Klarinet Archive - Posting 000417.txt from 1998/12

From: HatNYC62@-----.com
Subj: [kl] James Levine
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 18:48:49 -0500

I don't think I need to quote any of Mr. Wolman's post, as it was vivid enough
for anyone who read it to remember pretty well.

I didn't mean to offend anyone, but whatever you think of Levine's
performances compared to guest conductor x at the MET, remember this: Levine
built that orchestra. Whatever it accomplishes under another conductor on any
given night is directly attributable to Levine and his brilliant tenure as
music director.

I haven't been to the opera this year, but I saw at least 13 productions last
year and many the year before, including the entire ring cycle. Most of the
performances I see there are actually dress rehearsals, to which I am often
invited by members of the orchestra who are friends and colleagues of mine. I
didn't intend to be a name-dropper, a practice which annoys me in others, so I
didn't mention who they were. It's not a big deal for a professional musician
to know these people. I probably know someone in most major orchestras.
Believe me, it doesn't do me a lot of good on a daily basis.

I have no doubt that the orchestra at the MET has off nights. Every orchestra
does. The best orchestras have fewer than others. At the MET, early in the
season (Early October would qualify) is a time when the orchestra is
rehearsing and performing a quantity of repertoire that is truly staggering.
They play 7 performances a week of at least 3 or 4 different operas, as
opposed to the 4-6 performances of 2 or 3 programs at a major symphonic
orchestra. These performances are generally at least 3 hours long, and many
are closer to 6, much longer than a symphony concert. Thus when some notes get
dropped from time to time, or some intonation is spotty at times, it is
understandable.

One only has to attend the MET, not even know anyone in the pit, to know that
the audience understands what a special thing is happening in the orchestra.
The ovations for the orchestra after overtures and preludes are just as
enthusiastic as for the big tunes and singers. You won't find that in many
other houses. As a long time MET fan, you yourself must know what a difference
there is between the MET orchestra of today and the one 40 years ago. Yes,
Stoki and Mitropoulos got amazing results compared to the then house standard,
but I believe if those performances were repeated today, remarkable as they
were, they would still fall below today's daily house standard on a technical
basis.

Of course, we are listening with different sets of ears. Again, I meant no
offense. But the major complaint among musicians in the house (and some
members of the audience as well. . .remember Simone Young has been booed at
the MET) is the quality of the guest conducting at the MET. For every
Tennstedt or C. Kleiber, there are dozens and dozens of Simone Youngs and
Giuseppe Sinopolis.

I would like to reinstate another old opinion of mine: Don't compare a live
performance to a record. Recordings today are often spliced and re-balanced to
the point that they bear almost no relation to what was heard in the room when
they were recorded. The producer and engineer have more control over the
product than the conductor, sometimes. This includes 'live' recordings made
from more than one concert.

Finally, you originally stated as a matter of fact (if I may paraphrase) that
the orchestra and Levine had reached a point of artistic stalemate and that
the orchestra generally sounded better under others. I simply wanted to point
out that this is not the general view of most musicians I know, and it
certainly is not the view of the audiences present when I do attend evening
performances. If you had just stated that you didn't like Levine and preferred
others, I probably wouldn't have bothered to respond at all.

David Hattner, NYC

-------------------------------------------------------------------------