Opera appreciations and discussion

[hard pecs]

3 hours ago, InBangkok said:

what on paper was a stunning new production of Aida at the Royal Opera House towards the end of the 1980s. Mehta conducting, Jean Pierre Ponnelle producing with a cast including Pavarotti, Ricciarelli, Toczyska and the superb Georgian bass Paata Burchuladze making his House debut.

 

Lots of people and decisions behind the scene could lead to these below par performances. Unlike a recording where there are so many junctures to “make it perfect”, live performances is a different game. Sometimes you get an unexpected dream team. Other times a dud. That’s why live opera performances are alluring and exciting.

 

 

[InBangkok]

I realise it's not opera but with Christmas coming in many parts of the world Handel's Messiah is frequently being performed. I have heard so many performances, the latest with William Christie and Les Arts Florissants at the Hong Kong Arts Festival.

 

Two short excerpts here to illustrate three of the finest voices of the century, all illustrating the importance the singers give to the words. The first recorded in 1967 "He shall feed his flock" with the incomparable duo of Dame Janet Baker and Elizabeth Harwood along with the always excellent Sir Charles Mackerras and the English Chamber Orchestra. So sad that Ms. Harwood died of cancer aged only 52.

 

The other is a famous version of "He Was Despised" in an older, much heavier - but traditional at that time - 1952 interpretation featuring the greatest contralto of the 20th century, Kathleen Ferrier, with Sir Adrian Boult conducting the London Philharmonic. As is well known, cancer also claimed her life and wonderful voice in 1953 when she was only 41. This makes the aria sometimes so painful, and yet also so life affirming, to hear. The great conductor Bruno Walter said on learning of Ferrier's death, "The greatest thing in music in my life has been to have known Kathleen Ferrier and Gustav Mahler - in that order."

 

Interesting, I think, that Ferrier started her life working in a Post Office while Baker worked in a bank!

 

 

 

[Steve5380]

15 hours ago, hard pecs said:

Aida. I still have a heavily marked up copy of the operatic score at home. Having performed Aida a few times on the concert stage, one learns a lot about Verdi's use of language and the subtlety of his orchestration. Even in the big choruses, lots goes on in the orchestral underlay. I count myself privileged to have that deeper level appreciation of Verdi's music. 

 

I also sang in a choir, and it was a nice experience.  My family and me we were members of the biggest Unitarian church in Houston, and I did sing in its choir (so that attending the service was not a complete bore).  I remember the nice classical pieces from Haendel and Bach we sung.

[Steve5380]

7 hours ago, hard pecs said:

 

Lots of people and decisions behind the scene could lead to these below par performances. Unlike a recording where there are so many junctures to “make it perfect”, live performances is a different game. Sometimes you get an unexpected dream team. Other times a dud. That’s why live opera performances are alluring and exciting.

 

 

There must be some masochism in being allured and excited at operatic duds. 

 

What I find alluring and exciting is to browse through the many versions of musical recordings to find the one most attractive. This is how I found the performance of AIDA that I posted earlier, with Pavarotti and Margaret Price,  and I was enchanted with her singing there.  

 

I let other people have the bad experiences with duds, and if I find one in youtube, a few clicks of the mouse takes care of it,  instead of having to sit there forever and put up, then return home in a disappointed mood.

[Steve5380]

9 hours ago, wilfgene said:

Sill hurts to see so much efforts by so many people go to waste.  Can't bring myself to Robinson.

 

Where is Robinson?

[InBangkok]

11 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

There must be some masochism in being allured and excited at operatic duds. 

 

What I find alluring and exciting is to browse through the many versions of musical recordings to find the one most attractive. This is how I found the performance of AIDA that I posted earlier, with Pavarotti and Margaret Price,  and I was enchanted with her singing there.  

 

I let other people have the bad experiences with duds, and if I find one in youtube, a few clicks of the mouse takes care of it,  instead of having to sit there forever and put up, then return home in a disappointed mood.

You stick to your youtube masterpieces and the rest of us will spend some of our time enjoying the thrill of live performances.

[Steve5380]

2 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

You stick to your youtube masterpieces and the rest of us will spend some of our time enjoying the thrill of live performances.

 

You stick with your live performances, some good, some duds, and the rest of us will spend some of our time enjoying the thrill of the best masterpiece recordings on youtube.

[InBangkok]

13 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

 

You stick with your live performances, some good, some duds, and the rest of us will spend some of our time enjoying the thrill of the best masterpiece recordings on youtube.

But you did not read my post. It said very clearly only one disappointment in "all my long Opera going experience." That's one in about 40 years and probably over 150 performances. "Some" duds is inaccurate. But enjoy your youtube masterpieces. Incidentally, did you never came across even one dud the first time you viewed it? Amazing!

 

23 hours ago, InBangkok said:

This has been virtually the only disappointment in my all my long Opera going experience. Even so, there is something fascinating sitting in a glorious opera theatre seeing a disaster unfold before you. I would not have missed it - but I would not want such an experience again!

Edited December 3, 2020 by InBangkok

[Steve5380]

28 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

But you did not read my post. It said very clearly only one disappointment in "all my long Opera going experience." That's one in about 40 years and probably over 150 performances. "Some" duds is inaccurate. But enjoy your youtube masterpieces. Incidentally, did you never came across even one dud?

 

 

I am sorry.  I should have written "dud" instead of "duds", but I was responding to @hard pecs, who didn't limit his comment to one dud. 

 

"Duds" in youtube don't make much sense, since one is not committed to one video in particular. There are good videos and bad videos of course,  but one has always the choice.   If you are fascinated by glorious opera disasters, you may have a variety to pick instead of having only one that left you not wanting such an experience again!

 

And the risk of having a dud among the expectations of finding thrills in live performances must be much higher than the risk of a crash in a Boeing 737 Max.  

 

 

Edited December 3, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

1 hour ago, Steve5380 said:

And the risk of having a dud among the expectations of finding thrills in live performances must be much higher than the risk of a crash in a Boeing 737 Max.  

Oh indeed it is. It all depends on expectations. As I said, please enjoy your youtube performances. Those of us for whom live performances are very much the lifeblood of opera will continue to attend them. 

[InBangkok]

I was thinking this afternoon about enjoyment of opera performances. Of course anyone can sit at home with all the usual home comforts and see and hear great performances. Several concerts and performances I have attended ended up on DVD and I could easily have waited to watch them at a later date.

 

In part, the enjoyment is surely the whole experience. The first time I attended a performance at La Scala - Cosi with Muti conducting - I was almost overwhelmed. It was not just the interior architecture of that amazing House. It was as much the knowledge of all the greats who had performed there. Toscanini, Callas, Gobbi and the whole panoply of truly great artists. Seated in the stalls with the seemingly never ending tiers stretching upwards was enthralling.

 

In Dresden for Der Rosenkavalier it was to experience the famous Dresden 'sound' in the rebuilt opera house. With Thielemann and the Dresden Staatskapelle, my companion and I were in seventh heaven. This is where Strauss was the Music Director for many years and that made it for us particularly special. During the Act 3 Trio we were both in tears,

 

The Ring at Bayreuth was totally unique. Nothing on DVD or CD can match the feeling of that very unique House. It may not be the most comfortable seating-wise but it is the only opera theatre I have ever been in where, when the house lights are dimmed, you sit in almost total darkness. This is because the curtain is a very dark shade of grey and the canopy over the conductor and orchestra means that only a faint sliver of light can be seen. Then that low E flat suddenly appears, but you don't know where the sound it coming from. It seems almost to surround you.

 

Certain concerts have had a similar affect on me. Sitting in the gorgeously decorated Haydnsaal in the Esterhazy Palace south of Vienna preparing to hear Haydn's Creation in the very hall where he spent so much of his life working on so many premieres can not be described, even though The Creation was premiered across the border at the Esterhaza Palace. Our performance was to start at 11:00 am on Sunday 31 May 2009, the exact date and time when the Master died exactly 200 years earlier. It is impossible to bottle up that experience - to put it crudely.

 

The Russian National Orchestra with Pletnev conducting and Sarah Chang performing the Sibelius Concerto before the Manfred Symphony in Moscow's Tchaikovsky Hall was superb (what an outstanding orchestra!) although the Hall itself is hardly special apart from its history.

 

But other Houses create their own atmosphere. I find Munich very special. It is said the orchestra pit has a resonating chamber below it rather like a drum which explains the richness of the orchestral sound. Whether this is true I do not know. But I loved the hot raspberries and vanilla ice cream they serve at the intervals!! Mind you, Rheingold in the extremely capable hands of Sawallisch featuring an amazing Loge from Peter Schreier, a singer I would never have thought of in that role, and Salome with that amazing stage animal Helga Dernesch as Herodias were quite wonderful. I love also the short steps up to the stalls at the Royal Opera House and the sight of that perfectly lovely House opening up long before you get to your seat.

 

Many Houses are far more ordinary, of course. But there is still something about mingling with an audience of fellow opera lovers, enjoying a pre-performance drink and then taking in the performance itself. Although I have visited St. Petersburg twice and have sat in the auditorium, I have yet to attend a performance.  I would also love to hear a Mozart Opera in the gorgeous Opera House in Versailles, as I would in the Rezidenztheater in Munich and the old Margrave Opera House in Bayreuth. These are the stuff of bucket lists!

[InBangkok]

Perhaps for a change one Opera House I do not like. Not for its exterior, though. The Sydney Opera House is an absolutely  stunning piece of architecture. I have walked by it and sailed past it on the ferries on more than a dozen visits to the city. On each occasion I get a special thrill.

 

But as an opera house interior, I found it almost depressing. It is well known that when Jorn Utzon designed the building as part of the international competition, he submitted concept drawings rather than detailed architectural drawings. After he had won, he and his team then had to try and put in the detail. The structural engineers were baffled as they had no idea how the sail structures could be created.

