Good question.
But are your questions reflective of what the people in in USA think of what is important or not important.

 

The major orchestras are doing ok. Some excelling: they have large endowments and patrons with deep pockets. They have summer festivals that are well attended. No one has a good recording outlook these days.

The small, community, semi-pro, and amateur orchestras, mostly operating on shoestring budgets are still viable. They remain a valuable outlet for people who want to play but can't make a living at it. Some cities make room in their parks & rec budgets for an orchestra. No one pretends these are stellar orchestras, but they have a place in the musical firmament.

The orchestras I worry about are the 2nd and 3rd tier groups. They don't have huge endowments, not many patrons with money, no summer festivals - and they are struggling. Some have had to eliminate many positions, shorten seasons or even cancel them. They have to cut pay and in some of these groups salaries and benefits were already low. Worst of all, they've had to resort to playing so many pops concerts. Some play more pops now than classical which is a sure sign of circling the drain. There have been casualties already, such as the once fine orchestra in San Antonio.

The problems are many: general lack of interest in classical, an aging audience, more entertainment opportunities than ever. Add to a increasing crime profile and a large number of homeless people who inhabit downtowns and the problems become almost insurmountable. The real lack of outstanding personalities these days doesn't help either. Long gone are the likes of Bernstein, Toscanini, Horowitz, Stokowski, Heifetz and such. Nor does the constant replaying of the same old, tired, worn out warhorses.

Suggestions and opinions on correcting the problem abound, but tangible results scarce. I have one, but it will never happen: the US federal government spends a staggering amount of money every year and a lot of it is on stupid, worthless things. Both political parties are complicit. We do spend money supporting bands, orchestras and choirs already: every branch of the military has music departments with great ensembles. So, let's spend another say $1 Billion a year on supporting classical music. It's chump change anymore. Think of all the musicians and others it would employ. But there will be strings attached: no unionization allowed. No extra pay for recordings. Travel to smaller towns and areas that otherwise never hear a live orchestra. A large amount of the music performed must be from American composers - and of course nowadays not only from men. Music representing every conceivable minority group must be heard. Music calms the savage beast; some of our cities could sure use that right now.

 

The major orchestras are doing ok. Some excelling: they have large endowments and patrons with deep pockets. They have summer festivals that are well attended. No one has a good recording outlook these days.

The small, community, semi-pro, and amateur orchestras, mostly operating on shoestring budgets are still viable. They remain a valuable outlet for people who want to play but can't make a living at it. Some cities make room in their parks & rec budgets for an orchestra. No one pretends these are stellar orchestras, but they have a place in the musical firmament.

The orchestras I worry about are the 2nd and 3rd tier groups. They don't have huge endowments, not many patrons with money, no summer festivals - and they are struggling. Some have had to eliminate many positions, shorten seasons or even cancel them. They have to cut pay and in some of these groups salaries and benefits were already low. Worst of all, they've had to resort to playing so many pops concerts. Some play more pops now than classical which is a sure sign of circling the drain. There have been casualties already, such as the once fine orchestra in San Antonio.

The problems are many: general lack of interest in classical, an aging audience, more entertainment opportunities than ever. Add to a increasing crime profile and a large number of homeless people who inhabit downtowns and the problems become almost insurmountable. The real lack of outstanding personalities these days doesn't help either. Long gone are the likes of Bernstein, Toscanini, Horowitz, Stokowski, Heifetz and such. Nor does the constant replaying of the same old, tired, worn out warhorses.

Suggestions and opinions on correcting the problem abound, but tangible results scarce. I have one, but it will never happen: the US federal government spends a staggering amount of money every year and a lot of it is on stupid, worthless things. Both political parties are complicit. We do spend money supporting bands, orchestras and choirs already: every branch of the military has music departments with great ensembles. So, let's spend another say $1 Billion a year on supporting classical music. It's chump change anymore. Think of all the musicians and others it would employ. But there will be strings attached: no unionization allowed. No extra pay for recordings. Travel to smaller towns and areas that otherwise never hear a live orchestra. A large amount of the music performed must be from American composers - and of course nowadays not only from men. Music representing every conceivable minority group must be heard. Music calms the savage beast; some of our cities could sure use that right now.

