Author: hmather@btopenworld.com

Many of us enjoy listening to the brilliant young musicians who come from outside the EU to study at one of the London conservatoires. I have only recently started to understand the difficulties they face in surviving here, and being allowed to remain in the UK. I thought it might be interesting to describe the circumstances of one such musician. At his request, I am keeping his identity secret, but all the details below are accurate.

He is an exceptional young pianist, in his mid-20’s who has a star-studded CV. He was born in the former Soviet Union, showed exceptional promise from an early age, trained with distinction at the Moscow Conservatory and won a scholarship to study at the Royal College of Music. He has won first prize in two important international competitions as well as several awards in other competitions. He is a charming young man who, to coin a phrase, plays like a god ! Yet he is in an impossible situation. Although his scholarship covers his tuition fees at the RCM, it doesn’t cover his living expenses, which need to be obtained from elsewhere. He is not allowed to teach piano or work in any other capacity. The immigration authorities require him to show that he has £11,000 in his bank account for a period of a month, in October, to prove that he can sustain himself, before they will give him a student visa to remain in the UK. He has won several awards of a few hundred pounds from various worthy funding bodies who support exceptional young musicians, but is still about £5000 short of the target, and is desperate to raise the funds to allow him to stay in the UK and to progress his career as a pianist. Various generous individuals have already contributed support, but it is insufficient. The RCM (and Professor Vanessa Latarche in particular) have been immensely supportive to this student, but there is little more they can do.

I am writing this post for two reasons. Firstly, there may be some readers who would like to help this wonderful young musician so that he can complete his training. I have heard this pianist give outstanding recitals and I know enough about piano-playing to declare that he has exceptional talent. He is also a thoroughly charming person, and I cannot think of a more worthy recipient of support. If anyone would like to contribute to help him stay in the UK, please send me an email at hmather@btopenworld.com and I will put you in touch with him directly. I hope this might stir some generous souls to contribute. Why not help this very good cause ? Any support would be treated in strictest confidence, and would be gratefully received.

Secondly, I am ashamed of our country’s attitude to outstanding young musicians. This blog steers well clear of political comment, particularly in the current climate, but when there are so many untraceable illegal migrants in the UK, it seems perverse to concentrate so hard on excluding supremely talented young musicians from the UK. This is a frequent problem for the many other brilliant musicians who want to remain here. London is still the music capital of the world, and so many of the world’s elite musicians live here. In terms of pianists, for example, this includes Brendel, Perahia, Uchida and Schiff, who were all born abroad and have contributed enormously to our cultural life. So why do we make it so difficult for their successors to settle here ?

Ask any opera buff whether there is a fully-staged production of Wagner’s Ring Cycle in London this year, and they will confidently tell you that there isn’t one.  They will be wrong. You only need to travel to North Ealing to experience the whole great cycle, on four consecutive evenings – August 18th to 21st – with world-class singers and a peerless orchestra, in a lavish and realistic production.   St Barnabas Church PCC is indeed presenting the complete cycle from August 18th to 21st !   So if you need your annual ‘fix’ of a fully-staged Ring, there is no need to travel to Bayreuth or Seattle – come to Ealing instead.

Of course, we will be watching a fabulous recording of the cycle, emanating from the Met, New York, from about 1990, in high quality sound and vision.   Full practical details are on www.barnabites.org/wagner-ring-cycle/ .    There is no need to book tickets, each opera will cost £10, and delicious food will be provided in the intervals.  In fact, the church has been showing operas now for 5 years, with about 55 performances covering most of the core opera repertoire.   The operas have given huge pleasure to many local people, particularly the elderly who would be unlikely to travel to Covent Garden, the Coliseum or Glyndebourne, and have raised funds for the church.  The format really does work supremely well in practice.

I am a huge fan of ‘canned opera’.   The advantages over the ‘live’ experience are self-evident and too numerous to list, but include better singing, better vision, (usually) better sound, more ease in reading surtitles and no risk of singers cancelling because of a sore throat !  These are discussed in detail in a previous blog post http://www.hughmather.uk/wordpress/the-advantages-of-home-opera/ .   I accept that there can be an extra ‘frisson’ of excitement with a live performance, but this usually turns into a massive frisson of irritation with modern productions.    Watching ‘canned opera’ at home on one’s own can be a solitary and lonely experience, whereas being part of an audience experiencing an opera together, as at St Barnabas, is enormously enjoyable.

