The 2014 Proms Season - what are your thoughts and feelings?

[Sir Velo]

I suspect it was just a theme with orchestras such as those from Qatar and Istanbul coming from regions not usually associated with western classical music at all, so a Sort Of Message.

You don't think it was more to do with selling the BBC and its programmes to new markets?

[Stanley Stewart]

# 40 The article is copyright but Paul Driver indicated his pleasure and amazement that 'such exalted and exhilarating music-making could be happening night after night' over the season and mentioned the achievements of several orchestras making their debuts before concluding with the 'transcendent finale of the BPO in Bach's St Matthew Passion. As I conclude, a refreshing change from the nit-picking and repetitive whingeing we read on these boards. I've listened to the majority of the season but cheerfully ignored several programmes which were not for me but shared PD's disappointment with the Cleveland Orchestra in the Brahms symphonies, particularly after the Brahms 3 & 4 offering of the Budapest FO. Swings and roundabouts with much pleasure over eight weeks.

[Simon B]

Addressing the question posed in the thread title:

P14 was like a British summer. Hot and dry and cold and wet. In many respects, the usual mixed bag.

Highs: Many of the actual performances. Notably: Elektra (moreso than Salome), BBCSSO/Manze (esp. Roddy Williams singing Butterworth), Borusan Istanbul orch, RLPO/Petrenko (controversially)...

Lows: Incoherent low-key programme overall, the sense that (finally, having avoided it for years) this was a recession Proms, possibly reeling from a massive Wagner shaped hole in the budget...

[amateur51]

For those unable or unwilling to scale the paywall, could you provide a synopsis?

In demotic French of course

[hedgehog]

????? I thought there were such things as omnidirectional microphones - though not like our ears of course - and have existed for a number of years. That is part of the trouble it seems to me however, microphones do not have a brain attached which filters the sounds our ears (hopefully) register, they tend to pickup and deliver a lot more (like unwanted coughs etc). I do agree however - the microphone set-up for a studio recording of an orchestra is not necessarily the best for a live registration. I was particularly disappointed with the live broadcast of Ben Mason's "Meld". I don't know where the microphones were, but there I felt as if just two microphones plus a 'space pair' had been hung somewhere.

[Hornspieler]

To which I replied in my message #32:

Those BBC Legends recordings of Silvestri and the Bournemouth Symphony orchestra were recorded in the Bournemouth Winter Gardens, using a stereo pair (AK 41s as I recall) and a space pair to capture the atmosphere and resonance. I know! I was there!

In my five years at BBC Bristol I was responsible for producing many recordings and live transmissions for Radio 3,

including:

Bournemouth Symphony Orchestra, Dartington String Quartet, Stanshaw Brass Band, Academy of the BBC - all fell within our remit.

And what did we use? A Stereo Pair (and a space pair in a concert hall venue).

What Radio 3 did to our programmes before transmitting them was neither our concern nor our business to enquire, but our basic requirement on the day of a stereo pair and a space pair (with a possible additional microphone for a soloist(s) is as valid today as it was then..*
HS

* Let me just expand on that a little:

If you are sitting in a concert hall, about eight rows back and in the centre, you are enjoying what the orchestra is playing through the medium of your own stereo pair - your ears. The receptors in your ears are omni directional; they can hear sound from all directions but obviously, the right ear hears more from its own side and the left visa versa. So you don't need a "Space pair" (another pair of ears on the back of your head) to pick up the atmosphere and ambience of the Concert Hall.

But a stereo pair of microphones are uni directional each one receives sound in what is known as a cardiode pattern with a fairly narrow angle of acceptance.
So the space pair of microphones to which Petruchka and I referred is available to add, (with discretion), the ambience and atmosphere of the concert hall itself - often using microphones which have what is known as a "figure of eight" pattern of acceptance.

Is that clear? The audio engineer adjusts his balance and volume input at his mixing desk, (overseen by the Producer) fashioning an output of stereo sound for further treatment before transmission.

Now you can see how this simple procedure can be quite impossible if the said audio engineer has a dozen or more extra individual microphones to balance into the mix to highlight the various players who are separately miked to give them prominence at particularly points in the score.

Nothing to do with what goes out on transmission - that's for someone else to deal with.