 

For opera lovers, though, it was politics that resulted in a very inferior opera space. First Utzon was fired and replaced. As work on the building progressed, the total cost soared into the stratosphere. The building opened 10 years late with a budget that had increased by a staggering 1,457%. Part of the problem was a change of government in New South Wales in the mid-1960s had seen the election of a State Premier who was dead against the whole project. He and many others did not believe there was a big enough audience for opera. Within Utzon's shells were a number of performing spaces, the two largest being a multi purpose Opera House and Concert Hall with over 2,000 seats and a Drama Theatre with around 1,400 seats. It was eventually decided to cut the Opera House element from the large hall - resulting in a huge expenditure on costly items like the fly tower going completely to waste, increase the seating to 2,500 and make it suitable primarily for orchestral concerts by the Sydney Symphony Orchestra.

 

The Opera House was thus demoted to the Drama Theatre despite its having no orchestra pit, extremely limited wing space at the sides of the stage and the impossibility due to the external structure of increasing those spaces. Further, it had not been designed acoustically to handle a large orchestra and full company of chorus and singers. When it opened in 1973 with Prokofiev's War and Peace, about a third of the orchestra had to be placed at the sides of the auditorium and the stage was only barely able to accommodate the large chorus and group of principal singers.

 

Since then there have been slight improvements. I saw Macbeth there probably about 15 years ago. The acoustic wasn't bad but neither was it anywhere like as good as most opera theatres. The pit had been enlarged but the stage still looked quite small. Overall I was disappointed. That this extraordinary, almost revolutionary iconic building, a true symbol of Australia, should be called an Opera House when in reality it isn't I found quite sad. Yet it remains one of the Wonders of the World and a magnificent sight - from the outside.

 

 

 

 

[Steve5380]

9 hours ago, InBangkok said:

Perhaps for a change one Opera House I do not like. Not for its exterior, though. The Sydney Opera House is an absolutely  stunning piece of architecture. I have walked by it and sailed past it on the ferries on more than a dozen visits to the city. On each occasion I get a special thrill.

 

But as an opera house interior, I found it almost depressing. It is well known that when Jorn Utzon designed the building as part of the international competition, he submitted concept drawings rather than detailed architectural drawings. After he had won, he and his team then had to try and put in the detail. The structural engineers were baffled as they had no idea how the sail structures could be created.

 

For opera lovers, though, it was politics that resulted in a very inferior opera space. First Utzon was fired and replaced. As work on the building progressed, the total cost soared into the stratosphere. The building opened 10 years late with a budget that had increased by a staggering 1,457%. Part of the problem was a change of government in New South Wales in the mid-1960s had seen the election of a State Premier who was dead against the whole project. He and many others did not believe there was a big enough audience for opera. Within Utzon's shells were a number of performing spaces, the two largest being a multi purpose Opera House and Concert Hall with over 2,000 seats and a Drama Theatre with around 1,400 seats. It was eventually decided to cut the Opera House element from the large hall - resulting in a huge expenditure on costly items like the fly tower going completely to waste, increase the seating to 2,500 and make it suitable primarily for orchestral concerts by the Sydney Symphony Orchestra.

 

The Opera House was thus demoted to the Drama Theatre despite its having no orchestra pit, extremely limited wing space at the sides of the stage and the impossibility due to the external structure of increasing those spaces. Further, it had not been designed acoustically to handle a large orchestra and full company of chorus and singers. When it opened in 1973 with Prokofiev's War and Peace, about a third of the orchestra had to be placed at the sides of the auditorium and the stage was only barely able to accommodate the large chorus and group of principal singers.

 

Since then there have been slight improvements. I saw Macbeth there probably about 15 years ago. The acoustic wasn't bad but neither was it anywhere like as good as most opera theatres. The pit had been enlarged but the stage still looked quite small. Overall I was disappointed. That this extraordinary, almost revolutionary iconic building, a true symbol of Australia, should be called an Opera House when in reality it isn't I found quite sad. Yet it remains one of the Wonders of the World and a magnificent sight - from the outside.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't think that Opera has been damaged one bit by the inadequacy of the Sidney Opera House interior. I visited Sydney exactly a decade ago, and I enjoyed very much this beautiful building and its surroundings.  But this was just one enjoyable part of the trip. Crossing on foot the Sydney Harbor Bridge was another, as was a long day at the Sydney zoo, the Lady Bay Beach, Bondi beach, Manly beach, Australia Museum, Sydney tower.   What did I left off?  Ahhh... the great times I had in five visits to Club 357,  including an excellent foam party    

[InBangkok]

8 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

I don't think that Opera has been damaged one bit by the inadequacy of the Sidney Opera House interior. I visited Sydney exactly a decade ago, and I enjoyed very much this beautiful building and its surroundings.  But this was just one enjoyable part of the trip. Crossing on foot the Sydney Harbor Bridge was another, as was a long day at the Sydney zoo, the Lady Bay Beach, Bondi beach, Manly beach, Australia Museum, Sydney tower.   What did I left off?  Ahhh... the great times I had in five visits to Club 357,  including an excellent foam party    

Interesting visits. But your point is you do not think opera has been damaged by the Joan Sutherland Theatre's inadequacies? Odd that you do not tell readers of the operas you experienced inside the Opera House. Please enlighten us. Which one/s did you see? Why did you find the experience not inadequate? As for the exterior, as I stated in my earlier post and you clearly agree, it is anything but inadequate in terms of being one of the 20th century's great iconic buildings. It is not often a nation is identified by one building. The Opera House exterior defines Australia.

 

As for the Opera Theatre within the structure,  in 2011 a year after your visit,  as reported in TIME magazine a survey of musicians, critics and audience members published in August by Limelight, an Australian Music Magazine, rated the Sydney Opera House Opera Theatre as having the worst acoustics out of 20 major venues.  Not inadequate?

 

Quote

Richard Evans, the chief executive of the Sydney Opera House, wasn't surprised by the results: "We all know about the issues with the Opera House." There have been some acoustic upgrades, he said, but the space is not as "terrific" as it could be. The Opera Theatre is not sufficient in size to produce a good acoustic for opera performances.

TIME magazine Oct. 19, 2011

[Steve5380]

24 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

 

Interesting visits. But your point is you do not think opera has been damaged by the Joan Sutherland Theatre's inadequacies? Odd that you do not tell readers of the operas you experienced inside the Opera House. Please enlighten us. Which one/s did you see? Why did you find the experience not inadequate? As for the exterior, as I stated in my earlier post and you clearly agree, it is anything but inadequate in terms of being one of the 20th century's great iconic buildings. It is not often a nation is identified by one building. The Opera House exterior defines Australia.

 

 

I don't think that my operatic experience in the Joan Sutherland is any relevant, because personal experiences are always subjective.  But one look at the issue reveals that your information is somewhat outdated.  The theater has been renovated with a big improvement in its acoustics:

 

https://www.sydneyoperahouse.com/digital/articles/building/acoustics.html

 

Acoustics is a complex science that, like the weather, is not always possible to resolve with equations.  It seems that the renovation of the theater was successful.  But in case it was not,  we are living in an era of emerging electronic technologies, and hall acoustics can be improved with these means:

 

https://www.sfcv.org/article/the-digital-system-that-fixes-concert-hall-sound

 

And if the acoustics is still not the best, this will not take away at all the importance of this opera house.  It is a positive symbol of Australia with its 25 million habitants.  This is much more important than what a fraction of this number could find less than perfect in their attendance of a performance there.  This fraction is maybe a ten-thousands of the population, nearly insignificant.  And this fraction could be contented even with a more practical solution:  powerful loudspeakers, and a big movie theater screen in the front that displays the videos of operas from youtube,  In this way a great variety of operas could be shown, nearly the 24 hours of the day.  This would be, in my modest opinion, a great solution to make opera appreciation much, much more popular.   

 

 

[InBangkok]

37 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

I don't think that my operatic experience in the Joan Sutherland is any relevant, because personal experiences are always subjective. 

So you think that Opera had not been damaged - but you clearly never attended any opera performance at all in the Joan Sutherland Theatre or you would have answered my question directly. You are therefore in absolutely no position to make that comment.

 

As for the first article you quoted about the acoustics having been improved, yet again you are incorrect. I doubt if you even read that. If so you would have realised - surprise! surprise! - that the acoustic renovation was exclusively for the Concert Hall - not to the Opera Theatre. 

 

As for the John Pellowe and John Meyer article about acoustic enhancement, once again did you read it? I think not. it has nothing to do with opera theatres. Early on it references specifically "concert halls." Acoustic enhancement is perfectly possible in a concert setting where the orchestra is in one position throughout. It does not work in opera where there is a great deal of movement over a large stage area. Can you name even one opera theatre where it has been installed? Surely it's better to be more sure of what you quote before you press 'Submit Reply!'

 

37 minutes ago, Steve5380 said:

And if the acoustics is still not the best, this will not take away at all the importance of this opera house.  It is a positive symbol of Australia with its 25 million habitants.  This is much more important than what a fraction of this number could find less than perfect in their attendance of a performance there.  This fraction is maybe a ten-thousands of the population, nearly insignificant.

You do like to repeat what i said. The Sydney Opera House is a world icon. But you then make another stupid comment. What is the name of the building? The Sydney OPERA House. Why was it built? To accommodate OPERA. After whom is the Opera Theatre named? Australia's most famous singer Dame Joan Sutherland. You then twist everything around in saying you consider the exterior of a building designed for a very specific purpose is more important than that purpose for which it was built! Such strange reasoning.

Edited December 10, 2020 by InBangkok

[Steve5380]

10 hours ago, InBangkok said:

So you think that Opera had not been damaged - but you clearly never attended any opera performance at all in the Joan Sutherland Theatre or you would have answered my question directly. You are therefore in absolutely no position to make that comment.

 

As for the first article you quoted about the acoustics having been improved, yet again you are incorrect. I doubt if you even read that. If so you would have realised - surprise! surprise! - that the acoustic renovation was exclusively for the Concert Hall - not to the Opera Theatre. 

 

As for the John Pellowe and John Meyer article about acoustic enhancement, once again did you read it? I think not. it has nothing to do with opera theatres. Early on it references specifically "concert halls." Acoustic enhancement is perfectly possible in a concert setting where the orchestra is in one position throughout. It does not work in opera where there is a great deal of movement over a large stage area. Can you name even one opera theatre where it has been installed? Surely it's better to be more sure of what you quote before you press 'Submit Reply!'