Great post. Thank you. There was a time where government in the USA had a greater support of the Arts. One example;National
Endowment Of The Arts.
But that has become politically out of fashion.

 

Shaw wrote an essay many years ago advocating government support for regional British Orchestras, arguing that the purpose of government was to fund things for the public good that couldn't support themselves - i.e. schools, roads . . . orchestras

 

What if Kanye West were paid a hefty sum to tour the US conducting Beethoven's 9 symphonies?

 

Here in Holland we have a popular state-funded TV show where various national celebrities are given the chance to conduct classical music, it's called "Maestro". Talent or training isn't required, apparently there are people who think that putting soap actors and comedians in front of a real symphonic orchestra and filming their spasmodic attempts to "conduct" Beethoven's 5th makes great TV.
This travesty takes place in the Concertgebouw, Amsterdam, features a full orchestra, and it contributes to the quota for "cultural programming", which means that sucks dry the funds that, in better times, were used for TV recordings of real music, played by real orchestras and real conductors.
So no, it isn't just the US. Good music and good taste are on their way out in Europe as well.

 

The idea of 100 physical performers + supporting staff being able to sustain themselves economically from performing in the same city over and over again is kind of loony - unless it's a major tourist location.

Edit: Especially when musicians demand to earn as much as people who provide essential services in the same area.

 

Especially when musicians demand to earn as much as people who provide essential services in the same area.

This is so true. Musicians who play in the major orchestras of Berlin and London are dumbstruck at the enormous salaries some players in the US make. The concert master of the NYPO makes over $500,000 a year. The principal bassoon in LA over $300,000 a year. Conductor salaries are huge, too. Some make upwards of $100,000 per concert. They argue that why not? their skill is as demanding and important as that of a ball player or actor. And the Big orchestras can afford it, I suppose. Orchestras like Kansas City pay much less ($75,000 range) but do they sound any worse? Not to me. I see the budgets for major orchestras and opera companies and realize this just isn't sustainable. Orchestras have failed by and large to make themselves an important part of their communities. Every time I discuss this issue with board members and musicians at conferences I always ask a question that is generally met with silence: If your orchestra folded today, who would notice? Would the quality of life in your city suffer noticeably?

And yet our music schools turn out some 30,000 music majors every year. Why? And yet we do need orchestras: if for nothing else to provide soundtracks for movies and TV. To play in the orchestra pit for Broadway. Leonard Slatkin has had a lot to say about this sad state of affairs and his years of experience give his wise words a lot of credibility.

 

Good valid points in posts 5 & 8.
As much as it pains me to admit it, my inclination is to lean more toward agreement than not.
If any orchestra is incapable of sustaining itself, throwing money at it, regardless of where the money comes from, will be a never-ending, and ever escalating debacle.
Also, not altogether satisfied with the government bailing them out; my taxes are too high as it is.

 

An existential question and existential responses.

 

Smarty-pants one-liners lose most of their charm when they have to be edited.

 

WTH. What are you saying. The reason was stated. Spelling. Auto-correct is great sometimes;not so great at other times.

 

I have been listening to this debate in this forum for years.

For years I have been hearing that classical music is dying in the United States.

I have never heard any of our non-American members bemoaning the state of classical music.

It seems to me that the question should be why is it thriving in the rest of the world but not in the US?

So far in all of these years have I never heard an answer to this question.

I do not know the answer. My only experiences in this area are with volunteer groups.

 

I have been listening to this debate in this forum for years.

For years I have been hearing that classical music is dying in the United States.

I have never heard any of our non-American members bemoaning the state of classical music.

It seems to me that the question should be why is it thriving in the rest of the world but not in the US?

So far in all of these years have I never heard an answer to this question.

I do not know the answer. My only experiences in this area are with volunteer groups.

America is not the same country it was 50 years ago, or even 25.

 

If the nation's orchestras were profit making corporations offering shares of stock you can bet Congress would be pumping money into it. We know this is the reason the military budget increases every year. The legislators handing out the contracts own stock in the companies. Members of the NYP agreed to a 25 percent pay cut through August 2023 but they are still being paid on average a salary of $110,000 a year.

