I just had a similar thing happen last month... I will have to withhold some names as the players are very very well known.

I had a significant on-location event scheduled for months when I got a call to capture a second event for the local classical station - I had to rent equipment due to the extensive first site's needs. I got the crew set and after $2000 worth of expenses the 'second' ensemble decided if they were going to be recorded they wanted more money for their performance. So... even though it cost them nothing and they'd receive the promotion from the on-air re-broadcast - they increased their stipend. My relationship with the station folk is such that I followed their lead and all is well among all of us locals and we chose not to capture the show - unfortunately that cost me $2000.

My summary is - sometimes things don't work out - I really am in this for the long haul and don't mind if I do or don't do the capture. That has seemed to keep me in good standing with the folks here and at the same time keeps me sane.

In your case - it is a shame to miss the Bach Passion - I've done it three times and still find it a great capture.

As Ringo would say.... Peace and Love, Peace and Love!

-D

How did you manage to spend $2,000 on hire for a live broadcast recording. For that money you could hire a top truck with experienced crew and more mic's than you could possibly use. I wouldn't commit to any hire without a clear booking where the client knew what cost they were inccuring and I had at least an email confirming me for the date.

The music business is a difficult one to make a living in, without giving away money.

Regards to all

Roland

No big deal. Just forget about it. It happens all the time.

If the string players reject the concert taping, that's the way it goes. They probably want extra money to allow a tape recording to be made. Routine stuff--just get used to it.

It is for me, moneywise. I'm not going to starve (so no need for donations... heh), but it does burn a hole into my pocket. I also stronly dislike being suspected/accused of either being unable to make a good live recording or to plan illegal CD sales, with no chance of defending myself.

They did not say so. There was simply no way to negotiate with them at all.
No way. Will definitely have a word with the orchestra's manager (or whoever decided that) when the concert is over.

Hello D Fu,

Sorry to hear about your situation. It is a common problem.

What I was suggesting happened was that when the choir management found out that the orchestra wanted extra money if a recording was to be made, they declined to pay the extra money and dumped out the recording. That is no reflection on you.

The cheapness of some arts organizations is a perennial problem and, if you mine that field of "not-for-profit" or "government subsidized" work, be prepared for these cancellations. These groups do not require that they are recorded. For them it is only a vanity project.

By all means ask the management exactly what happened and let them know that you had done a lot of planning on their behalf.

We always get a payment of 1/2 of the job in advance and if something like this happened, we advise the client that we will keep their deposit as a cancellation fee.

That's not what happened. The choir isn't involved. They will actually be taken by surprise when they find out there will be no recording. I was half hoping that they'd have a word with the orchestra during today's rehearsals to make this possible at the last moment, but no...

What happened was that the conductor obviously did not mention the intended recording to them at an early stage, because they had had no objection to a previous one (made by some dork who never even delivered it to the choir...).

When he did talk about it a few days before the show, the said they didn't want it (I mentioned some of the rather obscure reasons that seemed to conceal something else) and wouldn't talk to me, which is why I feel I'm being treated like a potential criminal.

It's different here. The choir wanted the recording. It's a personal document/keepsake for the choir members, nothing else. Nothing commercial.

It's actually professional orchestras like this that make most of their money on directly or indirectly subsidized musical events (unless they also participate in musical mega-scams of the Lotti/Rieu variety ). They are being paid from the choir's annual budget (which is funded by the church, with taxpayers' money) plus maybe some more local public funding or even private sponsorship, depending on the event. But essentially none of the gigs they play as part of classical/church music concerts like this will be anywhere near profitable for the organizer (i.e. the choir and its parish). It certainly is profitable for the orchestra, but their income would usually be a lot more than what ticket sales could justify. I've talked to a conductor who performed Britten's War Requiem to a packed house and still there was no profit for the parish at all, it was all expenses (soloists, orchestra, rehearsal times, etc..).

