I ask the question stimulated by a distinguished musician saying the following as part of a recent email conversation:
“What is the point of presenting [these concerts] live as opposed to doing a video recording and distributing it that way? … The majority of these types of concerts do not feel like concerts at all. So why not have four rehearsals and use the remaining [time] to properly record, edit and present them as video documents. To me, the current method is not doing anything to gain new audiences and is just a reminder of how awful it is not to have live performances right now.”
The latest live webcast to come my way (linked to below and available to watch until December 15) features Kent Nagano (pictured) conducting members of Orchestre Philharmonique de Radio France in Britten, Pärt and Strauss – no audience, an ensemble socially distanced within itself, and repertoire chosen for its chamber scoring. I didn’t watch last night, when it was genuinely live, so caught it this morning, not live anymore of course but rather a film of an occasion.
The other side of the coin is that we are able (privileged?) to eavesdrop on happenings in numerous locations without leaving our homes (as instructed), and there is a certain vitality present when we know it is occurring there and then, which I didn’t experience quite so much with the Nagano concert just now, however expert and dedicated the performances.
However, what is your opinion? Please add a Comment below if you wish to.
People are desperate for live music again. It is not only the need of musicians to see and hear how their performances are being received, it is also the need of audiences for an emotional release and feeling of togetherness when a piece concludes. I respect the efforts of organisations to find alternative ways of staging performances. However, the thought of two people in the Wigmore Hall clapping at the end of a concert there is an absolute travesty of what live music should be about. Studio performances fine. Recordings made for later release using different media equally fine. But orchestras playing in empty auditoria in live-streaming or even worse slimmed-down versions of the standard repertory? Not for me, I’m afraid. And isn’t it rather odd that Premier League footballers can now look forward to playing matches with close physical contact, whereas this option is being denied to orchestras and opera companies? The current nightmare cannot end soon enough, and I’m quite happy to sit side-by-side with others wearing face-masks while witnessing a proper live performance, but the synthetic substitutes we are currently being offered represent not even second-best.
Being able to hear (and see) artists perform at this time is not only moving but, I feel, necessary. The act of performing, knowing that an audience (of many thousands in the case of the Wigmore Hall recitals) is enjoying your playing/singing must be a huge relief for these performers.
Given the current situation it is clear that we are many weeks, if not months, away from normal concerts being possible so I applaud wholeheartedly the efforts of organisations to make music available online for us to enjoy.
As the previous contributor specifically mention Wigmore Hall I must express my deep pleasure having listened to Pavel Kolesnikov and Samson Tsoi’s Piano four hand recital. This was balm for the soul at this difficult time and I know friends of mine felt the same.
I would like to thank Wigmore hall and all the artists involved in these concerts. They have definitely not been ‘second-best’.
For me, there’s a peculiar coldness to these ‘live’ WH
recitals. What’s missing is the breath and listening ears
of an audience. Better than nothing of course, but not
really a ‘live’ experience. The Daniel/Drake got nearest
to it because there was a sense of real dialogue which
drew one in.
The Nick Daniel/Julius Drake recital (June 4) is reviewed on this site.