We can only expect dwindling interest from the public when little investment is made in education to foster an interest and appreciation for artist expression beyond the celebrity pop market.

 

Take that money and support jazz musicians and jazz clubs. Jazz is OUR CULTURAL HERITAGE! CLASSICAL MUSIC IS 400 YEARS OLD AND COMES FROM 6000 MILES AWAY! ITS NOT OUR MUSIC, ITS EUROPEAN MUSIC! It angers me that we give ANY money to symphony orchestras!

 

Some things are hard to put a value on. One of my sons is a set designer. Although it is rare to hear a parent say "I'm so glad my child is in theater," I have made a point in telling him how proud I am that he has chosen be part of the transmission of civilization.

 

Gloom und drang

Rightly or wrongly, in the United States orchestra concerts are seen as diversions for well-off people. There won't be a groundswell of support for government funding of them, and the National Endowment for the Arts was inadequate at the best of times and is now thoroughly hated by more of the nation than I like to think about.

The funding is different today as well. The arts can't count on support from "old money" or the noblesse oblige of the upper classes. The new breed of private-equity managers and hedge-fund titans don't have the same kind of interest or the same kind of peer pressure to even pretend they care. So live classical music is stuck without much popular support and with less support from the top ranks, and it's dependent upon generosity from retirement-age physicians and reasonably comfortable lawyers, realtors, restauranteurs, etc. who may consider it in their own interests to show some civic spirit. (And, not to sound like a complete nihilist, I agree that some of those people actually like good music.)

Playing the long game - exposing kids to music in school - is the most effective way to rebuild an audience. If that started today, the current live-classical model will have to struggle for about 30 more years before things turn around.

 

Why should we support symphony orchestras? Its NOT our music, its European music! We have our own classical music, JAZZ. And its a lot more interesting than listening to 88 guys read little black dots off a page! Jazz musicians play new, exciting, syncopated melodies by the adventure of improvisation! Classical music is BORING!

 

Good music and good taste are on their way out

I doubt it. No need to get melodramatic.

 

That is a good one, must remember that, I hope for the rest of my days.

 

It's not just the symphony orchestras that are dying and in trouble: newspapers are struggling, many closing the doors. Movie theaters are in trouble. Have you seen the lousy reception the new West Side Story has received? Churches are going under with fewer and fewer people attending and contributing. Schools have largely forsaken teaching Humanities. High schools give out diplomas to kids who have never read a single work of Shakespeare. Our entire culture is in danger of disappearing. There's a great book called "The Twilight of American Culture" by Morris Berman that is 20 years old now. Anyone concerned about the death of orchestras or all of our culture should read this book. The Monastic Option, something he espouses, is something I practice constantly.

 

It's not just the symphony orchestras that are dying and in trouble: newspapers are struggling, many closing the doors. Movie theaters are in trouble. Have you seen the lousy reception the new West Side Story has received? Churches are going under with fewer and fewer people attending and contributing. Schools have largely forsaken teaching Humanities. High schools give out diplomas to kids who have never read a single work of Shakespeare. Our entire culture is in danger of disappearing.

There are differences in the cases of movie theatres and newspapers. Movie theatres are being squeezed by the competition of home entertainment systems, augmented by Internet streaming. Newspapers have been challenged by Internet-based news sources for the past several decades. The decimation of reliable, fact-checked news publishing amounts to a crisis of its own.

But, similar to the education crisis, in the classical music crisis, I don't see this cultural sector being challenged/replaced by anything. Both just seem to be deteriorating within a lousy, inefficient, outdated economic structure.

Both crises also seem related. The crumbling of public education has included the crumbling of music education, contributing to the loss of classical music understanding, interest, appreciation among younger generations (a critical factor, because this necessarily tends to be an acquired capability).

Basically, the classical music cultural sector by its nature needs to be socially supported, and under a "market" economy, this means some mechanism of major government support. I do recognize that this is an interesting notion for me to raise within a context that includes the somewhat rather absurd, seemingly endless debate over the Build Back Better infrastructure legislation in Washington. Nevertheless, it seems to me that classical music support is a need that deserves greater prominence than it's been getting.