All opera houses regard staging the Ring as their ultimate challenge –so St Barnabas PCC thought that it would take up this challenge as well !  It is a gamble, since many opera-lovers find Wagner very difficult, as do a surprising number of musicians, so we may struggle to find an audience.  I am always amazed that so few young instrumentalists, for example, seem to know any opera in general, and Wagner in particular.   And various friends who are superb musicians, particular (it seems) those with a choral background, seem allergic to what they regard as ‘overblown’, ‘emotionally incontinent’ music !   Perhaps it depends on one’s psychological make-up.   I think the excessive vibrato of many Wagner singers is a potent factor in their distaste – this is indeed a problem and needs its own blog post.   And it takes a certain amount of work to absorb the leitmotifs and the convoluted story of the cycle.   I was given the Solti set of LPs as a Christmas present by my wife around 1980, and spent whole weekends listening the music while following the turgid libretto, line by line.  Now it’s much easier to absorb the operas, watching them on DVDs instead.   Robin Duval is giving an illustrated lecture on the Ring Cycle on the preceding Sunday evening at 7 pm to help people who are new to the Ring.   He is considerable expert on Wagner, and this should be an excellent introduction.   More details again are on www.barnabites.org/wagner-ring-cycle/ .

The rewards are indeed great.  One can’t be neutral about Wagner – either it leaves you cold, or it completely knocks you over !  Your first Wagner ‘trip’ – particularly Tristan, Walküre or Götterdämmerung – can be a ‘rite-of-passage’ experience – a veritable life-event.     The cumulative emotional impact can be overwhelming.  It really does, like Heineken, reach parts which other (composers) don’t reach, although I don’t think I should be too specific as to what they might be.  One is left in awe of the genius of Wagner himself – regardless of his considerable personal failings.

So come along and enjoy Wagner’s Ring Cycle in August, whether you know the cycle intimately or not.  I am hoping that at least some people might have their ‘rite-of-passage’ experience in St Barnabas Hall in mid-August !   If you are already a Wagner fan, do come along – and please tell your friends.  It will be a mind-blowing experience, and certainly the cheapest Ring Cycle you will ever experience.  Come and be part of this special occasion.

Over the past decade, at least 318 pianists, listed here, have played in my 1000 concerts at St Mary’s Perivale and St Barnabas Ealing.   Some are no longer around, and many play chamber music or accompany singers, rather than give solo recitals, but there are at least 70-100 pianists who could, and would, present an excellent solo piano recital date at one of my venues.  Although I run about 100 concerts a year, my current concert series aim to provide a balanced programme of solo piano, duos, piano trios and larger ensembles, wind music and vocal items.   This variety is essential for a general audience, and piano recitals are perhaps less popular than, say, piano trios.   So in practice I can only provide recital opportunities for about 20-25 pianists per year.  This is clearly insufficient.  Furthermore, some of our pianist have given regular recitals for several years, and built up a considerable local following, including Viv McLean, Ashley Fripp, Jayson Gillham, Mengyang Pan and Mishka Rushdie Momen, and are invited back.  Thus it is currently difficult to give recital opportunities to more than a handful of ‘new’ pianists each year.  Yet the number of outstanding young pianists based in London continues to enlarge inexorably, with exciting new ‘kids on the block’.  These include the recent influx of outstanding pianists from the former Soviet Union, who have studied in Moscow and now are studying in London, and many from other parts of the world, although disappointingly few are from the UK.   I receive at least 100 emails per year from ‘new’ pianists seeking a recital.   All need, and deserve, regular performing opportunities, as a crucial part of their development as pianists.  Regardless of talent, there is no substitute for wide concert experience, with different audiences, pianos and concert conditions.  So this large pool of pianists are all competing for the limited number of recital slots available in and around London.  From my personal experience, all are charming young people who are following a very difficult career path, and they deserve our help.

