Condom...

[MELMOTH]

Is the conductor REALLY indispensable ?....
It's like with the condom...Much better without...Safer with...

[Andrew Clarke]

Post by MELMOTH
Is the conductor REALLY indispensable ?....
It's like with the condom...Much better without...Safer with...

As mentioned in another discussion, the past few decades have seen new conductors with very strong views on how music could be performed, forming their own orchestras. Some are HIP some are square. I suspect that the need to rethink how a score is to be played is stronger in the former case. It's the personal vision of these people that has led to these orchestras being created in the first place.

You could, of course, lead from the first violin desk. But only if the orchestra is small enough.

Andrew Clarke
Canberra
licence es lettres francaises

[[e-mail]]

Post by MELMOTH
Is the conductor REALLY indispensable ?....
It's like with the condom...Much better without...Safer with...

No. A conductor is *essential* in all large orchestral works. Any large work requiring many musicians, needs the authority of a singular vision.

We may hate some, tolerate some, or worship the few, but conductors are there for a good reason.

Ray Hall, Taree

[Herman]

In most cases it's not about orchestral "safety". Most orchestras have reached a level of technical and musical self-reliance totally different from the ragtag orchestras of yore. They can play most repertoire autonomously, keeping an eye on the concert master.

The conductor is about the artistic vision emanating from one point. That vision may not always be to your liking, but there are many different conductors. It's also the reason why practically no orchestra is "under the baton" of just one conductor.