Donald Satz <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>It's hard enough for an orchestra to remain strong and viable in the
>U. S. with clearly defined goals; without them, the whole house could
>crumble.

I have no way of knowing whether the Phillies have any kind of coherent
strategy planned; but (assuming that they do) the proposals as outlined
make rather more sense than some i've heard.

The situation as i understand it as follows: the orchestra has lost it's
recording contract; & i assume they want to do something about it (the
Phillies may (or may not) need the luxury of a recording contract for
financing purposes; but with the orchestra's long tradition in the studio,
i'm not sure how well a no-recording proposal would go down in the city).
I'm also assuming they the orchestra (& its backers) would consider signing
for Naxos (again assuming that King Klaus would consider signing the
orchestra an asset to his label) beneath their dignity: to an orchestra
with the perceived pedigree of the Philadelphia, a recording contract means
recording full-price core-repetroire prestige releases; not budget-priced
discs of dangerously interesting music.

(I think these assumptions are all pretty valid, if somewhat jaundiced)

The orchestra has a couple of options: they can look for a conductor
with a castiron recording contract; & induce him (are there any hers?) to
decamp from his present gig.  This, unfortunately, runs the risk of costing
a packet & still isn't guaranteed: Neeme Jarvi has had more recording
contracts than i've had Chinese dinners; & even he couldn't guarantee
studio time for Detroit.  Alternatively: they can do as the Phillies seem
to be doing; & see the future being in coproduction.

If the orchestra using corporate tieins to start financing its own
recordings (probably of popular repetroire, which can be tied into
orchestra programming), it won't be long before a company in search of
cheaper product offers to distribute the discs outside Phil.  Suddenly the
Phillies have a new recording contract: & XYZ Phil is out on its ear...
which isn't so surprising (or unfair), since XYZ probably got its gig by
bring sponsorship dollars (or some other competitive financial advantage,
such as a favorable exchange rate) to the table.

(If all this makes it sound like i consider most full price recording to be
glorified vanity publication: i do; & to add slander to contempt, i think
that full-price orchestral recording (in particular) has become rather like
top level motor-racing: seats are bought by the orchestra with the deepest
sponsorship pockets.  Take a close look at most classical CD covers
nowadays & you'll see enough ads & commercial acknowledgements to drown a
whale; & ask yourself again: why was _this particular recording_ committed
for sale? Could you simply be paying for a musical advertisement? In many
cases, i really think people are...)

Even stripped of it's profound cynicism, this speculation may be in advance
of the logic currently in vogue in Philadelphia; & therefore may be giving
them credit for more (dark?) vision than they actually have.  Still: where
they're going _seems_ to have some financial validity...  or at least:
more validity than Don Satz would them credit for....

All the best,

Robert Clements <[log in to unmask]>
<http://www.ausnet.net.au/~clemensr/welcome.htm>