Geoff Cox, a close friend who is also interested in helping young pianists, has produced a fascinating and invaluable survey of London concert venues, which I can heartily recommend, particularly since he has put my two venues at the  top of his list !   On the face of it, there seems an abundance of recital opportunities.   In practice, there are problems with many of the venues.   Firstly, the standard of pianos is widely variable.  Many churches were typically bequeathed a grand piano many decades ago – usually around 1950 – which is now in a mediocre state, or worse.  Churches don’t usually have the funds to re-condition pianos, and a ‘beat-up’ old Bechstein will still be a ‘beat-up’ old Bechstein, even after restoration.  The piano may supposedly be tuned ‘regularly’ – which may mean twice a year !   In reality, remarkably few venues have pianos which are good enough to enable exceptional pianists to show their true worth.  So much of fine piano playing is about sound quality, yet this is frankly impossible to realize on the indifferent instruments available in many venues.   String players don’t know how lucky they are !  Secondly, the number of recital opportunities at each venue is usually small.  Many well-established music clubs have about 8-10 concerts per year, but may devote perhaps only 2 or 3 to solo piano recitals.   All the amateur orchestras similarly have perhaps 2 piano concertos per season, so concerto experience is very difficult to find.  Few concert series are devoted solely to piano recitals. Thirdly, the arrangements for paying musicians vary markedly, as noted in a previous post.   Some of the most prestigious lunchtime recital venues in Central London, and some well-known private venues, offer no payment whatsoever, despite having retiring collections or charging admission.   This is blatantly indefensible, whatever the charitable aims of the organisations hosting the events.  Fourthly, the size and nature of the audiences are very variable.  I have played lunchtime recitals in Central London churches with about 6 in the audience – mainly homeless people, asleep in the back row of the pews.  Conversely, some up-market music clubs have a reasonable audience, but may comprise people who have come along for social rather than musical reasons, waiting for the drink or drinks in the interval, and may greet an outstanding performance with heart-sinking indifference.  Enthusiastic and knowledgeable audiences are a rarity.

So, looking through Geoff Cox’s list, there are relatively few venues which offer the golden combination of a good piano, a reasonable and keen audience, some sort of payment and the potential to host a significant number of piano recitals.  Yet there are so many wonderful young pianists based in London seeking more performing experience and exposure.In response to this imbalance, we are setting up a new Tuesday Afternoon Piano Recital at St Mary’s Perivale in July.   These will be at 2 pm, last one hour, and will feature carefully selected, outstanding pianists, who will receive £100 cash and a high-quality recording.   The first four concerts are as follows : July 5th Dinara Klinton ;  July 12th Tamila Salimdjanova ; July 19th Ashley Fripp ; July 26th Mark Viner.   Full details of their recital programmes are here.   If it is a success, we will continue the series from September onwards, throughout the year.   Hopefully this will provide about 40 pianists with a recital opportunity every year.   However, we do need to attract a quorum – perhaps 20-30 – of piano enthusiasts who enjoy listening to exceptional piano-playing, in comfortable and beautiful surroundings, with other like-minded piano fans.   It is easy to travel out of London to St Mary’s Perivale on Western Avenue out of the rush-hour, and parking is free and readily available, and the concerts will be free admission with a retiring collection.   So please help spread the word about our new piano series !  We hope that it will provide a invaluable service to many of the best young pianists based around London.  We owe it to them to make this new initiative a success.

There is an old story which relates how a world-famous pianist gave a brilliant recital in a Yorkshire town, receiving a standing ovation, whereupon someone commented that ‘well he should be good – he’s never done a day’s work in his life ! ’   I have often thought about this anecdote over the years.  I was brought up in Lancashire, and the overwhelming impression in those days, was that being a musician was not ‘a proper job’, in the way that being a doctor, for example, was.  Looking back, this was a major factor in my decision to opt for medicine rather than music.   I was expected to do a ‘proper job’ – with a proper income – rather than dissipate my life away practising Beethoven sonatas and Hanon exercises in a basement.   Later in my career, when I was a Consultant Physician but also maintaining a musical career of sorts (www.hughmather.uk ), senior medical colleagues (particularly surgeons) would often ask me, in a patronising and sneering manner, ‘Are you still playing your piano ?’   They seemed to equate piano playing with fixing jigsaws – a childhood activity that one should grow out of, and certainly not an appropriate activity for a middle-aged professional man.  So I am personally aware of the ‘stigma’ of being a musician.

