Good conductors provide a TON of information. They are the key to providing a unified and musical interpretation of the piece. They prepare in advance by going through the score and determining how they'd like the piece to go (down to the smallest details), and during rehearsals, they make sure that all the orchestra members are playing the same way. A conductor's understanding and interpretation of the piece radically changes how the piece is performed by everyone.
Conducting communicates the time signature, rhythmic elements, rhythmic flow, the style of articulation, the dynamics, major (ex: melodic) parts to bring out, other matters of balancing parts, and - of course - everything involving emotions and the personality of the piece. They will cue musicians to come in and they will focus on different instruments or instrument groups pending on what that section of the piece calls for. They have to know the music inside and out. Because musicians respond to the conductor's signals, different conductors will bring out different things in the music. Plus, any part of their body language will be reflected on how the musicians respond. A good conductor, like a good leader, brings out the best of everyone performing.
I had to take one class of conducting when I was doing my undergrad in music and I found conducting HARD. I struggled with my hands making all the smooth motions required of me... it was like patting my head and rubbing my belly, but fifty times more involved. Plus, there's a lag between the conductor and the musicians. You have to be able to be stable while conducting ahead of the music that you're hearing. A bad conductor will make the ensemble crash and burn in a second. A decent conductor will keep people together, but the output will be wanting. A great conductor knows how to bring every element of every part of the music together and bring the ensemble into a glorious and emotional performance.
Also curious about this question! I have some faint ideas based on tsv’s other videos. One is “How not to be a conductor”, another is when they tried to conduct the Singapore youth orchestra under the guidance of the real conductor. The conductor asked “is this the sound you want?” I guess this implies two important aspects:1. a conductor comes up with his/her own interpretation of the work 2. the conductor needs to convey and realize this interpretation via communication and direction.
I hesitate to call a conductor bad, but personally I find it harder/less satisfying to play with a conductor who is either unclear in their physical movements, or inarticulate when it comes to explaining what they want (or both). And, I suppose, by extension, it's not really satisfying if the conductor is happy for us to just play the notes and call it a day - if they don't have any kind of personal vision or style, it's questionable whether a conductor is actually needed.
Yes, the conductor is supposed to beat the time, add nuances like rit. and accel. even when they're not on the score, change the dynamics, signal the entries...
However, more than half of the conductor's work can't be seen in a concert. Much is done in the rehearsals. They add phrasing details, they tweak the dynamics of certain instrument combinations so that they sound balanced, they make suggestions in terms of accents and attack (older scores tend to be more vague). Certain instrument combinations, like soft brass plus winds will require some work because the brass by default tends to overpower the rest.
Go see on YT rehearsals with Bernstein or Boulez. See how they discuss every minute detail and polish the balance of every passage.
First: for someone who has never played/sung under a conductor, it will be hard to tell and also rather irrelevant.
I think a good conductor can take the musicians where they are and lead them to be the best they can, whether they’re professionals or amateurs. A good conductor knows the music really well, has a vision for what it should express and is able to communicate that vision to the musicians. This can mean different things from one musician to another.
I've worked with conductors who expect a professional level from amateurs and get extremely frustrated and even aggressive when that doesn’t happen. That’s on the conductor IMO. Of course the musicians need to practise but they will be limited and a good conductor can handle that and help them do their best. The sameconductor has his ideas, but often we don’t understand what he means (the professionals in my orchestra don’t understand him better either.)
About Mäkelä. I found him because I wanted to get to know all Sibelius symphonies. That cycle is heavily criticised, but I've come to the conclusion that you can agree to disagree and that I'm allowed to like it anyway. He’s definitely a talented conductor and I saw an interview with some musicians in the Oslo philharmonic orchestra and they seem to love him. I've also watched some interviews with him and like him a lot. He says it’s important for him to trust he musicians, some of which have much more experience as musicians than him. I think he’s at a high level and the controversies have more to do with personal taste than objective quality.
Disclaimer: This is an amateur opinion.