I have been listening to the two large Mercury Reissue boxes this year. All of those recordings were made with a set up very similar to what HS used. For the most part they sound more natural than more complicated set ups done in the intervening half century. Not as detailed, perhaps, but certainly more natural, and representative of a Concert

[hedgehog]

I don't agree.

What are your thoughts on omnidirectional microphones Hornspieler? Fine to assert a particular preference as to microphone set-up, but not without a thorough investigation of all that is available these days and stating why they are not up to the job That would be like saying a valveless horn was the best for Mozart? (which is OK by me because that is what he wrote for, not some modern apology for the 'Real Thing' )

[hedgehog]

What are your thoughts on omnidirectional microphones Hornspieler? Fine to assert a particular preference as to microphone set-up, but not without a thorough investigation of all that is available these days and stating why they are not up to the job That would be like saying a valveless horn was the best for Mozart? (which is OK by me because that is what he wrote for, not some modern apology for the 'Real Thing' )

[Flosshilde]

[Hornspieler]

I don't agree.

What are your thoughts on omnidirectional microphones Hornspieler? Fine to assert a particular preference as to microphone set-up, but not without a thorough investigation of all that is available these days and stating why they are not up to the job That would be like saying a valveless horn was the best for Mozart? (which is OK by me because that is what he wrote for, not some modern apology for the 'Real Thing' )

At one time, all microphones were omni directional. A simple diaphragm which would pick up sound from anywhere within range.

Just like one's ears.

That big prewar BBC microphone, known to the audio men as a "meatsafe" or "Birdcage" mike was just such - a simple carbon (I think) element, protected in a large perforated metal casing.

Ribbon mikes were more sophisticated and gave more pleasing results. Their response is known as a "figure of eight" being receptive of sound from in front and behind. Still in much use in many studios where more ambience or fullness of sound is required than that provided by a microphone with a Cardiode response which has a narroe unidirectional sensitivity (think of a torch beam)

The very latest developments in microphone design and use are best explained by a former audio technician (I believe that our own ferretfancy was one such.) My job was to listen to what my audio engineer produced and suggest any changes that I felt were neccesary.

I think that the point that Petrushka was making about a plethora of microphones was that it gives the audio engineer the task of managing many faders on his mixing desk at the same time. Not the same as in an editing suite, where there could be many inputs to control but not the immediacy of a live, once only source.

I hope that clarifies things a little. I was simply writing about what equipment we used to obtain a result that was satisfying to "them upstairs" at the time.

HS

[richardfinegold]

To which I replied in my message #32:




I have been listening to the two large Mercury Reissue boxes this year. All of those recordings were made with a set up very similar to what HS used. For the most part they sound more natural than more complicated set ups done in the intervening half century. Not as detailed, perhaps, but certainly more natural, and representative of a Concert

This is regard to post # 51. The paragraph above was written by myself( (rfg), not by HS. Somehow it came out on the forum under HS moniker. I attempted to change it, then delete it, but failed in both efforts.

[AjAjAjH]

And back to the thread:-

After the post 'Nimrod' applause I didn't listen to any more concerts.

Then on Saturday, I started listening on the radio to the first half and eventually turned it off because Saun Rafferty was being so rude interrupting his co-presenter at every turn.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Then on Saturday, I started listening on the radio to the first half and eventually turned it off because Saun Rafferty was being so rude interrupting his co-presenter at every turn.

SR does rather over-estimate his own significance, but they all appear to be trained to be like that. All we like sheep...

[Demetrius]

Tried to sort the negative/non-positive/critical remarks made here and in the Last Night thread and think them through.

1) Too much pop acts.
A complaint which was equally made last year and with which I agreed thoroughly.
Back then, there were 13 concerts of urban classic/jazz/World Music/children's Prom/Hollywood/Musicals etc

this season, there were:
Prom 8 (Pet Shop Boys); Prom 11 (Children); Prom 13 (Children); Prom 30 (Battle of the Bands); Prom 45 (Laura Mvula); Prom 65 (Paloma Faith); Prom 74 (Rufus Wainwright) = 7 (might have missed one)

So, it is actually significantly less than last year. Sadly, they dismissed the wrong ones (World Routes, though I personally didn't go for them; Musicals/Light Music, which had more claim to the Proms than pop)

2.) Orchestras from far-flung corners/too many minor international orchestras

I don't get that point. Each Prom Season features International Orchestras, including Big Names and Smaller ones.
Last Year, these smaller names included the Bamberg SO or the Camerata Nordica. So this season included orchestras from Iceland or Turkey. No difference really, especially if additional costs were indeed covered by sponsorship. Why include those non-familiar orchestras? To discover new/unusual approaches, for one thing. Quite possibly to discover that there are more than 5 quality orchestras in the world. The Icelanders and the Borusan got high marks in their respective threats. Yes, the Qatar prom sunk; but there will always be bad proms, and experienced members of this board might even point out one or two of those performed by the likes of the BBC SO (the exalted spinal chord) or shockingly even the first-tier international greats of the Leipziger Gewandhaus.

