Sparrow View Post
BUT this is a vanity project that WILL suck resources from the rest of the country
The "puff" document they produced made great play of how it was going to benefit music education and the whole country
by the time it is built, (if it is built at all ?) how many schools will still have ANY music department at all ?
No mention of what will happen to St Lukes ? Will the money be given back ? and so on
As for the "acoustics argument" it seems to be largely founded in "received wisdom" from people who have little understanding of acoustics in the first place.
Simon Rattle is a great musician BUT he isn't the saviour of anything.
What is interesting to me in the whole debate is that there are several folks who's voices have been notably absent.Comment
-
-
[FONT=Comic Sans MS][I][B]Numquam Satis![/B][/I][/FONT]Comment
-
So are we getting the money that the LSO spent on St Luke's back as part of this ?
The silence from people who know about these things speaks volumesComment
Comment