Nothing wrong with that in principle, and I'm not against public funding for music and art, and certainly not against musicians being paid well. What gets me is that they knowingly prevent someone from generating some income from this recording, when it's not even their event. They are just part of it, no one attends the concert only because of them, and I wasn't interested in recording this particular orchestra, either. They are just grossly overestimating their own importance IMHO... Of course I wouldn't expect to go and record an orchestra concert of theirs and sell it. I just wanted to do the job I had been asked to do by the choir...


Daniel

I think you are being too hard on the orchestra here. They ARE the full-timers here, right? This is their bread and butter. I am sure they do their own recording of 'whatever' they want, and sell them, and make money. They are doing this for the money.

The choir is a project type set up, so this is all (or mostly) amateur, right? They are doing this for the love of it.

IMHO it is not about the orchestra being over important.

It is about the organization of the event being bad, both in terms of a recording clause not being agreed with the orchestra, and no contract either with yourself. There is NO other blame other than that IMHO.

Next time, get a signed contract, and maybe a deposit as mentioned. You will find the straighter YOU can keep your side, the straighter everyone else will be and they will respect you for it. maybe if you had insisted on a contract and a deposit in the first place, then the gig would still be going ahead because you woke up whoever is paying for the gig to be wondering if they might want to ask the orchestra if it's OK to record them

You're right this is a difficult business to make a living in. One way that I do is that I realize it is a business and sometimes I have to make an investment in order to stay in business. The circumstances of the investment dealt with very very tight timings and human resource scheduling that we were unable to get a response from the ensemble who were en-tour and the European managment were 1/2 day out-of-phase with us in communication. So you see, if you are really in business then it is easy to make an investment that doesn't always pan out.

BTW it was an on-location for later broadcast, not live.

-D

Exactly.

Sure. So am I. The orchestra is getting paid, and handsomely, I'm sure. The recording does not take away any of that. Why should they stop someone from having a certain share, when it's not their event? They are "only" an accompanying orchestra here. The money I would have made with this has nothing to do with the fact that it's this particular orchestra.

What I find extremely arrogant is that they wouldn't be talked to. Without knowing the least bit of hoe and how well I record, they assuemed I would be unable to "balance" things after the recording. And then there was the suspicion/allegation of illegal sales I could be planning. No way to convince them of the opposite. Prejudgement and execution in one go, no trial...
Had they wanted some extra money for the recording, I might have invested it... They didn't ask.

How is that relevant? Do they not have a right to have a document of something they've rehearsed for months? And can they not hire someone to do this well?

No doubt. I still think the orchestra is being unfair. There was still time to negotiate, but not the will. That's why I feel they were overplaying their role in this event.

Daniel

So? The orchestra gets paid by the parish/choir to provide a service to the parish/choir. The choir is the master, not the orchestra. Isn't there a saying about biting the hand that feeds you... Next year there will be another set of strings for that choirs easter project.

L

Indeed. This requires this shenannigan to be known by all involved parties.
IMO it is not a good idea to present this, with an air of spitefulness. Which is the card the orchestra is going to play towards you if you take this further.
You could also let it go. It reads like it's negative vibes, this orchestra, and you didn't choose them.

Sorry for my late reaction, but I would really like to know what hypocrisy and lies are hidden in André Rieu's music? I come from a rock and roll background and there I have heard some music that fits your discription a lot better, even from bands or artists whose integrity is regarded highly.

Maybe I wouldn't listen to Rieu at home but I see nothing moraly wrong with it either. The music is performed quite well and it makes people feel good.

Can explain your gripes? It's just so easy to make acusations like you do. Are you even a musician yourself? Do you produce better music? Or are you just moraly superior to others?

Had to get that of of my chest, hope your conflict with the orchestra works out.


Coen Thomas

Ok, as a former orchestral flying monkey, and current recordist, I've been on both sides of this fence.

My current feeling about this sort of thing is that the art form, at least in the states, has been in a steady state of decline for many years, because of alternative forms of entertainment including radio, internet, and of course, porno.

Musicians can either make sacrifices for the art to help it to survive, or stand their ground for economic security, while at the same time killing their own art form.

