I have probably already posted about this topic, but since I have started off this year seemingly determined to aggravate, irritate, and generally annoy everyone in the business whom I possibly can, I think it’s about time to tackle this issue once more. To wit….. what has happened to the conductor who still plays their instrument?
One of the great myths of Classical music that is foisted upon the general populace is the “even though the Conductor usually just waves his/her arms around they’re really playing one big instrument – the orchestra” myth. A larger barrel of pigeon droppings has not yet been discovered. The Western Classical orchestra is most certainly a collection of instruments, and at their best it can sound like one amazing voice, but an instrument by definition requires this – you have to be in physical touch with it.
With the exception of such strange creations as the Theremin and its ilk, every instrument that is used in our business requires direct physical contact to make a sound. You depress a key, or you draw a bow across a string, or blow into a reed, or whatever. Conducting, by definition, is one step removed from any true making of sound, and is therefore one step removed from any true music making. Truly great conductors make that distance seem infinitesimal but, let’s be honest, how many of those are there? What I find distressing is that in today’s world it is now OK, if not downright de rigueur, for a conductor to not regularly play their instrument. How in the world did this happen?
Solti was an accomplished pianist who was a protegé of Bartok, and even later in life made a landmark recording of the Sonata for Two Pianos and Percussion with none other than Murray Perahia. Toscanini, after making a sensational conducting debut at the age of 19, returned to his cello chair in the orchestra and participated in the world premiere of Otello. Mitropoulos was a phenomenally gifted pianist who in Minneapolis once filled in during a morning concert for an ailing soloist. He played, and conducted, the 3rd piano concerto of Prokofiev that day.
In today’s world Barenboim, Eschenbach, and Levine lead the pack, with a few others such as Oundjian and Ashkenazy joining the ranks, though the latter two seem to have given up their instruments due to injury or boredom, respectively (hey, if you’re Ashkenazy, and you can literally play anything, I suppose it would get boring after a while, but I don’t think I’ll ever have that particular problem). What concerns me is that the youngest of that list, Oundjian, is 54 years old.
Among today’s crop of conductors I can’t find a single one who performs on their instrument with any semblance of regularity. It took me a while to find out that The Dude played violin at one point, though there is absolutely no mention of him doing that in public for the last 14 years (though from some reports in the press he seems on the verge of being capable of transubstantiation). My fellow Buffalonian Michael Christie got himself a degree in Trumpet, but ditto on the disappearing instrument. My buddy Alastair Willis? No idea. I do know that his sister is a helluva horn player, but that’s about it. Don’t get me wrong – I like all these guys, but my question is: “How do conductors expect orchestras to take us seriously if we don’t play our instruments?”
I know this is very old school and fuddy-duddy of me but when I look at the “great” conductors of yesteryear (or today) I see very well-rounded musicians. They were involved in opera, orchestral, chamber music, composition, etc., and almost all of them were very accomplished performers on their instruments! Exactly when did it become acceptable, nay even expected, that conductors were no longer performers in their own right? This seems a musically dangerous trend, and one that is not going to go away any time soon.
Part of the problem starts right in the music conservatories. Going to Juilliard for a conducting degree? No time for that pesky instrument!!! You’re required to have passed out of Piano I/II, but not the least mention of playing an instrument, either studying it privately or in the orchestra, is made on the website as a requirement for the conducting degree. Ditto for my alma mater Eastman. I suspect it’s the same at the other ones, so straight from the get go the major conservatories demand that the conductor be segregated from the musicians instead of picking up valuable experience by playing in the orchestras they’re supposed to conduct!
Out of college the separation is even starker. None of the conducting competitions so much as waste a nano-second worrying about whether this or that conductor can play. Conducting jobs with orchestras? As far as I am aware the Edmonton Symphony is the only orchestra that requires any applicant for the Resident Conductor position to be able to play an instrument. Managers/Agents? They actively discourage any young conductor from continuing on their instrument. Goodness, practicing scales takes away valuable time during which they could be doing another conducting gig, becoming a Music Director with your 3rd, 4th, or 5th orchestra, thereby maximizing profits for management. The goal here is to make money, not music.
