Things they somehow managed to avoid......

[teamsaint]

Yes and no. Certainly releasing CDs is becoming more difficult and each one I'm involved in feels like it might be the last. But that is not really how most people listen to contemporary music these days, it seems to me. I think more people listen to what I've put on my Soundcloud page than would buy CDs of the music and I have no problem with that - moreover that page now contains over seventy items totalling twenty hours or so of music, and getting all of that released on CD would have been impossible even at the best of times.

of course business models in the arts are changing very quickly, and the record companies/ book publishers are often, though by no means always quicker to respond to change than composers, authors, bands or whoever.
Rapidly changing routes to the audiences can still be an opportunity for traditional media, as well as a challenge. In book publishing, the various routes for a new project mean that even a simple new book is a multi channel project. Traditional routes are still important, and actually I expect them to remain as part of the mix .
As an example, growth of ebooks is flattening very quickly.

we seem to have wandered interestingly off topic !!

[kea]

Yes and no. Certainly releasing CDs is becoming more difficult and each one I'm involved in feels like it might be the last. But that is not really how most people listen to contemporary music these days, it seems to me. I think more people listen to what I've put on my Soundcloud page than would buy CDs of the music and I have no problem with that - moreover that page now contains over seventy items totalling twenty hours or so of music, and getting all of that released on CD would have been impossible even at the best of times.

Of course, you are also paying Soundcloud a certain amount to keep your music up on their site, whereas people are listening—as far as I can tell—for free. With CDs your financial risk would be greater, but it's not a guaranteed loss, there's at least the possibility of breaking even.

It's thus hard to tell how sustainable the Soundcloud model is. Seems like it just makes Soundcloud rich, while creating music becomes more difficult. The same is true with e.g. Spotify and other streaming services. Perhaps I just don't understand the industry that well.

Does seem like somewhere down the line the relationship between creators and audiences got turned around... music is just so dirt common nowadays that you pretty much have to pay people to listen to yours. That seems wrong somehow, but I can't see any feasible changes to the current model that will improve matters.

[Sir Velo]

Of course, you are also paying Soundcloud a certain amount to keep your music up on their site, whereas people are listening—as far as I can tell—for free. With CDs your financial risk would be greater, but it's not a guaranteed loss, there's at least the possibility of breaking even.

It's thus hard to tell how sustainable the Soundcloud model is. Seems like it just makes Soundcloud rich, while creating music becomes more difficult. The same is true with e.g. Spotify and other streaming services. Perhaps I just don't understand the industry that well.

Of course Soundcloud does allow the composer the platform to have their music heard by a larger audience than would hear the CDs. This can then translate into gigs, concert promotions, commissions and even academic posts where the criteria for award would include composition.

[kea]

Of course Soundcloud does allow the composer the platform to have their music heard by a larger audience than would hear the CDs. This can then translate into gigs, concert promotions, commissions and even academic posts where the criteria for award would include composition.

Certainly. But does it ever translate into those things? More to the point, if there are e.g. 10 million people uploading music on soundcloud, how are you going to stand out from the crowd and thus attract a larger audience?

[Ferretfancy]

But where is the "criticism" of Mahler? Saying "I don't like him" or "His Music is neurotic" isn't criticism - it doesn't comment on any failures in his use of thematic, rhythmic, structural, harmonic, contrapuntal or instrumental features. It's an expression of opinion and feeling - which is what the Forum is all about. But then so are the counter-opinions (the "wrath") of others! If someone makes the claim "Rachmanovsky produced nothing but wet bilge as far as I'm concerned", they shouldn't then feel slighted that half-a-dozen others come down on him/her with all guns blazing. It's all part of the fun!

Yes, of course it's all part of the fun! When a friend told me the other day that she couldn't stand Britten, I felt shocked, I even have friends who hate Mozart and that's a hard one to stomach! I do think though that the Mahler enthusiasts go over the top. I don't for a minute wish to dismiss his importance, not least in the influence he had on other composers like Britten and Shostakovich, composers I hugely admire, I just wish we could have a brief moratorium, like a silence between prayers.

[Sir Velo]

There we go! I'm not anti Mahler, in fact I find the first four symphonies very enjoyable, but then the neurosis sneaks in. It isn't the composer I dislike, after all there are plenty of others, it's the cult.

Funnily enough, I would take symphones 6,7,9 and 10 and leave the rest behind.

Agree with you about the cult though, which is a real bore. Ok, when you're a student but for everyone else, time to grow up!

[Richard Barrett]

Certainly. But does it ever translate into those things?

Yes it does.

But that isn't the only reason for doing it. The main point is for people to hear the music. As far as a "business model" is concerned I have never made any significant money out of making CDs, and for larger projects the recordings have in any case been supported by arts funding organisations of various kinds. It should also be noted that the equipment needed to make good recordings and prepare them for release is vastly less expensive than it used to be.