This jaundiced attitude to musicians evidently extends to the teaching sector as well.  The ‘music master’ is always a figure of fun and ridicule in operas such as Don Basilio in Rossini’s Barber of Seville and many more.  Mozart, in his Salzburg days, had to eat with the servants, as a mere musician.  A friend who is Director of Music in a well-known school tells me that his post has much less ‘gravitas’ than, say, the Head of Classics or Science.  Classical music is regarded as a dilettante pastime, which is OK for children to devote time to, if only to have something useful to put down on their University Entrance forms, but not a suitable occupation to take up professionally.  In other words, it’s not that important thing – a ‘proper job’.

In reality, being a classical musician is perhaps the toughest profession around, as any pianist will readily tell you, and certainly qualifies in my eyes as definitely a ‘proper job’.  I undertook a medical career through sheer cowardice, not having the guts to pursue my original intention to pursue a career as a pianist and organist.   Medicine was, and has been, an infinitely easier occupation, and it has been immensely rewarding – but it was nevertheless a ‘cop-out’ !  So I have immense respect for all the young people who are now trying to pursue a musical career, in a hugely competitive environment, against all the odds.   The fact that large sections of the public have such a low regard for their efforts, and such little understanding of their motivation, is simply another cross which they have to bear.   It is a further manifestation of the profound ignorance and lack of interest in classical music which is all around, and which we musicians sometimes forget.   A world-class pianist playing at St Mary’s Perivale will attract an audience of 50, compared with 50,000 for a world-class pop-star or footballer.  So hats off to all our musicians, who face all these vicissitudes and nevertheless strive towards the goal of improving their art, and in doing so, enrich all our lives !

Over 300 pianists have performed in my 1000 concerts over the past decade, as detailed here .   The standard is always very high indeed, but I am increasingly aware that the very best ones often don’t make as much impact on my audience as some others, who may not be quite as good.   The total impression of a performance is not simply dependent on the quality of their piano playing – other factors are involved.  One is the crucial art of platform manners and presentation – in other words, their non-verbal communication with the audience.

I used to hold the ‘purist’ view that all that mattered was the quality of the musical performance, and that an unattractive platform manner or irritating mannerisms were irrelevant.   After sitting through 1000 concerts, I now know that this is totally wrong.  A concert is an exercise in communication between the musician(s) and the audience, and this commences before a single note is played.  As in most aspects of life, first impressions are overwhelmingly important.   So pianists who bound on to the platform with a big smile and an apparently warm personality, and then play as if they are at ease with themselves and are enjoying the experience, will win an audience over, almost regardless of the quality of their performance.    We – the audience- will want to relate positively to them, and get on their side.   By comparison, a diffident approach to the audience and a ponderous shuffle to the keyboard can easily be interpreted as unsettling insecurity, and a cold, aloof approach might indeed indicate a cold and aloof personality.   Among great pianists, Gilels and Richter were notorious examples of the latter, and Ashkenazy and Rubinstein good examples of the former.    These extraneous factors do make a difference in a concert setting.

Many pianists have irritating mannerisms, often involving distorted facial expressions – pulling ‘funny faces’.  Although they may be difficult to eliminate, pianists need to be aware of their considerable importance.    ‘Making faces’ in the difficult passages suggests to the audience that the pianist is unduly stretched and invokes a sense of unease, regardless of the excellence of the performance.   It is very difficult to relax and enjoy a performance, if it appears to be an uphill struggle.    Alfred Brendel has referred to the use of a big mirror by the keyboard to monitor these bad habits, but now the simplest way is to use a video camera, to see how distracting they can be.  Youtube has many highly amusing examples of extreme mannerisms, with grotesque expressions from the likes of Lang Lang and Daniel Trifonov – see the final clips…

Facial expressions are also important with string players.    Some violinists play with a stern, unsmiling countenance, and some with an anxious expression, which again can seriously distract an audience, whereas others can look positively happy.  These factors really come into their own with cellists, where the mood conveyed by their body language is inevitably an integral part of the overall performance, simply because their faces are so much more exposed those of pianists and less inhibited by their instruments than violinists.  Some look seraphic, happy and/or transported to another world – as Jacqueline du Pre memorably did –  whereas other equally good cellists look strained, anxious and  suffering from severe constipation !   Some breathe heavily at the start of every phrase – another distracting mannerism.  These factors are more important than is generally recognised.