I actually had one of the most powerful Manager/Agents in the business tell me that I should quit the piano, a suggestion that left me utterly speechless for one of the few times in my life. Now, I don’t consider myself the greatest pianist out there but I’m pretty good in my repertoire, and I don’t think I make a complete fool of myself on stage. I must admit, though, that as a black man growing up in the USA I’ve heard every nasty racial insult there is, but I have never been so insulted as when that pompous idiot suggested I stop playing. In my universe it shows a cosmic lack of understanding concerning what should go into a well-rounded conductor’s life.
Now of course, for every rule there are exceptions, and I am not saying that we should immediately put every conductor working out there through a rigorous instrumental jury, as entertaining as that would probably be. Keeping up on an instrument is very time consuming and just might not be practical for a lot of people. I am also very sure there are some tremendous conductors who haven’t touched their instrument in decades. I haven’t heard of Haitink playing in public for a quite a while, though I’d be very interested about it. I would advocate, though, that if most conductors spent more time in actual contact with an instrument then they would have a better connection with both music and their fellow musicians. Would that be such a bad thing?
What about Gerard Schwartz — Trumpet. Michael Tilson Thomas — piano, I think.
Indeed, Michael is an excellent pianist. I by no means meant my list to be exhaustive, but rather a snapshot of the situation.
Schwartz hasn’t played the trumpet regularly since the mid 70s as far as I know.
Amen! A conductor “directs” the orchestra, he/she doesn’t “play” the orchestra. Once again, my friend, you’ve nailed it!
Good points! I can add a few to your list: Andrew Previn is a good pianist. Michael Tilson Thomas plays piano in public semi-regularly. Osmo Vanska has played clarinet at the Mostly Mozart Festival and elsewhere.
Dear Bill Eddins,
It never occured to me that conductors should or would play instruments. Hum, maybe, sing or talk to themselves while conducting, perhaps. But, your ‘rant’ is well reasoned and for me, enlightening about the relationship of playing and conducting. I did think that many conductors evolved from being part of an orchestra to conducting. But, now having read your essay I will probably re-read it, send it to a few people who would be interested in the reasons you put forth,and start my own dialogue with a few people about this.
I am interested in other reactions that you get to this viewpoint. It seems that a layman, or a mere ‘listener’ would not have a real understanding of the subtle values of a conductor maintaining ability to play at least one instrument at ‘concert level.’
Linda
Amen!
Ditto for composers. When an annotation is made in a score by someone used to interpreting music, it actually means something. On the other hand, when they conduct an orchestra, they can demand things of them because they know they are possible, and make a difference.
Double and triple threat compoers/performer/conductors were the norm in the 1700’s, the maestros in the 1800’s, and the endangered species in the last century.
A question about the well rounded conductors of past, when did holding an academic position become passe? In Europe, I notice a large number of conductors that do the orchestra/opera/ballet circuit as well as a regular academic position. Yet academic positions in the US seem to carry more of a stigma than not. Thoughts?
oh god, the easiest way to kill your career is to take an academic position. Once again, that interferes with becoming music director for that 5th orchestra and so is something that the Management concerns definitely frown upon. Profit before music, remember.
Manfred Honeck, violin and viola; Jaap van Zweden, violin; Simon Rattle, percussion; Larry Rachleff, percussion; Giancarlo Guerrero, percussion; Alastair Willis, trumpet; Per Brevig, trombone; Zubin Mehta, double bass; Guillermo Figueroa, violin; Enrique Diemecke, violin; Carlos Miguel Prieto, violin; Christopher Wilkins, oboe,…to name just a few more.
all true, but outside of Simon I haven’t heard of any of them playing their instrument in public in decades.