 

You do like to repeat what i said. The Sydney Opera House is a world icon. But you then make another stupid comment. What is the name of the building? The Sydney OPERA House. Why was it built? To accommodate OPERA. After whom is the Opera Theatre named? Australia's most famous singer Dame Joan Sutherland. You then twist everything around in saying you consider the exterior of a building designed for a very specific purpose is more important than that purpose for which it was built! Such strange reasoning.

 

Nonsense!  All of it!  You attribute to me what I have not written.  And your ignorance shows off.

 

So they renovated the concert hall instead of the opera theatre?  Maybe they gave more importance to the concert hall!  And this makes sense, because many, many more people prefer symphonic concerts to operas. They find operas boring.

 

You are completely wrong in that acoustic enhancement does not work in opera.  People move around in opera?  They do so too in concert halls, if you see the many arrangements of orchestras on the stages. The distance between the right most musician and the left most musician in the orchestra is more than what a singer walks on a stage. But you don't need to take my word for it.  Here is a quotation from an aricle in Wikipedia: 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera_house

 

Acoustic enhancement with loudspeakers

A subtle type of sound reinforcement called acoustic enhancement is used in some opera houses. Acoustic enhancement systems help give a more even sound in the hall and prevent "dead spots" in the audience seating area by "...augment[ing] a hall's intrinsic acoustic characteristics." The systems use "...an array of microphones connected to a computer [which is] connected to an array of loudspeakers." However, as concertgoers have become aware of the use of these systems, debates have arisen, because "...purists maintain that the natural acoustic sound of [Classical] voices [or] instruments in a given hall should not be altered."^[2]

Kai Harada ^[3] states that opera houses have begun using electronic acoustic enhancement systems "...to compensate for flaws in a venue's acoustical architecture." Despite the uproar that has arisen amongst operagoers, Harada points out that none of the opera houses using acoustic enhancement systems "...use traditional, Broadway-style sound reinforcement, in which most if not all singers are equipped with radio microphones mixed to a series of unsightly loudspeakers scattered throughout the theatre." Instead, most opera houses use the sound reinforcement system for acoustic enhancement, and for subtle boosting of offstage voices, onstage dialogue, and sound effects (e.g., church bells in Tosca or thunder in Wagnerian operas).

 

I wish all the opera fans the utmost enjoyment.  But I don't see why society should make the biggest efforts to provide a fancy elite enjoyment to a small group of snobs.  MUSIC should be offered to society at large, especially to the common people like me.   Therefore it occurred to me a perfect solution for the Sidney opera house:

 

-  The orchestra pit and stage should be replaced by a big, beautiful EMAX screen, 4K laser projection and 64 channel DOLBY sound.

 

-  The Sydney place should negotiate with Google for the public display of all the music content of Youtube.

 

- The opera house should perform on a continuous basis the best versions of a variety of operas on Youtube videos.  Out of respect for the person the hall is named after, preference should be given to performances by Dame Joan Sutherland.

 

- Entrance to the opera house should be free to the public, with free seating, and visitors should be able to walk in an out unrestricted. This will be a BONANZA to tourists like me,  who will be able to appreciate the interior of the building without having to anticipate and make reservations for performances at odd times of operas that may not be of interest. INSTEAD,  they walk in the opera house and listen for as long as they want to one of the many operas shown.

 

I think that my proposal is the best, most cost effective solution that benefits society and MUSIC as it should be intended. And I am SURE that it will be enthusiastically welcomed by all tourists visiting Sidney !!!   

 

 

Edited December 10, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

9 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

Nonsense!  All of it!  You attribute to me what I have not written.  And your ignorance shows off

My ignorance? I am merely ignorant because you will not answer questions posed to you following statements that YOU have made. Clearly you enjoyed walking around the Sydney Opera House. Everyone does. Maybe you went inside the cafe area. But twice now I have asked for the name of the operas you witnessed on the basis of which you made your ridiculous statement that as a result of the many failures I highlighted in the Joan Sutherland opera theatre "Opera has not been damaged".   So I ask again. Which opera/s did you see that gave you that impression? Either you were inside that theatre or you were not. It's a very simple question.

 

9 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

Therefore it occurred to me a perfect solution for the Sidney opera house:

 

-  The orchestra pit and stage should be replaced by a big, beautiful EMAX screen, 4K laser projection and 64 channel DOLBY sound.

 

-  The Sydney place should negotiate with Google for the public display of all the music content of Youtube.

 

- The opera house should perform on a continuous basis the best versions of a variety of operas on Youtube videos.  Out of respect for the person the hall is named after, preference should be given to performances by Dame Joan Sutherland.

 

- Entrance to the opera house should be free to the public, with free seating, and visitors should be able to walk in an out unrestricted. This will be a BONANZA to tourists like me,  who will be able to appreciate the interior of the building without having to anticipate and make reservations for performances at odd times of operas that may not be of interest. INSTEAD,  they walk in the opera house and listen for as long as they want to one of the many operas shown.

 

I think that my proposal is the best, most cost effective solution that benefits society and MUSIC as it should be intended. And I am SURE that it will be enthusiastically welcomed by all tourists visiting Sidney !!!   

Your proposal is as with many of your proposals totally idiotic and totally unworkable - if only regarding licence fees and the ridicule that would be heaped upon the city. It is clearly so long since you were ever inside any opera theatre that you think members of the audience walking in and out at will would be tolerated by those who actually want to see and hear an opera in the first place. They wouldn't. In fact they are not permitted to except in your ridiculous La La Land! 

 

Free entry will be a BONANZA for people like you? But you are such a cheapskate you want to watch free because, as you keep telling readers ad infinitum ad nauseam that you prefer to watch free youtube performances to paid live performances. How many more times are you going to destroy this thread with that canard when no other posters agree with your view?

[wilfgene]

2 hours ago, InBangkok said:

My ignorance? I am merely ignorant because you will not answer questions posed to you following statements that YOU have made. Clearly you enjoyed walking around the Sydney Opera House. Everyone does. Maybe you went inside the cafe area. But twice now I have asked for the name of the operas you witnessed on the basis of which you made your ridiculous statement that as a result of the many failures I highlighted in the Joan Sutherland opera theatre "Opera has not been damaged".   So I ask again. Which opera/s did you see that gave you that impression? Either you were inside that theatre or you were not. It's a very simple question.

 

Your proposal is as with many of your proposals totally idiotic and totally unworkable - if only regarding licence fees and the ridicule that would be heaped upon the city. It is clearly so long since you were ever inside any opera theatre that you think members of the audience walking in and out at will would be tolerated by those who actually want to see and hear an opera in the first place. They wouldn't. In fact they are not permitted to except in your ridiculous La La Land! 

 

Free entry will be a BONANZA for people like you? But you are such a cheapskate you want to watch free because, as you keep telling readers ad infinitum ad nauseam that you prefer to watch free youtube performances to paid live performances. How many more times are you going to destroy this thread with that canard when no other posters agree with your view?

Steve has come to accept himself as subscribing to the preferred versions by the the recording dictators and the concept of one and only, ever so mighty god as dictated by the Catholic Church, without Luther's questions.  That's All.

I myself turn a deaf ear and a blind eye at some point on the line.  Then realize the line does come to an end, even deemed not so by mathematicians.

[InBangkok]

19 minutes ago, wilfgene said:

I myself turn a deaf ear and a blind eye at some point on the line.  Then realize the line does come to an end, even deemed not so by mathematicians.

You mean the line ends in death?

[wilfgene]

1 hour ago, InBangkok said:

You mean the line ends in death?

Or dementia.  Or self-consciously insulating oneself from the rest of the world.

Supposedly, 哀莫大於心死

[Steve5380]

12 hours ago, wilfgene said:

Steve has come to accept himself as subscribing to the preferred versions by the the recording dictators and the concept of one and only, ever so mighty god as dictated by the Catholic Church, without Luther's questions.  That's All.

I myself turn a deaf ear and a blind eye at some point on the line.  Then realize the line does come to an end, even deemed not so by mathematicians.

 

You are right that the straight line comes to an end.  This is where the gay line starts, as is increasingly recognized by the progressive societies.

 

And mathematicians still believe that two parallel straight lines touch themselves in the infinite.  And this is true by the rules of perspective.  So don't tease destiny by turning deaf ears and blind eyes,  many seniors see their enjoyment of life end when these useful organs cease to work right.

 

About recording dictators,  I nearly saw the hand of God when the first commercial CD player came out.  I still have mine, a SONY CDP-102, still working great. (I had to repair it recently after decades unused, and for that I was motivated to repair my oscilloscopes, an interesting chain of events)

 

You would be amazed at the mixture of intricate technologies that make a CD player work, even more a DVD player...  and the technology behind the enjoyment of youtube recorded music is astounding.

 

Recorded music, in my opinion, is to bring universality to the art of music. A sound that never vanishes !!!!  In modern times we have become unaccustomed to the marvel of such achievement, and take is as granted.  I see a great future for recorded music,  a future where concerts, operas will be enjoyed by viewing them in 3 dimensions.   Hopefully you also look forwards to such future, and forget about dictators and gods.  

[Steve5380]

15 hours ago, InBangkok said:

My ignorance? I am merely ignorant because you will not answer questions posed to you following statements that YOU have made. Clearly you enjoyed walking around the Sydney Opera House. Everyone does. Maybe you went inside the cafe area. But twice now I have asked for the name of the operas you witnessed on the basis of which you made your ridiculous statement that as a result of the many failures I highlighted in the Joan Sutherland opera theatre "Opera has not been damaged".   So I ask again. Which opera/s did you see that gave you that impression? Either you were inside that theatre or you were not. It's a very simple question.

 

 

You really have nerve to insist in asking me questions to then make snide remarks on my answers.

 

 

15 hours ago, InBangkok said:

 

Your proposal is as with many of your proposals totally idiotic and totally unworkable - if only regarding licence fees and the ridicule that would be heaped upon the city. It is clearly so long since you were ever inside any opera theatre that you think members of the audience walking in and out at will would be tolerated by those who actually want to see and hear an opera in the first place. They wouldn't. In fact they are not permitted to except in your ridiculous La La Land! 

 

 

Bah... you are just irritated because I revealed your ignorance of the ways to enhance sound it opera houses. I have a long experience in attending services at Catholic churches, masses, etc.  And people enter and exit churches at will.  There are no tickets nor assigned seats.  And this movement of people does not disturb the spiritual concentration.  I don't think that an OPERA deserves more respect than a Catholic Mass.