 

I know little about American symphony orchestras, their organization and means of sustenance, the nature of their economic issues, problems, or resources ....

I do know something of Greek drama. The tragedies of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, the comedies of Aristophanes and Menander have proved among the most influential works (philosophically, politically, socially, aesthetically) in our Western culture. Though but some 30 of these works remain extant, they loom large in our cultural heritage. Each of these works, and all of the "lost" others, were produced by artists supported by the state. It's notable to remember that the great Greek dramas flourished in the city of Athens. Another famous Greek city, Sparta, produced little notable poetry and no known dramas. Apparently, their financial support went towards making war rather than making art. I ponder what may have been the state of our current culture had Athens foresworn the cothurnus and followed, rather, in Sparta's jack boots.

If art is important, it deserves societal support, which includes governmental aid (the government's funds, of course, deriving from the pockets of its citizens). Certainly, not all subsidized art will prove of value, but the few worthy pieces, the sort of art works that determine the direction of a culture for the better, may not see the light of day without such support, and that would prove a great harm to all of society.

It's intriguing, also, to realize that advancements in science correspond to those periods of human culture when arts were prized. Eras such as ancient Greece, the Roman era, the Renaissance. The term "Dark Ages" provides a hint of the state of artistic culture during its era. There was neither a flourishing of arts or science during the great periods of "dark ages" that sweep through human culture. I much prefer the alternative.

 

Let’s not forget the effect of Covid. I haven’t been to a concert in 2 years. I’m in my mid sixties and slightly immunocompromised.
Most of the audience is the wrong side of fifty. Most Orchestra venues are in Urban areas. Even if I went the thought of wearing a mask for2 hours after doing so all day at work, when I could be enjoying the same music at home at no risk and in comfort, just isn’t appealing

 

Really? Why don't you do something exciting and go out to a jazz club? As an American, my cultural heritage, my classical music is JAZZ. And, sadly, its more well loved all over the world besides The U.S.! Symphonic musicians just read little black dots off a page, Jazz musicians read exciting, syncopated, melodies, followed by the adventure of improvisation. Its so much more fun! And often, its danceable!

 

In America, we seem fixated on this idea that commercial success is the only legitimate standard by which to judge or assess a particular activity.
This leaves us with a rather dubious outlook regarding our overall contributions to human progress on the grand and historical scale....I guess our contribution wil be:

WWF, Big-Time Wrestling
UFC Championships
MMA events....

they generate income, so they must be "great"..[??]

 

I believe it was Socrates said: "Popularity does not translate quality." What that means is that; Even though McDonald's sells millions of hamburgers, that doesn't mean that their GOOD hamburgers!" Same with WWF, UFC, and MMA Events.

 

If nobody listens to a falling orchestra, does it make any sound?

 

Who cares? Stop funding them! America has its own classical music; JAZZ. It our cultural heritage.

 

Recently saw a couple interesting articles about this.
They indicated that the sheer number of orchestras in the US has been dwindling steadily for, at least, the last decade or so.
Indications of major US cities that no longer have a major SO.

To articulate the problem, the articles used phrases such as:
pay cuts, musician strikes, dwindling budgets, ever escalating ticket costs, shortened seasons, massive deficits, and bankrupt.

There were also suggestions that CEOs of a number of orchestras are of the mind that any cost saving strategy is, at best, a short-term solution.

Gives one pause to consider how much of a concern this really is.

The tenuous condition of the classical music cultural sector has become a matter of increasing concern to me, particularly in the case of symphony orchestras, in view of news reports of financial and other operational problem that have emerged in recent decades.

I will fast-forward here to mention what I perceive as crucial steps toward a solution: (1) A massive increase in governmental funding for classical organizations (orchestras as well as ballet and opera companies); in the USA, this would mean an increase in federal funding, probably administered through the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), as well as local funding (mainly municipal). (2) A major escalation in classical music education programs, mainly in public education systems, focusing on widespread understanding ("music appreciation") programs as well as playing instruments for students with strong interest or exceptional talent.

First it's helpful to recognize the depth of the problem. Perhaps a resource to start with is a 2016 document from the League of American Orchestras: Orchestra Facts: 2006-2014. A Study of Orchestra Finances and Operations, Commissioned by the League of American Orchestras.

