If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Yes, it’s an old joke but (slightly adapted) irresistible in the circumstances.
From: Hornspieler Associates - Management and Productivity Consultants
To: Chairman, Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra
Subject: Schubert's Symphony No. 8 in B minor.
We make the following observations and recommendations following observation of rehearsals of this work:
1. We note that the twelve first violins were playing identical notes, as were the second violins. Three violins in each section, suitably amplified, would seem to us to be adequate.
2. Much unnecessary labour is involved in the number of demisemiquavers in this work; we suggest that many of these could be rounded up to the nearest semiquaver thus saving practice time for the individual player and rehearsal time for the entire ensemble. The simplification would also permit more use of trainee and less-skilled players with only marginal loss of precision.
3. We could find no productivity value in string passages being repeated by the horns; all tutti repeats could also be eliminated without reducing efficiency.
4. In so labour-intensive an undertaking as a symphony, we regard the long oboe tacet passages to be extremely wasteful. What notes this instrument is called upon to play could, subject to a satisfactory demarcation conference with the Musician's Union, be shared out equitably amongst the other instruments.
5. The contribution made by the supervisor in charge of the proceedings appears to be inaudible (unlike everyone else taking part), it does not utilise the level of skill shown by most players and is certainly out of all proportion to the fee paid. Consideration should be given to correcting this anomaly.
Conclusion: Implementation of the above recommendations would allow the piece under consideration to be played through in much less time with associated savings in overtime, lighting and heating, wear and tear on the instruments and hall rental fees. Also, had the composer been aware of modern cost-effective procedures he might well have finished this work.
5. The contribution made by the supervisor in charge of the proceedings appears to be inaudible (unlike everyone else taking part), it does not utilise the level of skill shown by most players and is certainly out of all proportion to the fee paid. Consideration should be given to correcting this anomaly.
Maybe that's why so many conductors now so audibly sing along?
I keep hitting the Escape key, but I'm still here!
Yes, it’s an old joke but (slightly adapted) irresistible in the circumstances.
From: Hornspieler Associates - Management and Productivity Consultants
To: Chairman, Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra
Subject: Schubert's Symphony No. 8 in B minor.
We make the following observations and recommendations following observation of rehearsals of this work:
1. We note that the twelve first violins were playing identical notes, as were the second violins. Three violins in each section, suitably amplified, would seem to us to be adequate.
2. Much unnecessary labour is involved in the number of demisemiquavers in this work; we suggest that many of these could be rounded up to the nearest semiquaver thus saving practice time for the individual player and rehearsal time for the entire ensemble. The simplification would also permit more use of trainee and less-skilled players with only marginal loss of precision.
3. We could find no productivity value in string passages being repeated by the horns; all tutti repeats could also be eliminated without reducing efficiency.
4. In so labour-intensive an undertaking as a symphony, we regard the long oboe tacet passages to be extremely wasteful. What notes this instrument is called upon to play could, subject to a satisfactory demarcation conference with the Musician's Union, be shared out equitably amongst the other instruments.
5. The contribution made by the supervisor in charge of the proceedings appears to be inaudible (unlike everyone else taking part), it does not utilise the level of skill shown by most players and is certainly out of all proportion to the fee paid. Consideration should be given to correcting this anomaly.
Conclusion: Implementation of the above recommendations would allow the piece under consideration to be played through in much less time with associated savings in overtime, lighting and heating, wear and tear on the instruments and hall rental fees. Also, had the composer been aware of modern cost-effective procedures he might well have finished this work.
"And I would go even further", chipped in Herr Webern.
"And I would go even further", chipped in Herr Webern.
Yes S_A. We've all had a good laugh at that old chestnut and I'll give you another one, which is very often true:
"The definition of an expert is an average bloke who's been brought in from outside at great expense."
Well, I've spent years on the inside - 'at the coalface' - where musical performance is concerned, but I never attempt to pronounce upon those areas of music where I have no practical experience.
Nobody has to pay heed to what I wrote and it matters not one jot to me whether it makes any difference as to how these message boards run.
I suggest that, having said what I thought would be helpful, that the administrators do me the favour of removing the thread completely.
HS
Well, they haven't. So I have amended my opening post in the hope that it will be helpful to some; but nobody has to read it or take any notice of what I have written.
On one occasion I returned the first draft of a consultant's report with a list of so many additional areas that I felt needed covering that said consultant complained that I seemed to know what I wanted. I didn't rise to that, we got a better report and she didn't dare to bend the agreed fee
Comment