 

Many visitors to the Sidney Opera House would like to enter their concert hall, their opera hall,  NOT to attend a long performance but to get the experience of the place, its ambient.  Free, unrestricted entry is IDEAL for the tourist.

 

 

15 hours ago, InBangkok said:

 

Free entry will be a BONANZA for people like you? But you are such a cheapskate you want to watch free because, as you keep telling readers ad infinitum ad nauseam that you prefer to watch free youtube performances to paid live performances. How many more times are you going to destroy this thread with that canard when no other posters agree with your view?

 

 

You are really insulting.  You make assumptions about my persona that may come from an undeserved spite.

 

A BONANZA,  a cheapskate ??  You have a big misunderstanding.  I have the ability to pay for entrance to concerts as much as you have.  I am not an elite snob, but I am a wise person who spends with frugality, yet generosity, and not because I lack money.  Money has little importance to me. 

 

The FREE has a social sense.  I will not tire to repeat that MUSIC is an abstract art that every person on earth is entitled to.  I am of the same opinion about education, with schools and even universities being free of tuition in a society where these positive activities are subsidized by the government. 

 

I can pay for the most expensive tickets of any performance anywhere in the world. But not everyone can. As a child I was able to go to several concerts and watched operas a couple of times in the famous Teatro Colon (with first class acoustics).  But my family could not pay for that.  The tickets were FREE,  courtesy of a social program instituted by the famous president Juan Domingo Peron and his wife Eva Peron.  FREE ENTRY gave a modest child like me the opportunity to experience a superior art... that should be as FREE as the air we breathe!  And this is not "socialist" fanaticism.  The best classical music is in the PUBLIC DOMAIN.  Schubert does not get a cut every time a symphony of his is performed.  

 

COST is not the reason I choose to watch recorded performances via Internet.  Youtube is one source, Spotify is another one. I can get good sound and video at home.  And here is the great attraction:  I can watch WHATEVER I want from a huge selection that belittles all the programs offered worldwide for live performances.  And I can watch them WHENEVER I please.  No need to travel to a remote place, at an imposed date, an imposed hour, by means of an imposed ticket (yes, we common people have little choice of priority in seating) and having to follow imposed rules (no eating of chocolate ice cream or crunchy almond nuts during a performance of Aida).  

 

I am sorry that in order to satisfy your musical needs,  you need to wait for a performance to be offered, see to get tickets for it,  travel to some corner of the world to see it,  and afterwards it vanishes in thin air only retained by your memory.

 

You need to be more practical.   

[InBangkok]

Steve5380 made a statement.

 

On 12/10/2020 at 2:31 AM, Steve5380 said:

I don't think that Opera has been damaged one bit by the inadequacy of the Sidney Opera House interior. I visited Sydney exactly a decade ago, and I enjoyed very much this beautiful building and its surroundings

After I first raised the topic of Sydney, he claims does not believe that Opera has been damaged by the inadequacies of the Sydney (not Sidney) Opera House interior. So what were his personal opinions of that interior? Which opera that he saw gave him that impression? Simple question. It requires a short answer - that's all.

[Steve5380]

18 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

Steve5380 made a statement.

 

After I first raised the topic of Sydney, he claims does not believe that Opera has been damaged by the inadequacies of the Sydney (not Sidney) Opera House interior. So what were his personal opinions of that interior? Which opera that he saw gave him that impression? Simple question. It requires a short answer - that's all.

 

I am sorry for the typo of writing Sydney with a single 'y'.

[Steve5380]

Today I looked through my collection of 33 rpm records, and I found one with arias sung by Ezio Pinza.  I felt such a longing for my early years when I listened to this singer, which I had long forgotten.  So I played the record, which is not in very good shape having been played many times.  

 

Immediately I went to YouTube and found a great variety of videos with Pinza. Some very old ones, but... remastered. What a wealth!  What a treasure of old recordings I didn't know they existed.  Here is one where he sings as Leporello.  A 75 year old recording!  Nearly as old as I, ha ha.  Next I found a VIDEO that includes Pinza,  this one 73 years old but still viewable and hearable.  I don't think I will ever exhaust the musical jewels I can find in YouTube, even  if I live until 100.

 

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJLqJ8tbOMw

 

In this last video above, that was not correctly embedded but opens in a separate window, I had the opportunity to see Ezio Pinza as he was in person.  I would not have been able to do this without YouTube.

.

Edited December 12, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

Pinza had a wonderful career in opera, appearing regularly for more than two decades at the Metropolitan, the San Francisco Opera, La Scala and the Royal Opera as well as other Houses. It is less well known that after he retired from the opera stage at the relatively early age of 56, he transferred to the musicals genre. He appeared in several, most notably in Rodgers and Hammerstein's "South Pacific", a role for which he won a Tony Award as the Best Actor in a Musical. The recording of the song 'Some Enchanted Evening' made him a national celebrity.

[wilfgene]

44 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

Pinza had a wonderful career in opera, appearing regularly for more than two decades at the Metropolitan, the San Francisco Opera, La Scala and the Royal Opera as well as other Houses. It is less well known that after he retired from the opera stage at the relatively early age of 56, he transferred to the musicals genre. He appeared in several, most notably in Rodgers and Hammerstein's "South Pacific", a role for which he won a Tony Award as the Best Actor in a Musical. The recording of the song 'Some Enchanted Evening' made him a national celebrity.

A role remembered by more as played by Rossano Brazzi(?).  Couldn't recognize him in the 'The Far Pavilion'.

 

No, I am not siding with Steve.  His, and your money, to spend on something you both find enjoyable.  Enjoy more.

[InBangkok]

1 hour ago, wilfgene said:

A role remembered by more as played by Rossano Brazzi(?).  Couldn't recognize him in the 'The Far Pavilion'.

 

No, I am not siding with Steve.  His, and your money, to spend on something you both find enjoyable.  Enjoy more.

Thank you. Yes I remember "The Sound of Music" movie and thought Rossano Brazzi sang it beautifully and movingly even if his voice was a little bit more rough than Pinza's.

[singalion]

On 12/10/2020 at 12:48 PM, Steve5380 said:

 

I don't think that my operatic experience in the Joan Sutherland is any relevant, because personal experiences are always subjective.  But one look at the issue reveals that your information is somewhat outdated.  The theater has been renovated with a big improvement in its acoustics:

 

https://www.sydneyoperahouse.com/digital/articles/building/acoustics.html

 

Acoustics is a complex science that, like the weather, is not always possible to resolve with equations.  It seems that the renovation of the theater was successful.  But in case it was not,  we are living in an era of emerging electronic technologies, and hall acoustics can be improved with these means:

 

https://www.sfcv.org/article/the-digital-system-that-fixes-concert-hall-sound

 

And if the acoustics is still not the best, this will not take away at all the importance of this opera house.  It is a positive symbol of Australia with its 25 million habitants.  This is much more important than what a fraction of this number could find less than perfect in their attendance of a performance there.  This fraction is maybe a ten-thousands of the population, nearly insignificant.  And this fraction could be contented even with a more practical solution:  powerful loudspeakers, and a big movie theater screen in the front that displays the videos of operas from youtube,  In this way a great variety of operas could be shown, nearly the 24 hours of the day.  This would be, in my modest opinion, a great solution to make opera appreciation much, much more popular.   

 

 

 

On 12/10/2020 at 1:25 PM, InBangkok said:

So you think that Opera had not been damaged - but you clearly never attended any opera performance at all in the Joan Sutherland Theatre or you would have answered my question directly. You are therefore in absolutely no position to make that comment.

 

As for the first article you quoted about the acoustics having been improved, yet again you are incorrect. I doubt if you even read that. If so you would have realised - surprise! surprise! - that the acoustic renovation was exclusively for the Concert Hall - not to the Opera Theatre. 

 

As for the John Pellowe and John Meyer article about acoustic enhancement, once again did you read it? I think not. it has nothing to do with opera theatres. Early on it references specifically "concert halls." Acoustic enhancement is perfectly possible in a concert setting where the orchestra is in one position throughout. It does not work in opera where there is a great deal of movement over a large stage area. Can you name even one opera theatre where it has been installed? Surely it's better to be more sure of what you quote before you press 'Submit Reply!'

 

You do like to repeat what i said. The Sydney Opera House is a world icon. But you then make another stupid comment. What is the name of the building? The Sydney OPERA House. Why was it built? To accommodate OPERA. After whom is the Opera Theatre named? Australia's most famous singer Dame Joan Sutherland. You then twist everything around in saying you consider the exterior of a building designed for a very specific purpose is more important than that purpose for which it was built! Such strange reasoning.

 

But this doesn't only happen for classic performances, the same applies to rock concerts.

Take a very "instrumental" gig like Dire Straits (or let's say Mark Knopfler and his band).

Some concert halls are well known for acoustic issues. It may sound damped.

Knopfler is very much on the acoustic enjoyment and read up how much he cares in every concert place for the gig to turn out the best for the audience. but there are limits which cannot be corrected. I attended one concert in Zurich and the hall took much of the sound, at another place in France there was much echo to the sound inside the hall. Big sports arenas can be troublesome for bands too. The one keyboardist does always a gig report and you can read up on such issues, tech people can even ask him questions and he will respond from the tech/acoustic staff to those questions.

 

It works out on the architect's plan but not always in real. That's why most concert halls have these audio experts who come in later and fix some of the issues. Could be wooden wall skirting who cause issues or on times even the type of seating.

 

For sure you need to visit different concert halls to find out for yourself. Best is to try to sit on the "best sound seats" in the main hall rows 10 - 20 maybe. (Mostly they would have the highest price anyway).

 

Just sit in the best seats 10 to 15th row in most concert halls from the stage and you will see how acoustics play out differently even with the same classic concert group.

 

Guess why in Singapore at the Esplanade there are these wooden panels and bars at the back and on the top of the hall. The only purpose was to "straighten" the acoustic.

 

For sure older opera houses can give some ambience which may cover sound issues, because you just feel very excited sitting in any of these concert halls, but sound issues still remain.

 

Edited December 16, 2020 by singalion

[Steve5380]

9 hours ago, wilfgene said:

 

No, I am not siding with Steve.  His, and your money, to spend on something you both find enjoyable.  Enjoy more.