One way of establishing a good rapport with an audience, in a music club setting, is to introduce the music to the audience.  This is an art in itself, and is obviously difficult if the musician’s English is limited, but can have a marked impact.   A warm bond of communication can be established, and this will persist into the performance.  Conservatories should help musicians develop speaking skills, as well as playing skills, for this purpose, and teach them how to project their voice in a similar way to the projection of their instrument.

In conclusion, musicians should focus attention on their platform manners and appearance, as an integral part of their performance.  They should consider whether their current appearances help or hinder their communication with the audience.  The acid test is to take a video recording of their performance, turn the sound off, and watch it in total silence, to see how they look.  If they appear slightly bizarre, or even downright ridiculous, particularly with irritating mannerisms, they need to take steps to tackle the problems.  And they need to reach out with warmth to their public if they are to receive reciprocal goodwill in return.    I am convinced that these factors, which may seem rather peripheral, can play a significant part in the success or otherwise of a musician’s entire career.

There has been some discussion recently about the role and value of classical music criticism.  One salutary episode from a decade ago shed valuable light on this issue, yet seems to have been largely forgotten.   It is the Joyce Hatto affair.  Briefly, she was a British pianist, born in 1928, who had a modest career in the 1950’s and 1960’s, before developing cancer in 1970, whereupon she retired from the concert platform.  She married a record producer, and apparently spent the next 30 years producing a vast legacy of over 100 CDs, despite her chronic debilitating illness.   Her recordings were issued by her husband’s record label, Concert Artist, from about 2000 onwards, and earned consistently glowing reviews.   At her death in 2006, The Guardian obituary stated that she ‘was one of the greatest pianists Britain has ever produced…. Her legacy is a discography that in quantity, musical range and consistent quality has been equalled by few pianists in history…Not one of her recordings, covering a spectrum from  Scarlatti to Messiaen and with each composer stylistically defined, lacks some special insight even in the most familiar repertoire. Her musical imagination, unlike so many virtuosi, matched her awesome pianistic mechanism.’   These views were unanimously shared by the critical establishment, led by Gramophone magazine.  In fact her huge recorded legacy was ‘pirated’ from other recordings on obscure labels, made by over 100 different pianists, many of whom were virtually unknown !  It beggars belief that this ‘hotch-potch’ collection of recordings from so many pianists could be accepted by knowledgeable piano critics as the work of a single, ‘great’ pianist – but it really happened.    Further details on this remarkable story are on Wikipedia , and should be compulsory reading for all musicians and all critics.

This elaborate hoax is perhaps the most astonishing episode in recorded music history.   Most attention was focussed on the motivation of Joyce Hatto and her husband – the driving force – which seems to have been to ‘cock a snook’ at the musical establishment.  More importantly, it vividly demonstrated the fallacies and subjective nature of music criticism in general, and of piano performance criticism in particular. Some well-known critics had reviewed the original CDs in disparaging terms, and then enthused wildly about the same performances when apparently played by Joyce Hatto.  It seems that they were unduly swayed by the stirring story of an ill woman ‘triumphing against the odds’, and that this influenced their critical faculties.   It would be unfair to name the critics concerned, but it inevitably raises serious questions about their critical judgement.

We can all be guilty of similar lapses.  I occasionally listen to Classic FM, and enjoy trying to identify the performers, before they are announced afterwards.   Working with a ‘clean sheet’, without any preconceptions, I am often totally wrong, having either disliked a performance and then finding out that it is by a favourite musician, or vice versa.  It seems that most people have the same experience.   We all have our inbuilt powerful prejudices about the merits of particular musicians which are hard to dislodge, and which tend to outweigh any objectivity.   The Hatto affair shows this natural tendency to perfection.     In addition, all judgements on the merits of a piano performance depend on the particular tastes of the listener.  A good illustration was provided last year by the publication of the mark sheets of the distinguished judges at the International Chopin Piano Competition held in Warsaw.  It seems that some of them took an idiosyncratic dislike to individual performers which are difficult to explain. One can only speculate about the reasons, but clearly assessing piano performance is a very subjective art indeed.

