What Pat Kop did next

What Pat Kop did next


norman lebrecht

November 11, 2017

The controversial violinist’s latest attempt at new-form concerts.

See what you think.


  • Steve P says:

    Very entertaining. I particularly liked when the audience members were covering their ears as trombone players were blasting in their faces. Hammers were a nice touch, too.

    • David R Osborne says:

      Fine, why not? But let’s not kid ourselves, this is the drearily predictable, masquerading as edgy and new. It is neither innovative, imaginative or original. Just what you’d expect from an avant-garde that has exhausted it’s vocabulary and is clean out of ideas.

  • Ungeheuer says:

    The Simone Kermes of the violin? That is no compliment, mind you.

  • Cecylia Arzewski says:

    She is a joke not a violinist!

  • Bruce says:

    15:45-16:30 is an inaccurate portrayal of trombonist behavior — inaccurate in the sense that they stopped.

  • Bruce says:

    As a concert it seemed fine. The usual edgy or pseudo-edgy mix of old & new repertoire. Does it work to get people interested, or do they come only for a celebrity? A year ago we sold out 2 shows of Harry Potter music (1700 seat theater), and then 4 days later approx. 200 people came to hear our “Mozart & Modern” or whatever we were calling it. We cancelled the remaining concerts in that series immediately afterward.

    • David R Osborne says:

      Ha! Who would have thought Mozart would be so unpopular?

      • Mikey says:

        I think people were put off by having to listen to music by this guy “Modern”. Have you heard his stuff? *shivers*

        • Bruce says:

          Actually the series was called “Symphony With A Splash” and featured food & alcoholic beverages from local restaurants & breweries. The music was a mix of new (Mason Bates, Missy Mazzioli, etc) and old (e.g. Beethoven #1, Mozart #41). The management really made a good effort, I thought, to attract an audience. It didn’t work.

  • MacroV says:

    People so often lament – here and elsewhere – that classical music performance is so stodgy, traditional, irrelevant to modern life, etc.. Overture (or short modern piece)-concerto-symphony, 20-minute intermission, 2-hour max, etc..

    Then when somebody tries a somewhat different approach, the response doesn’t just include comments about whether they liked that particular performance, but outrage that the person would even consider deviating from the norm.

    Live performance, to survive, has to be a different experience than you get playing your CD/DVD at home. This show is probably something best experienced in person; props to her for trying.

    • David R Osborne says:

      Oh come on, this is nothing remotely approaching a ‘different approach’. It is filling the vacuum created by the paucity of actual musical ideas with ‘novelty’. An exercise in attention seeking. You really need to understand the difference.

      • Steve P says:

        I thought I heard some musical ideas – certainly hearing Biber surrounded by modern caused a pause – and the visuals were also thought-provoking, at least as far as “what the hell is going on” vibes can take you.
        If this isn’t your cup of tea (or grog or whatever you imbibe), give her some credit for a performance that would make patrons feel like the performers had invested a great deal of energy and time in preparation. I know hearing the Crumb would have been a highlight for me: it was very well played.
        PS glad I rechecked this post before I posted – Biber had autocorrected to Bieber. Oof.

  • Jonathan Grieves-Smith says:

    Wild, beautiful, intriguing, curious, rough, exquisite… Terrific imagination and she is a blessing of a musician.