 

 

You don't need to side with Steve. 

 

It is good enough that your posts have sincerity and positivity so that Steve sides with you!     

Enjoy your money too!

[InBangkok]

9 hours ago, singalion said:

But this doesn't only happen for classic performances, the same applies to rock concerts.

Take a very "instrumental" gig like Dire Straits (or let's say Mark Knopfler and his band).

Some concert halls are well known for acoustic issues. It may sound damped.

Knopfler is very much on the acoustic enjoyment and read up how much he cares in every concert place for the gig to turn out the best for the audience. but there are limits which cannot be corrected. I attended one concert in Zurich and the hall took much of the sound, at another place in France there was much echo to the sound inside the hall. Big sports arenas can be troublesome for bands too. The one keyboardist does always a gig report and you can read up on such issues, tech people can even ask him questions and he will respond from the tech/acoustic staff to those questions.

 

It works out on the architects plan but not always in real. That's why most concert halls have these audio experts who come in later and fix some of the issues. Could be wooden wall skirting who cause issues or on times even the type of seating.

 

For sure you need to visit different concert halls to find out for yourself. Best is to try to sit on the "best sound seats" in the main hall rows 10 - 20 maybe. (Mostly they would have the highest price anyway).

 

Just sit in the best seats 10 to 15th row in most concert halls from the stage and you will see how acoustics play out differently even with the same classic concert group.

 

Guess why in Singapore at the Esplanade there are these wooden panels and bars at the back and on the top of the hall. The only purpose was to "straighten" the acoustic.

 

For sure older opera houses can give some ambience which may cover sound issues, because you just feel very excited sitting in any of these concert halls, but sound issues still remain.

 

I think you will find that managements of contemporary concert halls - meaning those designed in the last 30-35 years - mostly start with the acoustic design and then work out from there. After all, if the sound inside is lousy, all the rest is a very large waste of money. One lousy concert hall in Asia is the Cultural Centre in Hong Kong. Most traditional concert halls are based on a basic form of shoebox shape. The great halls acknowledged to have the finest acoustics like the Goldenersaal in the Musikverein in Vienna, the Concertgebouw in Amsterdam and Symphony Hall in Boston are this shape. A large stalls area with a narrow balcony or two around the walls.

 

Hong Kong was disastrously designed from the outside in. The Chief government architect, who knew nothing about music. decided he wanted a circular shape like the hall in Christchurch, New Zealand. Why, goodness only knows, because Christchurch is a larger space with more room for the sound to resonate. And since the Hong Kong guy had to make the shape more of an oval to fit the exterior of the building, it became almost impossible to control the sound waves. The acoustics expert from Christchurch, Professor Marshall was brought in virtually at the last minute. He could not sort out the problems. So the sound in the stalls area where the expensive seats are is not good. Up in the balcony it is far, far better although the seats are jam packed together.

 

Asia has some great halls. Actually Singapore's Esplanade did have acoustic consultants on the job right from the start. Nagata Acoustics always planned for the Concert Hall to be on the resonant side. The wood panels around the ceiling were all deliberately part of the design. Their position is altered by computer, so the basic 'sound' of the hall can altered - as for a more intimate recital, a chamber music concert or a full symphony orchestra. Have you been to the KL Petronas Hall in the Twin Towers? It has a fabulous acoustic even though the hall only seats about 900. Kirkegaard & Associates were again involved right from the start of the design. It has no 'moving parts' as it were but great sound!

 

But older halls, even designed along the shoebox shape model, do not necessarily work the larger the space. The prime example is the New York Philharmonic's David Geffen Hall (until recently known as the Avery Fisher Hall). Opened in 1962 with 2,700 seats, the acoustics were acknowledged as near disastrous. It underwent major renovations in 1976 and another renovation in 1992. Neither worked. So after all that expense it is now closing again, this time for a US$550 million refurbishment that will also see the removal of 500 seats.

 

As you point out, arenas are generally horrible. After all, most are designed for sports events rather than symphony concerts and pop concerts. I heard Domingo at the I. M. Pei designed Singapore Indoor Stadium quite some years ago. Black drapes had been erected all over the upper part of the venue to stop echoes and everything was amplified.

 

Pop concerts generally want a totally dead acoustic space for their technicians and sound designers bring all the amplification equipment they need. They also need a near identical sound space for the artists at each venue. It is hardly surprising that with the volume of sound being pumped out from the stage and nearby, quite a number of the top pop musicians suffer from tinnitus.

Edited December 12, 2020 by InBangkok

[Steve5380]

So much effort and money is invested in building concert halls, opera halls, with as good as possible acoustics.  If this was justified 100 years ago,  today's technology should obsolete some of this effort.

 

I remember watching the movie Avatar in an EMAX theater.  Nice realism, nice sound.  Nothing that gave away the immense technological effort that made the movie possible.  Millions of people took advantage of this effort, and enjoyed the movie by just paying the customary fee for seeing a good movie. 

 

I can envision a similar evolution of musical performances, including opera, ballet, etc.   A good recording hall nearly anechoic, a scenery like is set up to film a movie,  and a near perfect three-dimensional capture of a performance can be made to be played back unlimited times for an unlimited audience.  NOT the big effort to stage an opera in one of the few halls with optimum acoustics, to be seen by just some thousands of people.  

 

It may come a time when most of the YouTube recordings will be three-dimensional, with 4K high resolution, to be displayed in the big screens and 3-D equipment we will all be able to afford in our homes. 

 

I look forwards to this 

Then I will move my new rowing machine to my living room with the big screen, and watch AIDA while I get my aerobic workout done.  

 

P.D.  I am now watching a YouTube video with Arthur Jussen playing the wonderful piano concerto of Schumann.  Sound does not need to be better, no need of acoustics of any kind. The video could not be better either,  I can see the artist in all detail, better than any person in the public.  To see him in 3D?  Maybe nice, but not necessary.   A great musical experience!   I will stop it now to prepare my dinner and watch the news on the TV.  Thereafter I will let it continue while my belly rests,  or later before going to bed.  I see the public in the concert hall... and sorry... they cannot do any of that. They have to keep seated and listening.  They may be able to scratch their butt if it does not disturb the people around them.

.

Edited December 12, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

May I suggest there is little point extending the "I love youtube" and "I love live performance" rivalry. There will always be some who love the latter and no doubt many more who love the former, perhaps because for whatever reason they don't want to bother going out to more than an occasional concert or opera. Promoting one or the other has become almost a game of one-upmanship - I plead guilty! So can we perhaps cease promoting why one is better than the other and merely talk about experiences. Quoting from youtube is perfectly fine since it is impossible to provide a clip from a live performance. Only a description is possible.

Edited December 13, 2020 by InBangkok

[InBangkok]

I want to go back for a moment to acoustics since it is only in recent decades that it has become a science in its own right. Prior to around the opening of the Berlin Philharmonie with its radical invention of placing the orchestra virtually in the middle of the hall, the shoe box shape reigned supreme. This was just how things ere done. And for the most part they worked. Endless studies have been done illustrating that this shape with at one end a large organ, then choir stalls (occasionally filled by members of the audience when choirs are not required), the stage, then a large, long stalls area with narrow surrounding balconies just works extremely well. One essential is that the members of the orchestra on stage have to hear each other rather like an expanded chamber ensemble. Another is that there is sufficient resonating space within the body of the hall to give the sound clarity, richness and depth.

 

I have read a number of papers on the reasons why shoe boxes work. The good ones have a reverberation time of around 2 seconds before individual sounds die. Sound waves coming from the orchestra radiate out in all directions. In the shoe box, someone sitting in the mid-stalls area first gets direct waves from the players, followed very quickly by the waves reflected from behind the orchestra. One key to good sound seems to be that the next waves are those from the sides followed by those from the ceiling and finally the back wall. Some form of decoration on the sides helps to deflect waves in a variety of sub-directions and this, it seems, assists the overall quality of sound. Another key is that the hall can not be too wide, one reason why the New York Philharmonic's home was such an acoustic disaster.

 

One of the great recording venues anywhere in the world for both classical and film music was London's Kingsway Hall right in the centre of the city. This opened as a Methodist mission in 1912. By the 1920s, London orchestras were using it for 78rpm discs because its shoebox shape and surrounding balcony had a near perfect acoustic. Thousands of recordings were made there, especially with the introduction of LPs and stereo. EMI even used the Hall after its own Abbey Road studios were in operation. Several continental orchestras were brought to London just to record in the Hall. Sadly the Methodists never had enough cash to maintain the venue. Further an infrequently used spur branch of the London underground passed underneath. Once the CD format was adopted, their greater aural range picked up the low rumble when trains passed. The Hall was finally sold, demolished in the 1990s and a hotel now stands in its place.

 

I almost forgot this is the opera thread! Here as we all know the horseshoe shape is the traditional one that works.  With so many participants, a very large volume of air is necessary to get the required reverberation time, resonance and richness. Again I think it is interesting that in several rankings, all the elements in the overall sound can best be experienced in the Teatro Colon in Buenos Aires, Dresden's Semper Opera, La Scala, the Palais Garnier in Paris and the Staatsoper in Prague. Reverberation time is a bit less - usually from 1.8 seconds down to a rather dry 1.3 seconds - than for concert halls because of the need for utmost clarity in hearing the voices above large orchestras.

[wilfgene]

1 hour ago, InBangkok said:

I want to go back for a moment to acoustics since it is only in recent decades that it has become a science in its own right. Prior to around the opening of the Berlin Philharmonie with its radical invention of placing the orchestra virtually in the middle of the hall, the shoe box shape reigned supreme. This was just how things ere done. And for the most part they worked. Endless studies have been done illustrating that this shape with at one end a large organ, then choir stalls (occasionally filled by members of the audience when choirs are not required), the stage, then a large, long stalls area with narrow surrounding balconies just works extremely well. One essential is that the members of the orchestra on stage have to hear each other rather like an expanded chamber ensemble. Another is that there is sufficient resonating space within the body of the hall to give the sound clarity, richness and depth.

