What Carnegie Hall pays the Vienna Philharmonic
NewsThe New York Times, in a generally uninformative piece on the collapse of international orchestra touring, has come up with one interesting statistic:
Carnegie paid the Philharmonic $1.4 million for four 2019 performances, according to public filings.
That’s $350,000 a show.
But those cash-rich days are over.
NY Phil’s Deborah Borda, in the same article, admits: ‘I am not convinced that we should return to the model of touring as it was in the old days. I’m not sure that you can really achieve deep artistic programs through it on a regular basis.’
Not to mention the small problem of presenting Putin’s conductor Gergiev this very week in Carnegie Hall.
Yes but what does that cover? If the costs of travel, hotels, subsistence and pre travel rehearsals come out of that, surely it’s a reasonable sum for an orchestra of that calibre. ( The British MU published an article about a decade ago arguing that a top level musician had motor, memory and analytical skills comparable to a top surgeon and barrister, but the pay differential makes you want to weep. Hands up all those musicians who think their skills and hard work are suitably rewarded in financial terms!)
Given that most of Vienna’s players are men, perhaps they could probably share hotel rooms more easily, cutting down on costs?
ooooh! Smexy!
did you know some men have tendencies that can’t be mentioned. If so roomsharing is not to be recommended
No. Youth Hostel and bunk beds in large group rooms. Come on! The money for Carnegie Hall stage hands salaries must be saved somewhere!
That’s almost as much as they pay their stagehands.
Bravo
Given improvements in technology, and as we approach universal connectivity to the internet, the question is what % of an in-person experience can be achieved by simply streaming a live performance. I recently watched a performance of the Brahms concerto with Hilary Hahn, Gianandrea Noseda and the NSO and if forced to try and quantitate the experience relative to imagining being there I’d say 80-90%. Is the rest worth it if it requires touring?
No way. NOTHING beats live music, “in the flesh” as it were. I had the pleasure of hearing Arturo Sandoval with Orpheus at Carnegie the other night – he was unmiked (as opposed to the usual jazz club) and the sound he made was like something that came straight down from heaven. Never in a million years can that be reproduced on even the best sound system in the world. Same applies to the sound of the Vienna Phil strings which I will be hearing on Friday. Shame about the boring conductor they’re bringing from Putin’s playground though.
Maybe Pussy Riot will stand up during the slow movement of Rachmaninov’s 2nd piano concerto?
With Matsuev playing it, the intervention of Pussy Riot could only help.
Maybe, if they are not at a business dinner with Soros.
Not sure about the lack of deep artistry with touring. Orchestras usually tour with 2-2.5 programs and play those more often than normally. I find the quality of such performances usually to be better than the regular stay at home schedule.
I think what she meant is that touring programs generally have a popularist bent by necessity, because hosting venues want to attract a large audience to cover costs. For example, Czech Philharmonic more often than not ends up playing the same greatest hits by Dvořák on tour despite a large repertoire of excellent works by Czech composers to choose from.
It’s unfortunate that so few “music lovers” know how wonderful the Czech Phil is and has always been. No I don’t want to hear them play Dvorak 9. Janacek? They won’t come. But they should.
I lived in Prague for several years and heard the Czech Philharmonic play a wide range of interesting music – Martinu, Janacek, Kabalec, and a good bit of newer music. And they play beautiful Mozart and Beethoven. It’s a little dispiriting, then, to see them on tour relegated largely to playing Dvorak’s greatest hits. At least if they would play his lesser hits there might be some novelty to it.
correct. That’s how you save money. AND, cheap conductors. Now you’re catching on. Oh yeah, and no more “classical” music.
Most orchestras just play war horses on tour.
Pre-pandemic, a Carnegie season was a lot of Mahler, Brahms, Bruckner, Beethoven, and the rest of the usual suspects.
Carnegie used to do some original programming — about a decade ago the had a contemporary music festival where they helped fund second-tier American orchestras to come to Carnegie Hall if they had adventurous programs. Those were some of the best concerts I’ve ever heard at Carnegie. They included lots of expensive-to-perform pieces that are rarely played, like Grainger’s “The Warriors.”
That’s what Carnegie needs to get back to doing.
Contemporary Music….. omg…
Monsoon, Here’s some great programming at Carnegie: “The New York Youth Symphony will perform the commissioned world premiere of Jonathan Cziner’s Rauch (And Other Delights) on its March 13 concert at Carnegie Hall, led by Music Director Michael Repper. Also featured on the program will be William Grant Still’s Symphony No. 1 (“Afro-American”) and Barber’s Violin Concerto featuring Grace Park, winner of the 2018 Naumburg International Violin Competition, as soloist. Cziner is one of this season’s winners of New York Youth Symphony’s First Music commissioning program for composers 30 and under… .”
I recall a similar Times article from about a decade ago when they mentioned top-tier orchestras like the Berlin Phil were getting about $180,000 per show. That’s a good bit of inflation since. But touring isn’t cheap; even at those fees the Vienna Phil probably isn’t clearing a big profit.
Compare it to the price of tickets. No one is losing money.
Putins Hofkapellmeister
https://www.abendzeitung-muenchen.de/kultur/musik/putins-hofkapellmeister-valery-gergiev-und-seine-zukunft-in-muenchen-art-794796
Enjoy 😉
Et alors !! Le vainqueur de l’US OPEN Tennis 2021 a gagné 2.5 millions dollars !!!!
Wiener philarmoniker is cheaper ….
More people watch tennis in person and on tv and buy the advertised products, so that’s not a fair comparison, not to mention the cost of a violin vs. a tennis racquet, which costs the player nothing.
Live streaming a concert may be acceptable to some but nothing can top being in a a great facility like Carnegie Hall with great music being performed.
I was only there once after the renovation, but it had lost all its charisma and the acoustics were dull at best. It’s not a great hall, just a great history. New York has no great halls, except those not used for concerts, such as some theaters, ballrooms or armories.
As far as the VPO, I’m sure it sells out and there are 3600 seats in the Hall selling for premium prices. Maybe with underwriting, its not such a high fee.
With global change and sustainable habits inevitable in the future (as, in,”now”) perhaps, touring will be a thing of the past. Musicians will have to “stay put,” and play for their home and regional audiences.
We will just have to adjust our expectations to fit the new paradigm.
And, perhaps, managing an orchestra will become simplified, with less emphasis on glamour and more on art.
Whatever happened to the benefits of globalization?
Maybe all touring orchestras have to made significant cutbacks by cutting numbers of players sent etc. I also think that other musicians and musical lovers sharing accommodation with players would lead to many benefits and the reduction of costs even more. Money could also be raised city-wide and through increased corporate support. Imagine if these groups chartered airplanes? Maybe, HD live streaming in a symphony hall setting is a very good option.
Time to get more creative. Ask Nelsons how he does it with the BSO and Leipzig groups?
If you keep attacking musicians for having politics you don’t like, you will have to attack all musicians for any politics at all.
This trip ought be a P.R. disaster for everyone.