I think you hit it right on the head when you wrote: “Keeping up on an instrument is very time consuming and just might not be practical for a lot of people.” I do think that even though a conductor doesn’t play an instrument any more, he/she still has a “connection” with the orchestra by virtue of having played in the past. BTW, Figueroa and Diemecke still play regularly. Simon still plays? Yikes.
I forgot to mention JoAnn Falletta, a classical guitarist — not an orchestral instrument but neither is piano. (Sorry, Maestro!)
Oh my dear Larry, nice attempt to devalue the piano, but I dare you to make it through most of the orchestral masterpieces of the 20th century without it. Your Stravinsky, Bartok, Prokofiev, Shostakovitch, Schwantner, Reich, Ives, or whomever is going to sound like something very very important is missing.
Hey Bill! Remember those times we played Rocky 2 six times on the coast of Alabama with the LPO!? I was mostly impressed by your performances on those ’50’s pinball machines at the Florabama Bar. You more than doubled the points records on both machines in about twenty minutes on a borrrowed quarter, no less! Someone should write a concerto for you playing that instrument with full symphony orchestra! Sweet! Bill Schultz
i’d be all over that, Bill. btw, i’m a proud owner of a vintage ’88 classic – PINBOT! great machine. i’ll see if i can find a suitable composer.
some are no longer able to play, and thus conduct. what’s your take there?
if someone has a injury which prevents them from playing i have tremendous sympathy for that. but if someone is just maximizing podium time – i really question this. where is the discipline which comes with practicing your instrument? many conductors don’t have it.
No need to call me “dear,” Maestro! (Though I did pay you a compliment.) I certainly didn’t mean to devalue the piano nor the skill it takes to play one. However, you didn’t respond to my second sentence. I’d be curious to know if you agree with my statement.
We could “Yes Dear” ourselves into some serious trouble here but perhaps it’s time to close that loop down!! But as to your second sentence – why, certainly, it does make a huge difference. I learned most about conducting by playing in orchestras. It is ridiculously valuable experience and something that I miss every day. But playing an instrument isn’t like riding a bike. This is a skill that needs to be kept up and developed throughout life. I worry about people who let that go. I play regularly but there are times when I don’t practice for several weeks. When I come back to my instrument it’s different. But when I have been practicing regularly my approach to conducting is different as well. I hope that it makes me a better conductor.
As an oboist who plays in symphony, opera, and ballet I really don’t care whether the conductor is performing on her or his instrument. I only care if the conducting is of good quality, and if the conductor is aware of the issues we all have to deal with. If he/she is a violin player, big whooop (to me) … I just hope he/she understands the perils of the oboist and our pesky reeds. I assume a conductor is spending mega-hours on studying scores, and I guess I just can’t imagine keeping up with an instrument as well.
So to me it’s no big deal. Just give me a competent conductor. Please. :-)
I agree with patty (I found your blog via hers, and I am also an orchestral musician who’s worked with symphony, opera, and ballet orchestras for over 30 years). Though I do feel it’s invaluable that a conductor has spent enough time playing in an orchestra in order to understand what we NEED from them on the podium, once they’ve gained that knowledge (and if they can gain it without playing in an orchestra, fine, just seems like it would be much harder) I don’t care if they play another note. It would seem to me to be more beneficial that they spend their time working on scores and conducting technique.
But I’d be interested to know how you feel your approach to conducting changes when you practice your instrument. I assume you are only practicing and not performing under a conductor (which from my standpoint would seem at least like a refresher course in what conductors look like from the other side!), so how does practicing your instrument make you see the art of conducting differently?
I’m disappointed you haven’t responded to my question – I would like to see this issue from the other side. I’m sure you have some good reasons that just wouldn’t occur to me.
(by the way, I didn’t at all mean to be dismissive by saying “only” practicing; as if that is not as worthy as the performing you do)