Some of the facts reporting are fairly sobering; for example:

Overall, audiences declined by 10.5% between 2010
and 2014 (OSR), broadly in line with other performing
arts sectors (NCAR). This decline was sharpest within
tour audiences, which decreased by almost 50% over
the five-year period. In contrast, audiences for classical
series concerts declined by 5.5%, corresponding
roughly to a 3% decline in the number of classical
series performances offered.

There's more, but this alone tends to suggest a worrying trend. Worthy of further discussion.

 

The tenuous condition of the classical music cultural sector has become a matter of increasing concern to me, particularly in the case of symphony orchestras, in view of news reports of financial and other operational problem that have emerged in recent decades.

I will fast-forward here to mention what I perceive as crucial steps toward a solution: (1) A massive increase in governmental funding for classical organizations (orchestras as well as ballet and opera companies); in the USA, this would mean an increase in federal funding, probably administered through the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), as well as local funding (mainly municipal). (2) A major escalation in classical music education programs, mainly in public education systems, focusing on widespread understanding ("music appreciation") programs as well as playing instruments for students with strong interest or exceptional talent.

First it's helpful to recognize the depth of the problem. Perhaps a resource to start with is a 2016 document from the League of American Orchestras: Orchestra Facts: 2006-2014. A Study of Orchestra Finances and Operations, Commissioned by the League of American Orchestras.

Some of the facts reporting are fairly sobering; for example:

There's more, but this alone tends to suggest a worrying trend. Worthy of further discussion.

I agree with you. But it's not going to
happen. If anything it's going to get worse.

 

Interesting thread.

I worry about my home town Cleveland Orchestra quite frankly. But, even though the younger generation of the ‘old guard philanthropist family’ members leave the area regularly, or have left years ago, so far, it amazes me that there is still a lot of support. Many of the ‘elite neighborhoods’ where these philanthropist families lived for years are more and more now being occupied by transients who have moved into the area from other parts of the country, or world, (many who are employed by the Cleveland Clinic), who have no idea of the Orchestras local, national, and worldwide historical significance. Obviously local corporate support is important as well, and still seems to be strong enough.

Concerts are still well attended, but for how long? What amazes me is the survival of the Cleveland Orchestra was never in doubt when Szell was alive, and his ‘ghost’ it seems still has an impact throughout the years in terms of what he built and accomplished for the Orchestra and the city of Cleveland.

So, I believe orchestras will have to eventually think outside of the box, and some are. The Berlin Philharmonic comes to mind. They have the Digital Concert Hall which has virtual members from all over the world, including me. For $160 a year, you have access to every live performance, specials, etc. in addition to a library of recorded concert performances going back to Karajan. Their video/streaming library is extensive, and the production is first rate. They have been doing this for years. They also have done a very good job producing their own recorded music productions, which are also first rate.

$160 is how much I would spend on one live performance at Severance Hall with the Cleveland Orchestra. So, to me, it’s a steal, even though no, it doesn’t compare to being there in person. But I highly enjoy my virtual membership to the Berlin Philharmonic, and gladly pay the yearly cost year after year. I’m sure it helps them a great deal in not only being able to survive, but to thrive. Those, as I, will gladly pay the yearly $160 membership because first and foremost I/we love the music. I’m not paying to go to Severance Hall as my ‘civic duty’, as quite frankly, many have, will, and do. Many of the regular Cleveland Orchestra concert goers would not be buying one of these subscriptions. And I have to assume that is probably somewhat true in Berlin, so the Digital Concert Hall subscribers has to be a significant contribution to the orchestra as well. Strangely, over the years since I’ve subscribed, I feel I ‘know’ the Berlin Philharmonic orchestra and musicians better than I do ‘my own’ Cleveland Orchestra and musicians.

Just in the past year The Cleveland Orchestra has also created a streaming subscription service called Adella. I downloaded it and have looked into it, but unfortunately it costs more per year than Berlin, and their library is tiny in comparison because it is a brand new concept for them. Yes, you have access to the live concert performances, but why cost more than the well established Berlin? Cleveland has also started self producing their own recorded music, and the production is top notch as well. Is that making money? Don’t know, but feel they must be doing it for a reason vs signing with a recording label.