So reviews need to be taken with a considerable pinch of salt, and liberal spoonfuls of humility and kindness.  I enjoy reading the reviews of critics, particularly in their assessment of recordings in magazines such as Gramophone, BBC Music Magazine and International Piano.  However, I am troubled by the tendency to cruelty and arrogance occasionally shown by some of them.   All reviewers should always imagine the impact that critical remarks might have on their subject.  As a courtesy to the musicians, they should only state in print what they would feel able to say directly to them.  Virtually all musicians feel vulnerable to critical reviews.   I used to socialize with a famous pianist, who ignored all the superlatives and praise heaped on his playing, and instead would focus solely on the ‘but’ or ‘although’ moment, detailing the few inevitable reservations.   Few musicians are immune from these anxieties, regardless of their eminence.   It is all too easy for critics, from the comfort of their seat in the stalls, to cast aspersions on the performances of musicians who have trained a lifetime, and been brave enough to perform in public, ‘putting their heads above the parapet’.   It all seems rather one-sided and unfair.  I sympathise with the violinist Patricia Kopatchinskaja who has decided to retaliate on her website .  As it happens, I am not an admirer of her playing, but I do respect her decision to answer her critics directly.

Critics also need a large dose of humility.   I suspect that some of them achieve their niche because of the quality of their writing rather than their erudition or sound opinions.   There is a constant impression of arrogance in many reviews.   A damning assessment of a performance might have a catastrophic impact on a young musician’s career, and I don’t see why they should be able to wield this power.   As is constantly alleged, many are ‘failed musicians’, but at least this group will be aware of the supreme difficulties of public performance at first hand.  Even worse are those who have never experienced these pressures first hand, and yet still feel able to pontificate in print.

So the musical world would benefit considerably from more kindness and humility from reviewers and critics.  And we all need to recall the Hatto scandal on a regular basis, to realize the inherently flimsy foundations of much of what passes for erudite critical writing.

This post follows on from my recent one on paying our musicians, which highlighted the uncomfortable fact that several well-known London venues – both public and private – expect musicians to perform for nothing – and yet either charge a fixed admission price or have a retiring collection, which the organisations keep for themselves.   I have just received a depressing account of an evening violin and piano recital, given in a Home Counties venue by two outstanding musicians of international calibre.  Although an admission fee was charged, the performers were paid precisely nothing.  They asked for their rail fares and they were grudgingly told that this would be transferred to them subsequently.  They found this to be very humiliating.

Even more depressing is their description of the concert itself.  The audience, numbering around 50, seemed totally passive and unenthusiastic.   The acoustics were very dry, and the piano was old, but what struck them most was the ‘very short clap we received’.  Afterwards, ‘nobody came to us after the concert.   We collected our stuff in our changing room and found the hall completely dark but the piano still opened with our scores on it’.   They were ‘quite shocked’ by the entire experience.

These two musicians have given the same recital at one of my venues to rapturous applause, and are very level-headed young people who are not prone to exaggeration.   Their treatment at this concert does seem rather shabby and deplorable.   I wonder whether this happens at other concert venues as well.  I suspect that it reflects the lowly status of musicians in the eyes of at least some sections of society.   It rather reminds me of Mozart having to eat with the servants before leaving Salzburg !   I would be very interested to hear ‘horror stories’ from other musicians who have suffered similar abusive experiences.   Let me know on hmather@btopenworld.com .

Many readers will recall the excellent feature entitled ‘Too many records’ which used to feature in the much-lamented ‘International Record Review’ magazine.  I suspect the title strikes a chord with many of us.  I suppose I have about 2000 CDs and 1500 LPs, as well as about 300 opera and music DVDs.   This is a far cry from when I was a boy in the 1950’s, when I had about 20 precious LPs.   In those days I spent whole weeks playing them over and over again, until I could almost sing my way through the entire works.   The performances have lived with me ever since – Menuhin playing the Beethoven and Mendelssohn concertos, Milstein playing the Tchaikovsky, Gilels the Emperor, Solomon playing Beethoven 3 etc.

Fast forward to the present, and I have this huge over-accumulation of ‘canned’ music.  The chance of any single CD being played is infinitesimally small, and each new CD reduces it even further.   My LPs actually sound slightly better than the CDs, if one can ignore the clicks and plops and the suspicion of a slight ‘wobble’ from a warped disc, whether real or imagined. However the physical side of getting the record out of its sleeve and putting it on is a deterrent, so I rarely bother.   And when I decide to play a CD, I go to the shelves and try to select one of the 2000.   That’s when the problems start !   There is simply too much choice.