Returning to Mahler, I can never get enough of his music and I certainly don't think it's performed too often. (Though there are quite a few recordings I've heard that don't seem entirely necessary.) On the other hand I am certainly one of the people who "can't stand Britten", the influence of Mahler notwithstanding.

[Richard Barrett]

And returning to the original thread topic: has anyone mentioned Beethoven's projected opera on Macbeth? That would be near the top of my alternative-universe list.

[Roehre]

...... It isn't the composer I dislike, after all there are plenty of others, it's the cult. Every time Mahler is performed or recorded there is endless comment and comparison of X's treatment of the rondo burlesque or Y's tempo in the slow movement etc. etc. ( Not to mention all the arguments about the order of movements ) Any breath of criticism of the great one is regarded as sacrilege)

Though Mahler is in my personal top 3, I fully agree wit Ferretfancy here.
Klemperer did mention this already, as we can see and hear in that magnificent 1973 film/biography: "Mahler is a fashion now"

[Roehre]

Well, conductors and performers are just playing to the market, it looks like.

Standard rep sells. People want 150 Beethoven Piano Sonatas and 75 Mahler Symphonies and 37.5 Ring Cycles. From my experience, most classical music listeners would rather buy 50 different interpretations of a piece they already know than 1 of a piece they don't. Perhaps I haven't met enough listeners, but the "charts" seem to bear that out as well to a certain extent. And there is nothing wrong with that—if something appeals to you enough that you can listen to hundreds of interpretations of it and it still stays fresh, more power to you. There's a lot of music in the world. No one has time to listen to everything.

There are plenty of conductors/performers interested in championing lesser-known music, and they're often bankrolled by the record labels who get their profits from the 38th Ring Cycle and The Essential Classical Chillout Album!, so I see no problem here really.

I am afraid I have to concur here

[Roehre]

And returning to the original thread topic: has anyone mentioned Beethoven's projected opera on Macbeth? That would be near the top of my alternative-universe list.

Or any of the only 20-odd operas he considered, or the Mass in c-sharp, or the Requiem he planned?
At least we've got an impression of some of the MacBeth music, as it's incorporated in the "Ghost"-piano trio, its 2nd mvt based on sketches for the opening "witches" scene in MacBeth.

[Beef Oven!]

Totally agree - and it's really refreshing to have someone say it on this forum!

I adore Mahler and couldn't live without his music, but it's important that a diversity of ideas is expressed and people are not 'scared' to say what they believe, even if it is 'heresy'!

[teamsaint]

going back off topic to the business of what sells, I would beware reading too much into any "chart."
Many are simply reflections of the record company or publisher's marketing spend, or are based on such small (and partial)sales figures, (as mentioned by Norman Lebrecht recently), as to be of little value in indicating what is really selling.

To get a book into a prime location in hight street chains , you either need to be an established best seller, or pay for the space. Space helps sales, but doesn't guarantee them. A place on the store "chart" is meaningless other than in upfront cash in the coffers of the retailer.
I remain unconvinced that conservative "safe" products are a route to sales and artistic success. They can be, and often are, simply a way to guarantee turnover, rather than profit.
(EG get big name on cover, pay a lot in origination, guarantee decent sales, but lose it all in advances, high royalties, marketing spend demanded by artist etc etc).
Nothing wrong with low margin turnover if that is what the shareholders want, but its only part of the mix.

Edit: Maybe this should be a separate thread?

[Ferretfancy]

The record industry often does well with music that is rarely heard in the concert hall. Bax is an obvious example, when was a Bax symphony last heard in a concert hall? Even Tintagel is no longer heard, and there's a lot of Vaughan Williams that is neglected by programme planners.

Moving away from British composers, Haydn is shamefully neglected and even Mozart isn't programmed much, certainly not at the Barbican, the Proms or the South Bank. Perhaps it's the apparent need for works to be presented as cycles, as we have had in recent years with Nielsen and Martinu. I sometimes attend Philharmonia concerts, but too often feel disappointment at how conventional the programmes are. This is doubly frustrating, since this orchestra often engages top flight soloists only to have them play Mendelssohn's Violin Concerto or Beethoven's 3rd Piano Concerto.

Generally speaking, it's the dear old BBC SO that has interesting choices these days.

Regarding the need for more challenging repertoire, the argument always seems to be that the audience won't come, if so, why do they buy the CDS?

[Boilk]

...Haydn is shamefully neglected and even Mozart isn't programmed much...

...I sometimes attend Philharmonia concerts, but too often feel disappointment at how conventional the programmes are...

IMO, you can't get more conventional programming than Mozart, Haydn (and Beethoven). So if fewer performances are making way for lesser-known composers and works, that's a good thing.

By the way, almost EVERY composer is more or less represented by a cluster of works in the concert hall, to the detriment of the majority of their oeuvre. And since that includes 'big names' like Mozart, Beethoven and Tchaikovsky,then there's precious little hope for 'lesser' names. The fact of the matter is that there's too much music vying for the available audience for everything to see the light of day on a regular basis.