John Escapa wrote:

>Hello everyone, Could someone please clarify why sometimes when watching
>different performances, instruments or instrument groups are placed in
>different areas of the stage?

This is a more complex matter than it might appear.  True, in some
instances setup can be capricious, but generally a lot of thought goes
into it.  It's generally a matter of sound and logistics.  One question to
be answered is what arrangement of the orchestra in a given building will
produce a given sound? How deep is the stage? How wide? What are the hall's
acoustics? Live? Dead? Bright? Dark? Bass light or heavy? If you want to
compensate for a characteristic you might set up one way.  If you want to
take advantage or reinforce that characteristic, you might do the opposite.
Another might be what arrangement will allow players to hear each other.
That is important in a building with poor stage acoustics.  Some buildings
are good enough that almost any setup will work.  Others, say with poor
stage acoustics or weak bass, are limiting.  Almost always in poor
buildings, and even in good ones, the solution of one problem is the cause
of another.  Some of this aspect of the issue is cut and dried, but if you
use your imagination just a bit, explore all the permutations, then factor
in the more subjective ones I'll talk about in a minute, it is possible to
conjure up a lot of factors and a lot of combinations and conclude,
accurately, I think, there is no ideal setup.

The building aside, there are other issues and preferences.  For arguments
sake, let me start by saying that the most common arrangement of the
strings is first and second violins on the left, cellos on the front on
the right, and violas on the inside on the right.

One of the major deviations from this is to split the first and second
violins.  That is, firsts on the left in front, seconds on the right in
front.  It wasn't long ago that separating the violins this way was the
most common way of doing things.  Listen to recordings by Boult or Monteux
to hear the effect.  Complicating the issue is that a lot of composers
wrote with the split setup in mind.  That is, they often wrote aleatoric
effects between the sections: a line in the firsts would be answered by
one in the second.  (Think of the HSDP variation in Elgar's Enigma.) In
Monteux's recording you hear the interplay.  In most recordings, with both
parts on the left you don't.  Conductors used to prize this capability but
you don't hear it so much any more.  I guess the theory of putting both
parts on the left is to allow all the f-holes to face outwards and to keep
the violin sound more of a luminous mass.  But there is always the argument
that this lies in direct contrast to the setup composers were writing for.

Of course, if you do split, you must face the question of what to put where
the second violins were.  I've seen the cellos here and also the violas.
If it's the cellos, you face yet another issue.  Where to put the basses?
Do you keep them on the right or arrange them more in the middle behind
the cellos? The latter keeps these bass instruments, which often play in
octaves, together.  It also tends to amass the bass in the middle of the
orchestra.  Is that what you want? (I like this setup a lot.) Does it work
in the hall or is the result mud and would you be better off spreading the
bass out even though it makes it hard for the cellos and basses to hear
each other while they play often similar parts?

Another variation is to keep the violins together, but switch the cellos
and violas, i.e., put the cellos in the inside and the violas on the
outside.  The theory here, as I understand it, is that it allows the
violas, the softest of the strings, to be heard more clearly.  At the same
time it weakens the bass.  The Boston Symphony uses this setup, and I don't
care for it much for that reason.

Arrangement of the woodwinds is more consistent.  The object is to keep the
principals together and the flutes and clarinets on one side and the double
reeds on the other.  This keeps the bassoons close to their oboe relatives
and also close to the lower strings (assuming they're on the right) (Though
I've seen the Concertgebouw put the clarinets on the right and bassoons on
the left.)

The brass is more varied.  One way is to spread them across the stage.
Another is to group them toward the back toward one side or the other or
the center.  Sometimes you'll see a mix, e.g., trumpets with trombones
behind them, then horns spread toward the middle.  Or maybe the horns are
the ones grouped.  First and second in front, third and fourth in back.
The issue here, obviously, is do you want the brass spread or grouped?
The hall character may play a role here.  Or just personal preference.
This issue settled (if it ever really is), many conductors like the first
trumpet and first horn together since they play so much, and so with each
other.  The first trombone can come into play too, if you find a way to put
him/her behind the horn and trumpet, but the location of the first trombone
vis a vis this issue is usually considered less important since the first
trombone plays the least among the three.  More of an question is where do
you put the bass trombone because that instrument so often plays with the
low strings.  Generally, that part is placed near them.  To the right in
most setups, but maybe to the left in a split string setup.

Percussion I know the least about.  My guess is that hall acoustics and
stage room are the biggest factors.  And perhaps simple logistics of
placement and players getting around.

Sometimes the work you're playing on a given night may influence setup.
Many pieces were written with split strings in mind.  If one is a major
work on a concert, sometimes the conductor will try to take advantage of
that by using split strings for that concert.  (I'm sure stage managers
love changes like that from concert to concert.) I haven't seen this kind
of thing done very often.  Generally, when orchestras change setup, they
stay with the new arrangement for a while.  I might add that the kind of
music an orchestra likes to play may dictate setup.

And do you really want to get into the question of risers?

Setup is often a matter of experiment.  Conductors, for it is they who
usually decide on this issue, are often fooling with setup trying to get
the sound they want out of particular group of players in front of them.
Stokowski was notorious for experimenting with some quite wild setups to
produce different effects.  I am in no way pretending to write a treatise
on this subject.  I couldn't do it anyway, but I'm sure someone could (and
probably has).  It's that complex.  But I hope I succeeded in convincing
you there is more to this issue than arbitrariness.  Different setups do
sound different, and they often affect the ways players interact with each
other as well.

Roger Hecht