My CDs are arranged alphabetically – so do I go for some Bach, from the top shelf ?   If so what ?  And if a particular piece, which of the versions do I choose ? It reminds me of a child in a massive toy or sweet shop – there are so many ‘goodies’ that the act of choosing just one of them induces a sort of paralysis.   Or how about some Beethoven ?   How about say one of the symphonies ?   But I have about 6 sets – which shall I choose ?   How about Karajan – or Klemperer – or Haitink – or Colin Davis – or Barenboim – or Walter ?    (Obviously I will give period instrument performances a miss !)     And then which symphony shall I choose ?  Or how about a Beethoven piano sonata ?  But which particular sonata and which of my current 10 sets (ie 320 sonatas), will I listen to ?  Somehow the choice seems inordinately difficult and paralyzing – because of the over-abundance on offer !   After 5 minutes of this agonizing and painful indecision, verging on mental torture, I usually give up completely and see what’s on Radio 3 or Classic FM – or the telly !

I don’t think I am alone in having these problems.   Some people transfer all their CDs to a hard disk, but that doesn’t solve the problem of having to choose something to play, and which performance.   Those who use Spotify or other streaming service will have a similar problem.   I heard a neat solution described on the radio years ago by the late Norman Del Mar, the well-known conductor.  He stated (as I recall) that he had numbered all his recordings, and had devised some method of producing a random order of numbers.  Then he forced himself to stick to this order of CDs (or LPs) to be played.   I think I will have to survive long enough to receive the Queen’s telegram to achieve this with my current collection !  An alternative, which most readers will choose, is to surrender oneself to the choices of radio presenters – and be either irritated or pleasantly surprised, either by the pieces or the performers they choose.  And so my CDs will remain unplayed, on the shelf.

So the chances of any CDs being actually played is very small.   Paradoxically this doesn’t stop me reading all the CD magazines (particularly Gramophone and BBC Music Magazine) from cover to cover, and salivating over the prospect of buying yet more CDs, particularly those tempting box sets of great performers from years ago, now available at bargain basement prices.   I realize that much of the pleasure derived from buying them is the guilty thrill of the purchase, rather than actually listening to the CDs, which isn’t really feasible with all those recordings.  I don’t usually tell my wife.  So it is a sort of shopping addiction, but I suppose as secret vices go, it’s less harmful than most !   The only problem is putting up more and more shelves to house them, plus the guilt in knowing that they will, in all probability, never be played.   I would be interested to see if others suffer from the same sort of paradoxical paralysis, induced by having – literally – ‘too many records’ and too much choice.

I have perfect pitch.  It isn’t as accurate as it was when I was younger, but it is still very important when listening to music.  The key of a piece is a vital part of its overall character – rather like the colours in a painting.   C major sounds totally different from B major, and A major from A flat major, and so on.   The slightly sharpened pitch used in Berlin recordings (A=444 rather than A=440) doesn’t disturb me – it’s close enough to be in the ‘right key’.   So all the major masterpieces I learned to love as a child are for ever associated with particular keys.   The Matthew Passion has to start in that plangent key of E minor and end in C minor, and the 5th Brandenburg has to be in that bright key of D major.   Perfect pitch does have some benefits.  It is very useful in singing at sight.  It is also useful in spotting music that has been transposed for a specific reason, such as lowering the pitch by a semitone at the end of Act 1 in Boheme or ‘Di Quella Pira’ in Trovatore, so that the tenor can reach his supposed top ‘C’ – when in fact it is a top ‘B’ !   That strikes me as cheating, but never mind…

So for the first 30-40 years of my life, I knew that D major was D major – end of story.   All was well until the ‘period performance’ movement came along and starting playing everything down a semitone.   So the Matthew Passion now starts in E flat minor and ends in B minor, and the 5th Brandenburg is in D flat major.   The Magic Flute overture is in D rather than E flat.  More recently, the Dunedin concert has recorded the Brandenburgs effectively a whole tone lower, so that the 6th Brandenburg is in A flat (to my ears) rather than B flat.    I know that there is a solid theoretical basis for this.  It may well be historically correct, and I don’t doubt the integrity or the motives of the musicians who believe in this approach.   But for my part, my ears and brain can’t ‘relearn’ the piece in the ‘wrong key’ – whatever the justification.   It sounds totally bizarre, is intensely irritating and ruins my listening experience.   So I now find that perfect pitch has become a real nuisance, and prevents me from enjoying most modern performances of Bach and other baroque composers, as well as period performances of Mozart etc.   This is easily solved by sticking to Bach recordings dating from the mid 1980’s and earlier.   It’s Easter this weekend, so I will be listening again to the Matthew Passion – in Karl Richter’s 1979 recording, rather than anything more recent.