I think it is these types of money generating endeavors that will help even the best Orchestras in the world survive, as their reach and money generation can be worldwide to actual music lovers. I do think this is the direction moving forward. Just as many folks today prefer to stream new movie releases at home vs going to the theater. Some still prefer the theater, but I’m sure at home home streaming is a cost benefit overall. It may help some theaters to survive as well, just as a concert hall. That isn’t something we want to lose.

Now, unfortunately, these expensive alternatives will not help the smaller orchestras, and in order to survive, they may also have to look for other ways to create income moving forward, or simply close shop. I’m surprised most all of them didn’t go belly-up since COVID and the restrictions over the last 1-2 years.

 

SO what! Jazz is our classical music, NOT classical. Lets support jazz, jazz musicians, and jazz clubs. (Like they do in Europe). Symphonic music is boring, just a bunch of old farts reading little black dots off a page. BORING.

 

Post #32 is an excellent post, and was interested in his indication of the digital subscription for the BP.
Went to BP's website and the cost of this needs to be updated.
BP's cost for this service is currently $169.
BP states $168 on the front page, but as you step through the ordering, the final page states $169.
Still something of a fair price as you get everything described in #32, and more.
BP also offers a free 7 day trial.

 

Sorry, I was going by memory. At times, they will offer existing subscribers discounts as well. Regardless, even $169 is a real deal for the year. Highly recommend.

 

The US has become a vast, culture-less wasteland. This isn't to say that the orchestras in this country aren't doing well, because, honestly, would any of us truly know how they're doing? I'm just glad that there is a smaller percentage of the American population that does love this music and tries to support it in some way.

 

Screw symphonic music. Its European music, its NOT American music. And most of it is over 400 years old! Our cultural heritage is JAZZ. We should support and fund jazz musicians, jazz clubs, and jazz CDs. Get rid of the orchestras. And get rid of John Williams, too. All his music sounds the same. So predictable. "Star Wars" sounds just like Raiders."

 

I only know of one study that addressed this issue and I mentioned it before in other threads.

The National Symphony in Washington, DC hired a marketing group to determine what they could do to increase attendance.

This group determined that their biggest problem was that the Kennedy Center was at a lousy location and difficult to get to. And it is.

 

This group determined that their biggest problem was that the Kennedy Center was at a lousy location and difficult to get to. And it is.

Wonder how much it cost the NSO to buy a study that concluded the obvious?

 

I used to live in DC and never once went to the Kennedy Center. It's remarkable how something can be so close to downtown as the crow flies, and also so aggressively irritating to actually get to.

 

From my experience, here are some key steps to deal with a major social problem like this: (1) Recognize there is a problem, and identify its main details. (2) Analyze the problem and identify its major causes. (3) Work out a strategic plan to address and resolve these major components of the problem.

On the whole, my research has led me to think the current problems in the classical music cultural sector, and particularly with respect to the deteriorating condition of symphony orchestras, fall into two categories: (1) The lack of an adequate, reliable, stable, sustainable funding base for critically important classical performing organizations, especially symphony orchestras. (2) The lack of meaningful, consistent classical music (and for that matter, art heritage) programs in public education systems.

These two factors are interrelated. For example, the lack of an adequately supported symphony orchestra base in a community typically means there's little to no opportunity for young people and their family members to actually attend live concerts, even if they had the desire.

Other factors may also be involved, but I see them as ancillary. For example, orchestra concert venues may be poorly placed for public access (e.g., DC's Kennedy Center), but I suspect this happens because of cost/funding issues and perhaps some political involvement behind the scenes.

In any case, recognizing and analyzing the problem and its components are crucial if there's any chance of finding solutions.

 

Most respectfully,your thoughts fly against "capitalism." Especially Uber-capitalism. Survival of the fittest. The strong will survive,the weak will die.
I agree with your thoughts. But the the thoughts are politically "socialist." And the USA has a very week strain in its DNA about societal concerns. USA has been predominant about the "individual." Go West Young Man. Find your future on your own. We are still seeing this play out today.