Oh yeah it also doesn't help the survival of the orchestral medium when idiot conductors program Bartok when the blue hairs just want to hear Eine Kliene YET AGAIN.

Jason

Exactly. There is IMO a way out though.
I'd like to throw some ideas around:

-Education of an audience is also a job of the programmer. This should start at a young age. (television is not enough IMO, because it doesn't provide hands-on experience, and quality is crap. kids can hear quality!)
-There is a gap between "high" and "low" culture, but it is often not in the content of the performance itself. More in the "culture" and attitude surrounding it.
-The sitting down in a row of chairs, and listening quietly is essential for most performances to succeed, but this will not get a younger generation inside if you only program that. Exceptions are open air concerts in parks, etc. Refreshing!
-Programmers are IME generally a bunch of self-centered ******s. Of course there are exceptions, that are not self-centered.
-Adapting to a different format often was unsuccessful. (=subjective critism) I cringe when I hear Candy Dulfer (who can play a jazz tune or two, and has worked with ppl. like prince) do something over a hardhouse beat for crissake. More often than not those coming from a classical-serious music-jazz background don't know deephouse from hardstyle, lump everything together under the denominator "dance", with disastrous results. Another unrelated example is André Rieu. Bashing is easy. I've done it too sometimes, because I can't stand it. (technical part is perfect btw.) But again, IMO that is purely subjective, and should not be confused for the only way towards more exposure (much needed for survival).
-"Serious music" carved out a little niche for itself. And for different reasons does not want to come out.

I agree, the gap between "low"and "high culture" is mainly formed by people's need to belong to a group and be "different together". I don't think that's all bad, I think that keeping a narrow view might help one to focus. I have a very broad musical taste and blending these tastes was never succesfull and I felt like I had "no taste". Sometimes it works but most of the time it doesn't, so I think some form purity in music is OK. Just respect other peolpe's tastes as well.

I agree again, I've noticed that when drums or bassguitar were added to the orchestra, not a good idea because they don't know how to apply it exactly and it becomes a pastiche.
I might have been guilty of bashing "light"-classical music as well, until I had to listen to it and found out that it really wasn't as bad as it looks. The music itself is not watered down, the reportoire and the presentation is adapted to a wider audience, wich, for some, places it in the "low culture".

"Serious music" never made any money, Beethoven, Bach, Mozart etc. were "sponsered" by the Church, Kings etc. because their music was seen as prestigious or uplifting.
Today we have the goverment and big companies sponsoring "serious music". Maybe, in these times where democracy is slowly spreading into the artworld, it's not a bad idea for "serious musicians" to reach out to a bigger audience instead of dfegad on them, however I would not like to suggest to make any compromises to the music itself. If one adapts to the short attentionspan of the common tv-audience the music will indeed be watered down. There will always be a new audience for "serious music". Someone who tries to popularize the lighter side of it will not change that and can perhaps even be benificial.

Coen Thomas

But that's what they do... Most of these "serious" musicians who are into this kind of pseudo-classical BS for the attention-span challenged will in fact ridicule or despise their own audiences. They know what they are doing is worthless junk, but as long as it pays for a new BMW or whatever, why not keep doing it and take advantage of / cash in on those who are stupid enough to buy it...? This is why I perceive it as a scam... It's that "If I don't do it, someone else is going to do it instead" mentality. You can't tell me that any of Rieu's musicians or even he himself really think they are doing something of any cultural value...

I do not think there is a path that leads from Rieu to Rihm or even Rachmaninoff...

Dude you should just let this go. The orchestra has the right to disallow a recording even for archival purposes. When booking this gig the choir should have without question stipulated this in the contract..

It does make a difference that the orchestra are professional. They belong to a union which prevents them from exploited. Entrusting unfamiliar people with a high-quality recording of your artistry is risky proposition! Think about it. It needs to be well-planned and have a thorough contract.

Union rules are this way for a reason, and the world is a better place for it. I think you have basically no point here, other than blaming the choir for not having their shit together.