So that’s my particular problem. It obviously doesn’t bother musicians working within the period instrument movement.  If I were younger, I suppose I would have grown up with much more flexibility to different pitches.  But I don’t think I can ‘unlearn’ it now.   Fortunately, as a pianist and organist, the instruments I play in are definitely at A=440, and this precludes any ‘strange’ pitches being introduced in our concerts.  And I don’t purchase or listen to CDs by any period performers – full stop.  But I can’t control the offerings on Radio 3 or Classic FM  !   I would be interested to know whether anyone else suffers problems.

All classical music promoters will be aware how difficult it is to  maintain and grow an audience.  One can never relax.  To quote from an earlier post, the problem is that of audience retention – persuading them to come again to another concert. In practice, this means that each concert has to be perceived as sufficiently enjoyable to encourage the potential audience member to come along, even if this means coping with heavy traffic on a cold, dark, wet night in the winter, rather than staying at home by the fire, watching the television. It is a tough challenge !

The most important factor will usually be the programme on offer, as discussed in my previous post.  But there are many others as well.   It is the total package – both musical and social – which will determine whether an audience member will return.   I am increasingly persuaded by the theory of ‘marginal gains’, derived from Sir Dave Brailsford and the British Cycling Team, whereby the accumulation of various small improvements makes a marked cumulative difference  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34247629   .

One invaluable way of assessing the whole ‘concert experience’ is to administer a questionnaire focussing on each aspect of the evening in turn.  Here is a questionnaire which we have administered to our audience.  A summary of their responses can be seen here

St Mary’s Perivale Questionnaire Survey October 2015

1. What do you like about our concerts

2. What do you NOT like about our concerts ?

3. How can we improve ?

Choice of musicians ….(more or less solo piano / piano trios / string quartets  / wind / vocal etc ??)

Choice of music ….(more or less modern / early music / any particular composers)

Practical organisation of concerts ….(Preference for Wednesday / Sat evenings / Sunday afternoons / frequency – what else?) (Seating ? / temperature ?)

Social aspects of concerts ….(Socializing at the end of concerts ? What else ?)

4. WHAT ELSE influences your decision to attend a concert ?(Cold / wet weather ?    Football on the telly !?  Traffic ? Transport problems ? Need of a lift home ? What else ??)

5. PUBLICITY : Any thoughts on how can we raise our profile ?(Weekly emails / leaflets / website / social media / other ?)

6. If you could plan your perfect ‘dream concert’ at our venue, what would it comprise ?

7. Any other comments or suggestions not covered by the above?

This questionnaire would be suitable for any concert organization – or any church or other voluntary organization as well – and is much better than the clumsy on-line questionnaires which ask ‘How do you rate our concerts ?’ etc.  Free text enables people to express themselves more accurately and fully, and works much better in practice.  The crucial  question is number 2. What do you NOT like about our concerts ?  This open question immediately draws attention to principle negative aspect, as perceived by an audience member, and focusses on what needs to be corrected.     I suspect that many organizations are rather afraid of this sort of honest feedback, since one is vulnerable to the occasional ‘brickbat.   However, I would strongly recommend it.  The answers are always unpredictable, surprising, and beneficial.

So reverting to the ‘Marginal Gains’ philosophy, our questionnaire has encouraged us to have more singers and wind instruments, to ask the musicians to talk more about their pieces, to relax our policy on admitting late-comers, to lower the audience lights during a concert, to create more room for socializing at the end of the concert, to buy better quality crisps and wine, and to embrace social media – hence this post !   These are all very marginal gains, but in summation they may make a difference.   Furthermore, the administration of a questionnaire has a direct effect on audience numbers, since the process of asking ‘What else influences your decision to attend a concert’ inevitably makes a person more likely to attend the next one !   Please feel free to use this outline questionnaire, suitably modified to meet your requirements in your own organization.   I would be happy to advise further if needed.