 

I have read a number of papers on the reasons why shoe boxes work. The good ones have a reverberation time of around 2 seconds before individual sounds die. Sound waves coming from the orchestra radiate out in all directions. In the shoe box, someone sitting in the mid-stalls area first gets direct waves from the players, followed very quickly by the waves reflected from behind the orchestra. One key to good sound seems to be that the next waves are those from the sides followed by those from the ceiling and finally the back wall. Some form of decoration on the sides helps to deflect waves in a variety of sub-directions and this, it seems, assists the overall quality of sound. Another key is that the hall can not be too wide, one reason why the New York Philharmonic's home was such an acoustic disaster.

 

One of the great recording venues anywhere in the world for both classical and film music was London's Kingsway Hall right in the centre of the city. This opened as a Methodist mission in 1912. By the 1920s, London orchestras were using it for 78rpm discs because its shoebox shape and surrounding balcony had a near perfect acoustic. Thousands of recordings were made there, especially with the introduction of LPs and stereo. EMI even used the Hall after its own Abbey Road studios were in operation. Several continental orchestras were brought to London just to record in the Hall. Sadly the Methodists never had enough cash to maintain the venue. Further an infrequently used spur branch of the London underground passed underneath. Once the CD format was adopted, their greater aural range picked up the low rumble when trains passed. The Hall was finally sold, demolished in the 1990s and a hotel now stands in its place.

 

I almost forgot this is the opera thread! Here as we all know the horseshoe shape is the traditional one that works.  With so many participants, a very large volume of air is necessary to get the required reverberation time, resonance and richness. Again I think it is interesting that in several rankings, all the elements in the overall sound can best be experienced in the Teatro Colon in Buenos Aires, Dresden's Semper Opera, La Scala, the Palais Garnier in Paris and the Staatsoper in Prague. Reverberation time is a bit less - usually from 1.8 seconds down to a rather dry 1.3 seconds - than for concert halls because of the need for utmost clarity in hearing the voices above large orchestras.

The staatsoper was where I watched the first opera of my life and commented 'It ain't over till the fat woman sings'.  No wonder it wasn't demolished even if the Sudeten Germans were driven out.

Couldn't tell the difference in term of audio effects from Narodni Divadro even then.  

Anyway, you reaffirm life is a journey.  The view along the way may well be more memorable than that at the designation itself.

Thanks.

Edited December 13, 2020 by wilfgene

[Steve5380]

20 hours ago, wilfgene said:

The staatsoper was where I watched the first opera of my life and commented 'It ain't over till the fat woman sings'.  No wonder it wasn't demolished even if the Sudeten Germans were driven out.

Couldn't tell the difference in term of audio effects from Narodni Divadro even then.  

Anyway, you reaffirm life is a journey.  The view along the way may well be more memorable than that at the designation itself.

Thanks.

 

Which Staatsoper was that?  (there are various).  Not all female singers are fat, so you must have hit on a fat one.

The view along the way may be the only one we will get to see.

 

 

22 hours ago, InBangkok said:

 

One of the great recording venues anywhere in the world for both classical and film music was London's Kingsway Hall right in the centre of the city. This opened as a Methodist mission in 1912. By the 1920s, London orchestras were using it for 78rpm discs because its shoebox shape and surrounding balcony had a near perfect acoustic. Thousands of recordings were made there, especially with the introduction of LPs and stereo. EMI even used the Hall after its own Abbey Road studios were in operation. Several continental orchestras were brought to London just to record in the Hall.

 

 

It may not have to be a big deal today the acoustics of a recording place.  Electronic processing of the recorded sound can take care of it, and allow for all kinds of settings.  It all starts with an anechoic room or something close to it.  Arrays of microphones can record the sound at many places and then process, combine, mix them together.  A reverberation can be created by taking a recorded signal and adding to it a certain fraction of the signal that is delayed by a certain time interval.  The complex combinations can be programmed by some specific software.   In the case of an opera, ballet or other stage activities combined with the music, a setup similar to the filming of a movie can capture the video with optimum settings. 

 

Long before YouTube there have been recordings of many operas in film, then DVD,  now Blue Ray, etc.  I have an older DVD with Mozart's Don Giovanni.  When I play it on my big TV the experience is very close to seeing it in an opera hall.  My older TV is not of the highest resolution, but great new models come on the market, some with curved screens. 3D TVs haven fallen out of demand for lack of material to make them interesting,  but a future resurgence is not out of the question.   Maybe home concert halls with good realism will restore interest,  and YouTube already has 3D videos to download, but I am not familiar with them.   I foresee that home concert halls will become less distinguishable from the real ones,  like electronic pianos already are coming very close to the acoustic ones.   With this,  millions in the future will be able to attend pseudo-live concerts from the comfort of their homes, at 3AM in the morning if they want,  and especially the ladies will not have to wait in line for a restroom to make pipi.   

.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

10 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

Long before YouTube there have been recordings of many operas in film, then DVD,  now Blue Ray, etc.  I have an older DVD with Mozart's Don Giovanni.  When I play it on my big TV the experience is very close to seeing it in an opera hall.  My older TV is not of the highest resolution, but great new models come on the market, some with curved screens. 3D TVs haven fallen out of demand for lack of material to make them interesting,  but a future resurgence is not out of the question.   Maybe home concert halls with good realism will restore interest,  and YouTube already has 3D videos to download, but I am not familiar with them.   I foresee that home concert halls will become less distinguishable from the real ones,  like electronic pianos already are coming very close to the acoustic ones.   With this,  millions in the future will be able to attend pseudo-live concerts from the comfort of their homes, at 3AM in the morning if they want,  and especially the ladies will not have to wait in line for a restroom to make pipi.   

.

I thought I had made an attempt to make a truce a day ago. There really seems no point continuing a discussion/argument re the benefits of youtube vs. live performance and vice versa.

 

On 12/13/2020 at 10:31 AM, InBangkok said:

May I suggest there is little point extending the "I love youtube" and "I love live performance" rivalry. There will always be some who love the latter and no doubt many more who love the former, perhaps because for whatever reason they don't want to bother going out to more than an occasional concert or opera. Promoting one or the other has become almost a game of one-upmanship - I plead guilty! So can we perhaps cease promoting why one is better than the other and merely talk about experiences.

But you have not accepted the offer. You seem determined just to continue your promotion of youtube and other electronic means of transmission into homes. You also continue to brush aside the comments made by me, others and especially the TS about why live performances have their own very special attraction.

 

On 12/2/2020 at 3:20 PM, hard pecs said:

Lots of people and decisions behind the scene could lead to these below par performances. Unlike a recording where there are so many junctures to “make it perfect”, live performances is a different game. Sometimes you get an unexpected dream team. Other times a dud. That’s why live opera performances are alluring and exciting.

Can I please make another plea that you cease so regularly promoting home entertainment. You clearly love it. Others no doubt love it. Countless millions like it. Yet you seem to rule out the fact that others really do have their own reasons for much preferring a live performance. That is just fact. Bachtrack's Classical Music Statistics for 2019 show there were 10,016 live opera performances. I have frankly no idea of the average seating capacity of the world's opera houses nor the numbers who actually attended. Even if we assume that the average number of seats is around 1,800 (the Lyric in Chicago has 3,563 seats whereas the Berlin State Opera has 1,400) and 80% were sold, that means at least 14 million people enjoyed live performances. Interestingly, the number of performances by traditionally the big three composers (Mozart, Puccini and Verdi) dropped from 34% to 29%. There were more world premieres and more performances than in earlier years of less well known works.

 

For symphony orchestra concerts, there were 20,535 worldwide. Let's assume again the same average number of seats per venue and seats sold. Then the number of attendees is nearly 30 million. Importantly numbers of opera and concerts increased over previous years - as did audiences.

 

We need to accept that not all opera performances and concerts will have been included. I doubt if all the concert halls in China are included, for example. Between 1995 and 2015, 23 new concert halls opened in China's Zhejiang Province alone. Between 2012 and 2017 the number of professional symphony orchestras around China increased from 30 to 72! So let's just accept that there are many tens of millions who enjoy live performances and there are no indications yet that this number will be reduced once the pandemic has disappeared.

 

The above are facts. I do not think there are facts instantly found for youtube apart from views per video. So let's just leave it that both have their adherents.

 

PS: I have just noticed a secondary Bachtrack link which shows that the figures are supplied by only 10 countries - Japan, Austria, Netherlands, Sweden, USA, Germany, Switzerland, France, Spain and UK. Given that the fastest growing market for live classical music is Asia and only Japan (where it is stagnating) is included, and there are no figures at all from Finland, Denmark, Italy (what an odd omission), Hungary, Russia, Canada, South America, Australia and others, a vast number have been totally omitted. I will guess, therefore, that the real number for live performances in 2019 will be at least 30 million for opera and 100 million for concerts - if not a lot more!

Edited December 14, 2020 by InBangkok

[singalion]

Without live performance there wouldn't be any home entertainment on channels like youtube etc. Simple as that.

 

The internet has killed so many art forms, I don't think it is good to continue on this path.

 

If people do not visit live performances a lot of the arts will just die off.

Nowadays with the internet we are all guilty in contributing to the downfall of live arts and performances.

And, less people will take up the skills to perform an instrument on the level and skill required to perform live.

Artificial intelligence is nice but let's not forget what we have been created to being able to do and perform and the talent brought out of human mankind.

 

Watching a live performance with your boyfriend/husband next to you is still something unmatchable or unrivallable or unparalleled... in life. Nothing can compare with that......

 

A music lover would not buy a PC but spend money into High Fidelity.... if he wants to listen at home. But still the live act cannot bring the same experience and happiness level compared to playing things at home.

 

Edited December 14, 2020 by singalion

[heman]

I  agree with what Singalion's  comment. Live performances keep music world alive. Too much of canned music can be sterile if one repeatedly listen to it.  As for me watching live performances of either  concert or opera opens a new dimension each time i witness it. It has nothing to do with elitism. I am happy in our small island state most concerts, ballet or operas are usually well attended and tickets are reasonably priced.

[InBangkok]

There is one other issue that should be raised. Apart from home vdos uploaded by individuals of their own work, all classical music concerts on youtube had originally to be paid for by some organisation. There would be no Yundi, Callas, Rubinstein, Vienna Philharmonic, Concertgebouw and other great artistic performances and certainly no opera performances if there had been no recording company or other organisation prepared to put up quite a lot of cash to get each recording made in the first place.