Which brings us to 3.) Not enough performances of the BBC SO; and the other BBC orchestras picking up their slack.

12 BBC SO Proms this year; 11 last year; 15 in 1994 (with less concerts overall)
so, slightly less than in previous times, but no more so than last year. I distinctly remember complaints against the amount of BBC SO proms, which was thought to result in lackluster concerts. I'm fairly sure that a steep increase of BBC SO concerts at the proms will not result in an increased performance quality overall. If the BBC SSO, NOW, Philharmonic have a fair share of concerts and do a good job, than great, what's the problem with that?

4. An army of Chinese violinists in the schedule

I counted 3, two of whom played piano, the third some sort of multipipe-mouthorgan

5. Bad Venue

Again, what is the alternative? Building a new one? Who says the acoustics would be better?

6. 6:30 Starts and high ticket prices

Obviously don't work for audiences. One reason why the attendance figures are down, I suppose.

7. Uneven broadcasting quality

Don't have the finest listening equipment in the world (in fact, it's held together with gaffer tape in various places). But if Jayne detected it, I fully trust her and agree that with the experience the BBC ought to have, this should not occur.

8. Overselling, gushing and generally annoying approach to commenting

Comparable to last year, it's just that last year the Radio 3 cheerleading squad cheered for the Wagner opera marathon and other great deeds of the 2013 Proms, so some of us might have been more inclined to agree with the overpositive comments.

9. Which brings us to the last cluster of criticism, which I believe to be the vital one: unimaginative and trivial programming, without enough oomph/pretensions.

Programming will always be a mixed back, as the Proms are supposed to feed several special interests. And each year will feature core points of interest that serve as highlights of the season.

Programming a lot (and there was a lot) of British music into the season was a treat. But no one concert stood out - an Alwyn 4 Symphony double-concert would have been that, or a concert that concentrated on Walton instead of spreading him out. Even the promise of an Alwyn cycle over the next 4-5 years would have sufficed.

Were was the point of a Mahler cycle this year? It's not as if he's been neglected before, he averaged 4-5 Symphonies a year.

Mozart has made a silent comeback, so silent in fact that some members of this board complaint about the proms never programming his 40th Symphony with a performance scheduled only days later.

With all the gushing, this year they FORGOT the marketing for the actual assets of the season. Add to that the failure to bring in any exciting project: no Brian Gothic Symphony or the like, no once-in-a-lifetime experience.

All the while, the performance quality was or seemed high, the pieces played were more often interesting than not. But 20 years from now, what will trigger fond (or any) memories? Not much.

Someone on this board described the music of certain composers as beige. Nothing wrong with beige, but it is what it is. That, I suppose might actually serve as a summary of this years Proms.

[Petrushka]

I've just taken a look at my copy of the 1971 Proms Guide (the earliest I have) and the BBC SO had an astonishing work load: 26 concerts out of 54. Most of these were conducted by Colin Davis and Pierre Boulez and it shouldn't be forgotten that in those days (as far as I am aware) principals did not share positions. The other BBC orchestras just had just one concert each except for the BBC Northern (later BBCPO) who never came at all! Moreover, some of the BBCSO concerts were on consecutive days. At the time all of this was by no means unusual as successive guides reveal.

The number of concerts (54) makes much more sense to me. The Proms season has become bloated with too many late night and pop acts. I'd be fully in favour of a return to something like the proportions of that 1971 season but with less of the work carried out by the BBCSO! They must have been exhausted by the Last Night!

My preference then is for all pop acts to be ditched; late night events more strictly rationed; no 6.30 starts; only the cream of foreign orchestras to be given a platform; a return to the BBCSO working with the best conductors of the day and slightly increasing their workload and last but not least, for the season to be very slightly shortened.