And we are very much in agreement on this

Granted.
I still consider it inappropriate to refuse to even talk about it and make silly allegations without giving me the chance to set them right. Most importantly though, it was simply not their show... And this orchestra isn't even all that well known (I had never heard of them before, this isn't exactly The English Concert or something even anywhere near that league). The potential market value of a bootleg would not gain from their name on it...
And right or wrong, if you're a (hired) guest at someone's performance, it is not nice to behave like this and it is not nice to just kick other hired guests (that's me) out...

Yes, I know, I've said that all before... I'll leave it now.

Daniel

I would agree with both these points. You seem to have been unfairly "branded" by the orchestra as someone who might cause them trouble. Perhaps you just look like a troublemaker? heh

Regardless of that, I wholeheartedly agree with the last point. It wasn't their gig to make the call - a compromise or at least a sit down to discuss their issues would have been the right thing to do.

Talking about arrogant, a number of years back I was one of the 26.000 visitors of an André Rieu concert at Gelredome Arnhem.

There was a huge mixing desk with a couple of engineers, yawning because of a lack of sleep.

You know this song with the citar as a solo instrument, can't remember the title.
There was no citar hearable, we could hear an engineer searching for the right channel, by pushing up faders until it went into feedback, but he couldn't find it before the song was near it's end.

The overall sound was one of the worst orchestral sounds I've ever been hearing and André's voice sounded like a dwarf.

Now that was arrogant in my book, treating 26.000 people like this, but I trust that was before your time.

Sorry, but this really happened.

Since then, his sound engineers just press play / stop...

Phew, I'm happy I only do Studiowork, you can slag me for that.

However, Rieu never played a full concert at the Gelredome, only one song for a show called ""de postcode loterij", and there wasn't citar.
Maybe you're referring to a different venue?

I didn't say that "serious" musicians should take the path of Rieu, or even compromise anything about their music. I just think that they should make their "seriousness" a little easier available to the public (who after all, payed for it). When I studied electronic composition I noticed that some composers where really satisfied when the public didn't understand what they've done. Which is cool, just don't expect the public's money for it.

I can tell from my own expirience that the musicians you are talking about don't ridicule their audiences (nor do they drive BMW's).
Every musician I ever encountered who was succesfull in his field really believed in the music he/she made and enjoyed it themselves. You cannot fake music (with the possible exception of some kinds of boybands, but probably even they...). Give the audience some credit, people will see right through someone who's faking it. In order to understand what your audience wants, you have to have the same taste as them. Because it might not be same taste as yours, don't think they're faking it. And don't think your taste in music is superior. "People stupid enough to buy it", that's an insult to those people.

I fully agree. I never heard Rieu claiming to do something of cultural value.

As far as I understand him he considders himselfto be an entertainer, which he does very well.

Dont get me wrong :I m absolutely no fan of Rieu but I dont understand why some people turn into the cultural police as soon as classical instruments are involved.

Cultural value...........djeez.....who is doing something of cultural value these days and can make a living.......Heino?Zillertaler?Timberlake?Metallica?Ramstein?Madonna?Take that?Sasha?Maffay?
d Fu:
Would be interesting to hear what you considder to be of cultural value, and why....

www.nickoosterhuis.com

i think we get on slippy ground when talking about topics around "cultural value" because i think there is nothing objective GOOD or BAD.
i find it interesting to ask what would the artist do when there would be NO money.
what is the intent of the music/ art.
and i think you normally hear it when money generating is the only purpose of the music.

He sure did an evening concert with in between the songs something with postcodeloterij shit, but he sure played a number of songs and the citar thing (the third man) was one of them. We even got a CD of that evening in which the audience got a record as the biggest choir ever, which got in the Guinness Book of Records (october 11 1998). I remember people dancing in the side paths.

As for Adre Rieu: he re-invented the wheel and got millionaire because of that, which is extremely clever of the guy.

Besides that, he makes some beautiful music and far from the boring way it was done by tradition.

Besides that 2: It's all a matter of taste and one can't argue taste, period.

I think you will find it's a Zither. A citar (Spelt Sitar) is an Indian stringed instrument with drone strings.

Regards

Roland