 

Until the early 1980s there were lots of recordings made by US orchestras. At the advent of the CD revolution, the New York Philharmonic was charging US$50,000 to make one CD. Add on top the fee and royalties for the conductor and possibly also soloist plus the cost of manufacture, marketing and distribution and you have a very expensive package (all a long time before youtube was even thought of). It is no accident that movies requiring orchestral scores moved from Los Angeles to London around the time John Williams was rising to fame. At the end of the 1970s the scores for Star Wars and Superman were among the first blockbusters to be recorded in London. Not only were London orchestras much less expensive, London musicians are the world's fastest sight readers. So at least one session could also be saved. Then when London became expensive, some movie companies requiring orchestral forces moved to central Europe. Now few classical CDs are made by US orchestras. unless they are self financed.

 

The point is that virtually all audio and video recordings available on electronic media were made primarily for sales that would recoup some if not all the cost of production. They were a commercial rather than a purely artistic venture. If Rubinstein had not been popular with live concert audiences, no record company would have touched him. Yundi got his first CD contract with DGG on the back of winning the Chopin Competition. But he was quickly dropped and then had to self-finance his own EMI recordings when DGG wanted Lang Lang - not because he is a better player but because, like it or not, he is a much greater commercial proposition.

 

If you get rid of live performances, you also get rid of most future electronic media reproductions. The financing of the classical industry is definitely changing but there is a limit to the amount of cost cutting. If you want The Ring, you need a theatre and rehearsal halls, you must have a producer and designers (sets, costumes, lighting), you need an orchestra of 90 plus, you need an experienced conductor and seasoned singers whose voices will last for six hours, you need several dozen technicians and a chorus of around 60 male voices - and you need all these personnel over what will be weeks of rehearsal for each opera. Add to that the administrative issues of contracts, payroll, publicity, marketing and so on. That is just fact. So if there are no future recordings becoming available, those depending on electronic media for their musical experiences will have no choice but to limit themselves mostly to what is already available. But there is a caveat which I will come to in a moment.

 

It's all very well people saying that the classical music industry has to change its ways. Given the pandemic, I think this issue is already front and centre with most performing companies. But you can never get away from the fact that classical concerts and operas are people-oriented businesses and this is the bane of every work study expert. If you need 90 musicians, you cannot get away with 20. If you need a cast of 43 major and minor paid principals in Der Rosenkavalier (as you do), you cannot get by with 10. If there had been no patrons, sponsors and  paid audiences, the output of Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Mendelssohn, Schumann and all the other great composers would be a tiny fraction of what we enjoy today - if that!

 

So classical music will always be expensive. If companies are to keep an even keel financially, they have to raise more cash. Given that there is a limit to how much can be charged for tickets - even with a wide spread of prices - either you cosy up to lots more rich donors and/or you find other sources. As already happens with some companies, charging more for streaming and what is shown on youtube may well be one way. Youtube already pays rights fees for the number of views on many of its free classical items. But some are now horribly interrupted mid way through by totally inappropriate commercials. Will more commercials be inserted in more classical music vdos? How many presently free youtube videos will eventually be moved over to the subscription format? I frankly don't know. I just know free lunches do not continue for ever. 

 

We will all continue to watch youtube, some more than others for our own reasons. But we have to remember there is a unbreakable link between the live performance and what we can see on our computers.

Edited December 14, 2020 by InBangkok

[InBangkok]

The link below lists a series of mostly free streaming from various parts of the world during the coming week.

 

Opera highlights include 

Tues 15 Wagner Lohengrin from the Met conductor James Levine with Eva Marton, Leone Rysanek and Peter Hofmann from 1986

Wed 16 Beethoven Fidelio in a minimalist production conductor Nikolaus Harnoncourt with Jonas Kaufmann and Camillla Nylund  from 2004

Wed 16 Berlioz Les Troyens from the Met conductor Fabio Luisi with Deborah Voigt and Susan Graham

Thurs 17 Humperdinck Hansel and Gretel from the Met conductor Vladimir Jurowski with Christine Schafer, Alice Coote, Rosalind Plowright and Philip Langridge from 2008

Thurs 17 Zandonai Francesca da Rimini conductor Levine with Renata Scotto, Domingo and Cornell MacNeil from 1984

Fri 18 Mussorgsky Boris Godunov from the Met conductor Gergiev with Rene Pape and mostly Russian cast from 2010

Sat 19 Verdi Nabucco from the Met conductor Levine with Domingo and others from 2017

Mon 21 Mozart Magic Flute conductor Levine with Ying Huang, Erika Miklosa and Rene Pape from 2006

 

Please check the link for start times. All listed times are New York time.

 

There are also some interesting concerts including

Sat 19

The Berlin Philharmoniker conductor Ivan Fischer, soloist Seong-Jin Cho performing Glinka Overture Russian and Ludmilla, Liszt Second Concerto, Dvorak Symphony No. 8 requiring a fee of €9.90

The London Symphony with Simon Rattle and Kristian Zimerman performing Beethoven Piano Concerto No. 5  requiring a fee of US$13

 

https://www.musicalamerica.com/news/newsstory.cfm?archived=0&storyid=46631&categoryid=1

[Steve5380]

11 hours ago, InBangkok said:

I thought I had made an attempt to make a truce a day ago. There really seems no point continuing a discussion/argument re the benefits of youtube vs. live performance and vice versa.

 

 

My desire is for more than a truce,  but a complete end of hostilities and a continuation of our friendly conversations of the past.  I think that our falling out is not over fundamentals but over circumstantial comments that built up in a wrong direction.   I think that we can resolve this by a code of conduct like this:

 

1- Avoiding the negative:  I don't criticize live performances or their fans.  You don't criticize the choice of getting the musical experience from electronic forms like videos from Youtube, Spotify, CD, DVD, etc.

 

2- Continuing with the positive: You will continue praising live performances, explaining why, sharing your experiences, and even commenting on the superiority of them over recorded music.   I will continue explaining my preference for recorded music, its advantages, its future in light of technology advances, and the reasons for my preference even if there are occasional veiled mentioning over some superiorities over live performances.

 

3- We will avoid shutting each other off with brusque statements of "wrong", "false", "Nothing",  recognizing that no poster here has an exclusivity over the truth, the reality,  and we have not been sworn in to tell "only the truth, and nothing but the truth".  ( I should write "reality" instead of "truth",  because our differences of opinions are not untruthfulness ) 

 

What do you think?

 

If you have detected something I wrote in my last posts, after your truce, that violate these codes of conduct, please let me know and y will apologize.

 

I see that in the last hours, while I was peaceful sleeping in bed, new posts appeared that speak highly of live performances and not so highly about recorded music.  THIS IS FINE WITH ME!  If people read back through our conversations, they will not find any observation by me that live performances should be eliminated.  I am all for personal freedom.  

[Steve5380]

9 hours ago, singalion said:

Without live performance there wouldn't be any home entertainment on channels like youtube etc. Simple as that.

 

The internet has killed so many art forms, I don't think it is good to continue on this path.

 

If people do not visit live performances a lot of the arts will just die off.

Nowadays with the internet we are all guilty in contributing to the downfall of live arts and performances.

And, less people will take up the skills to perform an instrument on the level and skill required to perform live.

Artificial intelligence is nice but let's not forget what we have been created to being able to do and perform and the talent brought out of human mankind.

 

Watching a live performance with your boyfriend/husband next to you is still something unmatchable or unrivallable or unparalleled... in life. Nothing can compare with that......

 

A music lover would not buy a PC but spend money into High Fidelity.... if he wants to listen at home. But still the live act cannot bring the same experience and happiness level compared to playing things at home.

 

 

I don't see it so simple.  YouTube is a depository of recorded music and other videos about miscellaneous topics nearly as deep as the US Library of Congress is for books.  This recorded music was performed IN THE PAST.  Now available for unlimited access for an unlimited future.

 

To say that recorded music or music electronically available through the Internet has killed any art is like saying that printed books, or ebooks, have killed the art of writing. 

 

The Internet is a fantastic tool to propagate art to the four corners of the world.  OVER SEVEN BILLION HUMANS are alive today, and most of them would not have access to the art the Internet can provide them.

 

Without visiting live performances in auditoriums the arts will die off?  This is like saying that without the big soccer leagues playing in big stadiums, football would die off!  If you visit modest places in the third world you will see multitude of young kids and teenagers playing football as soon as they have a ball and some empty field available.  Even a person like me who goes seldom to music performances keeps much music alive at home. Why do you think I have two pianos?  Many cultivated persons get together and play chamber music. Music schools organize concerts in their small halls, all with free entrance.

 

Many lovers of music feel driven to play an instrument, and to do it as best as possible, for the purpose to play it in front of others.  These "others" may not be the audience in the Carnegie Hall, but their friends, social gatherings, their church. 

 

If you think that artificial intelligence and electronic technology conspire against our human nature,  then you will always walk instead of taking a bus or a car or an airplane. You will walk to your utility companies and pay them in cash, instead of setting up an auto-payment through your computer.

 

Watching a live performance with your beloved boyfriend, husband next to you is very nice, if you have a boyfriend, but it may not compare... to be in bed with him  

 

I am a music lover but I would not spend too much on High Fidelity.  But A COMPUTER is primordial, is practically a necessity in modern life.  My ears are completely satisfied listening with good ear buds to a recording on a good quality MP3 player (like my old but high quality COWON S9 player).  How many hours of transatlantic flight have I killed listening to my extensive collection of music and even watching some videos on this excellent little player!

.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Steve5380

[Steve5380]

52 minutes ago, InBangkok said:

The link below lists a series of mostly free streaming from various parts of the world during the coming week.