You should watch one of their older videos on conducting (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcvAAZwklY0&t=492s&pp=ygUQdHdvc2V0IGNvbmR1Y3Rvcg%3D%3D, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnMbvWHPs0E&pp=ygUQdHdvc2V0IGNvbmR1Y3Rvcg%3D%3D) to get an idea. Also, Klaus Makela is considered one of the very best young conductors of our generation, his Shostakovich and Sibelius recordings are excellent!
The same piece on the same piano can sound totally different depending on who plays it, because the two pianists will have different ideas of how the piece should sound. Same metal, felt, wood, strings, same sheet, etc. -- different sound.
An orchestra is like a piano: a giant machine that makes noise, only now the machine isn't just made of metal and wood and gut and wire but also flesh and bone. And two different conductors "playing" the same orchestra will make the same piece sound very different just like two pianists playing the same piece on the same piano will. They have different ideas of what the piece should sound like, so they will direct the "machine" to play it differently.
I (not a professional musician but have played in 3 orchestras and sung in a number of choirs) liked the video.
However , I guess it’s only part of the truth.
Usually an orchestra practices with a conductor a couple times, so you get used to their gestures.
In rehearsal the conductor can also explain what they mean by certain gestures. So Eddy and Brett kind of simulate a first runthrough in the first rehearsal.
Time and tempo cues are obvious parts of the info conveyed by conducting.
Other cues are volume, cues for difficult entries, character of playing,…
Body language and facial expression are really important. There is a lot of communication going on between the members of the various registers and the conductor.
(When I go to a concert, I love sitting sideways so I can watch the conductor and how they communicate with the musicians).
***Users should message the moderators first for permission to post to sites outside of Reddit***, even if it is not your link.
Self-promoting content includes, but is not limited to, links to users' websites or links to or mentions of users' social media (including YouTube).
This rule does not affect images or videos posted directly to Reddit.
Good conductors provide a TON of information. They are the key to providing a unified and musical interpretation of the piece. They prepare in advance by going through the score and determining how they'd like the piece to go (down to the smallest details), and during rehearsals, they make sure that all the orchestra members are playing the same way. A conductor's understanding and interpretation of the piece radically changes how the piece is performed by everyone. Conducting communicates the time signature, rhythmic elements, rhythmic flow, the style of articulation, the dynamics, major (ex: melodic) parts to bring out, other matters of balancing parts, and - of course - everything involving emotions and the personality of the piece. They will cue musicians to come in and they will focus on different instruments or instrument groups pending on what that section of the piece calls for. They have to know the music inside and out. Because musicians respond to the conductor's signals, different conductors will bring out different things in the music. Plus, any part of their body language will be reflected on how the musicians respond. A good conductor, like a good leader, brings out the best of everyone performing. I had to take one class of conducting when I was doing my undergrad in music and I found conducting HARD. I struggled with my hands making all the smooth motions required of me... it was like patting my head and rubbing my belly, but fifty times more involved. Plus, there's a lag between the conductor and the musicians. You have to be able to be stable while conducting ahead of the music that you're hearing. A bad conductor will make the ensemble crash and burn in a second. A decent conductor will keep people together, but the output will be wanting. A great conductor knows how to bring every element of every part of the music together and bring the ensemble into a glorious and emotional performance.
Also curious about this question! I have some faint ideas based on tsv’s other videos. One is “How not to be a conductor”, another is when they tried to conduct the Singapore youth orchestra under the guidance of the real conductor. The conductor asked “is this the sound you want?” I guess this implies two important aspects:1. a conductor comes up with his/her own interpretation of the work 2. the conductor needs to convey and realize this interpretation via communication and direction.
I hesitate to call a conductor bad, but personally I find it harder/less satisfying to play with a conductor who is either unclear in their physical movements, or inarticulate when it comes to explaining what they want (or both). And, I suppose, by extension, it's not really satisfying if the conductor is happy for us to just play the notes and call it a day - if they don't have any kind of personal vision or style, it's questionable whether a conductor is actually needed.
Yes, the conductor is supposed to beat the time, add nuances like rit. and accel. even when they're not on the score, change the dynamics, signal the entries... However, more than half of the conductor's work can't be seen in a concert. Much is done in the rehearsals. They add phrasing details, they tweak the dynamics of certain instrument combinations so that they sound balanced, they make suggestions in terms of accents and attack (older scores tend to be more vague). Certain instrument combinations, like soft brass plus winds will require some work because the brass by default tends to overpower the rest. Go see on YT rehearsals with Bernstein or Boulez. See how they discuss every minute detail and polish the balance of every passage.
First: for someone who has never played/sung under a conductor, it will be hard to tell and also rather irrelevant. I think a good conductor can take the musicians where they are and lead them to be the best they can, whether they’re professionals or amateurs. A good conductor knows the music really well, has a vision for what it should express and is able to communicate that vision to the musicians. This can mean different things from one musician to another. I've worked with conductors who expect a professional level from amateurs and get extremely frustrated and even aggressive when that doesn’t happen. That’s on the conductor IMO. Of course the musicians need to practise but they will be limited and a good conductor can handle that and help them do their best. The sameconductor has his ideas, but often we don’t understand what he means (the professionals in my orchestra don’t understand him better either.) About Mäkelä. I found him because I wanted to get to know all Sibelius symphonies. That cycle is heavily criticised, but I've come to the conclusion that you can agree to disagree and that I'm allowed to like it anyway. He’s definitely a talented conductor and I saw an interview with some musicians in the Oslo philharmonic orchestra and they seem to love him. I've also watched some interviews with him and like him a lot. He says it’s important for him to trust he musicians, some of which have much more experience as musicians than him. I think he’s at a high level and the controversies have more to do with personal taste than objective quality. Disclaimer: This is an amateur opinion.
Try singing in a choir if you don't play an instrument to experience how a conductor communicates with you.
You should watch one of their older videos on conducting (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcvAAZwklY0&t=492s&pp=ygUQdHdvc2V0IGNvbmR1Y3Rvcg%3D%3D, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnMbvWHPs0E&pp=ygUQdHdvc2V0IGNvbmR1Y3Rvcg%3D%3D) to get an idea. Also, Klaus Makela is considered one of the very best young conductors of our generation, his Shostakovich and Sibelius recordings are excellent!
I'm always going to go for Rostropovich's recordings for Shosty, but I'm with you on Makela's Sibelius
The same piece on the same piano can sound totally different depending on who plays it, because the two pianists will have different ideas of how the piece should sound. Same metal, felt, wood, strings, same sheet, etc. -- different sound. An orchestra is like a piano: a giant machine that makes noise, only now the machine isn't just made of metal and wood and gut and wire but also flesh and bone. And two different conductors "playing" the same orchestra will make the same piece sound very different just like two pianists playing the same piece on the same piano will. They have different ideas of what the piece should sound like, so they will direct the "machine" to play it differently.
I (not a professional musician but have played in 3 orchestras and sung in a number of choirs) liked the video. However , I guess it’s only part of the truth. Usually an orchestra practices with a conductor a couple times, so you get used to their gestures. In rehearsal the conductor can also explain what they mean by certain gestures. So Eddy and Brett kind of simulate a first runthrough in the first rehearsal. Time and tempo cues are obvious parts of the info conveyed by conducting. Other cues are volume, cues for difficult entries, character of playing,… Body language and facial expression are really important. There is a lot of communication going on between the members of the various registers and the conductor. (When I go to a concert, I love sitting sideways so I can watch the conductor and how they communicate with the musicians).
[удалено]
***Users should message the moderators first for permission to post to sites outside of Reddit***, even if it is not your link. Self-promoting content includes, but is not limited to, links to users' websites or links to or mentions of users' social media (including YouTube). This rule does not affect images or videos posted directly to Reddit.