 

Opera highlights include 

Tues 15 Wagner Lohengrin from the Met conductor James Levine with Eva Marton, Leone Rysanek and Peter Hofmann from 1986

Wed 16 Beethoven Fidelio in a minimalist production conductor Nikolaus Harnoncourt with Jonas Kaufmann and Camillla Nylund  from 2004

Wed 16 Berlioz Les Troyens from the Met conductor Fabio Luisi with Deborah Voigt and Susan Graham

Thurs 17 Humperdinck Hansel and Gretel from the Met conductor Vladimir Jurowski with Christine Schafer, Alice Coote, Rosalind Plowright and Philip Langridge from 2008

Thurs 17 Zandonai Francesca da Rimini conductor Levine with Renata Scotto, Domingo and Cornell MacNeil from 1984

Fri 18 Mussorgsky Boris Godunov from the Met conductor Gergiev with Rene Pape and mostly Russian cast from 2010

Sat 19 Verdi Nabucco from the Met conductor Levine with Domingo and others from 2017

Mon 21 Mozart Magic Flute conductor Levine with Ying Huang, Erika Miklosa and Rene Pape from 2006

 

Please check the link for start times. All listed times are New York time.

 

There are also some interesting concerts including

Sat 19

The Berlin Philharmoniker conductor Ivan Fischer, soloist Seong-Jin Cho performing Glinka Overture Russian and Ludmilla, Liszt Second Concerto, Dvorak Symphony No. 8 requiring a fee of €9.90

The London Symphony with Simon Rattle and Kristian Zimerman performing Beethoven Piano Concerto No. 5  requiring a fee of US$13

 

https://www.musicalamerica.com/news/newsstory.cfm?archived=0&storyid=46631&categoryid=1

 

You never answered my question of what makes these streamings different from videos one can watch on YouTube.  Is there a reason I should pay 13 dollars to see the streaming of Beethoven's 5th concerto played by Zimerman, instead of watching the big collection of YouTube videos of this concert played by the best pianists, including Zimerman too?

[InBangkok]

I appreciate the basic sentiment of the first of your posts. I have given it some thought. Unfortunately I actually object quite sincerely to the detail of what you have written.

 

First, neither of us is a child. I do not obey arbitrary rules. Life is too important to be bothered with them. I obey regulations re my employment, re society in general and of a Board like BW. This is neither my Board nor yours. It is therefore a privilege to have access to it and contribute to it. I will not, with respect, obey rules set by another member other than the owner and moderators.

 

Second, music is an important part of both our lives. For me I cannot imagine life without music - live music. As @heman has pointed out, each live performance opens up a new dimension. Each conductor, each orchestra, each soloist brings something new to a work. No performance can ever be exactly the same as the next. It is a communal art form, to be enjoyed with others even if I am in the venue on my own as is quite often the case. Yes, with my bf there is an added element of excitement, the more so as he is usually learning something new and through my enjoyment finds his own enjoyment is heightened. Unfortunately he cannot always be free.

 

Third, as is obvious, my mind just cannot imagine spending days sitting on my own watching sterile two dimensional performances of opera on a screen listening with ear buds (although I swear by my Sennheiser buds when on planes) - no matter how good the quality of the equipment.  And I don't mean 3D would help. It is just totally alien to my nature. I don't want to sit in a relaxing armchair or whatever in a room that I spend much of my life in. I want the full opera experience from the anticipation in passing through the front entrance, to the excitement as it builds seeing the house fill up, hearing the orchestra tuning up, the theatre going dark, the conductor taking his bow and the excitement of what is to follow. What I am about to see may not be what i anticipated but there will always be so much to enjoy and later to savour. Yes, it can be expensive when I have to travel to performances. But that makes me happy and I save up for the trips in other ways.

 

Unfortunately there is too much about this sterile attitude to music and not attending concerts and opera that I simply cannot understand. You hardly ever even bother to attend performances in your home city in the last couple of decades, it seems (and do correct me if that is incorrect). The Houston Grand Opera has a very good reputation. Had the 2020/21 season gone ahead, you could have attended performances of such masterpieces as Carmen, Werther, Mozart's The Impresario, Parsifal, Cenerentola and Hansel and Gretel. That is a fabulous repertoire even if not especially adventurous. If Houston was performing those works here, I would be at every one.  

 

As for concerts the Houston Symphony has an equally good reputation. Its Music Director is one of the finest of today's younger conductors, yet he has still conducted the Vienna Philharmonic, the Lucerne Festival Orchestra, the Concertgebouw, the Staatskapelle Dresden and a host of other top world orchestras. He also has a wealth of highly praised recordings. I simply cannot comprehend how anyone with a strong interest in music would not be attending at least several Houston Orchestra concerts each season - unless there were specific financial reasons. 

 

So I am sorry. The terms of your 'pact' are unacceptable. And some of what you say in the next post is also unacceptable to me. But I will leave it at that. Let's just try and agree that this nice thread is specifically about opera. I will try not to deviate from the subject.

[Steve5380]

1 hour ago, InBangkok said:

I appreciate the basic sentiment of the first of your posts. I have given it some thought. Unfortunately I actually object quite sincerely to the detail of what you have written.

 

So I am sorry. The terms of your 'pact' are unacceptable. And some of what you say in the next post is also unacceptable to me. But I will leave it at that. Let's just try and agree that this nice thread is specifically about opera. I will try not to deviate from the subject.

 

Okay... it is your right to disagree.    At least, can we agree to not be disrespectful putting down each other with "Wrong", "false", and other statements like these?

 

Can I still expect that you will answer my question about the differences between the new streamed performances and the videos in YouTube?

[Steve5380]

11 hours ago, heman said:

I  agree with what Singalion's  comment. Live performances keep music world alive. Too much of canned music can be sterile if one repeatedly listen to it.  As for me watching live performances of either  concert or opera opens a new dimension each time i witness it. It has nothing to do with elitism. I am happy in our small island state most concerts, ballet or operas are usually well attended and tickets are reasonably priced.

 

Are movies sterile too?  What about the movie fans who know every detail about a century worth of movies?  I have a collection of over 500 movies on DVD.  Every once in a while I watch one or two,  and they are not sterile.  One of these movies is a favorite, Amadeus.  I must have watched it a hundred times. It's fresh every time.

 

But if the thing is variety, something so important for InBangkok,  YouTube has such a variety that it may take several life cycles to go through all of that.

 

And what about technology?  Having a fiber optic Internet link with data rates up to 1 gigabyte per second,  what can keep us from receiving the best video streamed to our homes?   NETFLIX has over 190 million subscribers world wide. Imagine the billions of movies watched world wide through the internet!  And one of the latest:  HBO MAX is planning to stream new movies practically at the same time they appear in movie theaters.  Yet movie theaters (after the pandemic) will stay still alive, ready to cater to the lovers of big auditoriums and their gaudiness, taking in the contact with the public, the smell of popcorn, the search for a good seat not behind the lady with the big hat, etc.  all things that "keep movies alive", or so they say.

.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Steve5380

[Steve5380]

3 hours ago, InBangkok said:

 

I want the full opera experience from the anticipation in passing through the front entrance, to the excitement as it builds seeing the house fill up, hearing the orchestra tuning up, the theatre going dark, the conductor taking his bow and the excitement of what is to follow. What I am about to see may not be what i anticipated but there will always be so much to enjoy and later to savour. Yes, it can be expensive when I have to travel to performances. But that makes me happy and I save up for the trips in other ways.

 

Unfortunately there is too much about this sterile attitude to music and not attending concerts and opera that I simply cannot understand. You hardly ever even bother to attend performances in your home city in the last couple of decades, it seems (and do correct me if that is incorrect). The Houston Grand Opera has a very good reputation. Had the 2020/21 season gone ahead, you could have attended performances of such masterpieces as Carmen, Werther, Mozart's The Impresario, Parsifal, Cenerentola and Hansel and Gretel. That is a fabulous repertoire even if not especially adventurous. If Houston was performing those works here, I would be at every one.  

 

As for concerts the Houston Symphony has an equally good reputation. Its Music Director is one of the finest of today's younger conductors, yet he has still conducted the Vienna Philharmonic, the Lucerne Festival Orchestra, the Concertgebouw, the Staatskapelle Dresden and a host of other top world orchestras. He also has a wealth of highly praised recordings. I simply cannot comprehend how anyone with a strong interest in music would not be attending at least several Houston Orchestra concerts each season - unless there were specific financial reasons. 

 

 

Well, you can always come to Houston. It offers much, and has low cost of living.

 

I HAVE HAD all the experience passing through the entrance of an opera house, and all what follows.  I had the experience of attending the RODEO , the Offshore Technology Conference,  the Cirque du Soleil, all in Houston and several times. (I don't have the experience of a rock concert, a Super Bowl game, a basketball final).   I am happy to have had such experiences, but I don't need TO FEED on them.  However, I need TO FEED on music, and I do it every day,  regardless of pandemic.  I might plan to attend live concerts, operas after the pandemic, but only if I feel like,  not because I should do it.

 

If you cannot comprehend my approach to music,  I suspect that not only this but much else you have still to learn to comprehend.  Conversely,  I comprehend perfectly well your passion for live performances.  I also like what you like in them,  but the difference is that I do it IN MODERATION. I also like the high cuisine of good French restaurants,  but I don't remember when was the last time I ate in one of them.  Lentils with vegetables, plus some other healthy stuff, is what I feed on every day.   Same with movies. I enjoyed so much going with my bf to a nearby big cinema complex with many screens, at walking distance from our home.  I haven't gone back to a movie theater since he is gone, and I don't miss them.

.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Steve5380

[InBangkok]

6 hours ago, Steve5380 said:

 

Okay... it is your right to disagree.    At least, can we agree to not be disrespectful putting down each other with "Wrong", "false", and other statements like these?

 

Can I still expect that you will answer my question about the differences between the new streamed performances and the videos in YouTube?

Yes to the first point. As to the second, I will respond when you respond to my earlier question about which opera you saw in the Sydney Opera House which made you issue the statement -

 

On 12/10/2020 at 2:31 AM, Steve5380 said:

I don't think that Opera has been damaged one bit by the inadequacy of the Sidney Opera House interior. I visited Sydney exactly a decade ago, and I enjoyed very much this beautiful building and its surroundings.  

The opera theatre in that iconic building in Sydney (we definitely agree on that) is lousy for opera. Audiences say, that, critics say that, singers say that, orchestral musicians say that. Having seen one opera, I agree! I don't really understand the response because it seems as though you are actually suggesting that perhaps Sydney itself is not damaged by the inadequacy. There I aiso agree. Pre covid19, visitors flocked to Sydney with the Opera House building top of the 'must see' places. Not 'must attend opera', though. Many young Japanese and Chinese now use the front steps for their wedding photos.