Jessica and Colette’s performances were stellar, and I’m so proud to have worked with such gifted musicians. So, Thank you Jessica and Colette!

My next concert will be with on May 21 and 22 with the Anubis Saxophone Quartet. Once again, this work will be presented on a concert of music with other Random Access Music composers. I’ll post more info when the concert date gets a bit closer.

This past weekend, I received two marvelous performances of my work for solo flute entitled Crazy Cat Lady. My friend, colleague, and new music performer extraordinaire, Christine Perea, was the performer. What I love the most about Christine is her dedication and commitment to new music. She’s a fearless advocate of music that employs extended performance techniques and modern compositional practices. She’s also one of the kindest musicians I’ve ever worked with. Crazy Cat Lady  was written for and dedicated to Christine, with the express intent to make use of her varied talents, and she did not disappoint.

Every once in a while a composer writes a work that he or she is proud of; that is performed well; that is appreciated by the audience; and that the performer of the work enjoys playing. It doesn’t happen often. Crazy Cat Lady  is one of those pieces, and I’m so happy that Christine Perea was part of making that happen. So, to my favorite crazy cat lady: Thanks! If you find video of performances to be distracting, then visit my works list page to take a listen to an mp3.

I’d like to congratulate all the players of the Round Rock Symphony for their commitment, energy, and strong musicality. And, thank you Maestro Huff for your wonderful leadership.

I should have a recording of the two concerts soon, and I’ll post the recordings to my “works list” page as soon as it is available.

Discover Opera! A Show For Family Audiences:Gargoyle Garden 

The Concert Requires Free Tickets. FREE TICKETS may be requested via e-mail, as well as mail order, by phone, or in person. To order free tickets by email, contact:

concertinfo@msmnyc.edu

When requesting free tickets, please remember to include your name, the number of tickets requested, and a phone number (MSM will only contact you by phone if the event details change). Unless you specify otherwise, tickets will be e-mailed as a printable e-ticket. You will receive an automated e-mail confirmation from Vendini, the MSM ticket provider, when your request has been processed.

Date(s): Sun Apr 5, 2009/ Wed Apr 8, 2009
Event Time: 2:30 PM (sun)/ 3:00 PM (wed)
Location: Greenfield Hall (sun)/Ades Performance Space (wed)
Price: Free—Tickets Required
Contact: Concert Office 917-493-4428

Please come if you can!

When I was in high school and college, I spent many summers marching in drum and bugle corps. One year, I spent the summer living in Boston and marched with the corps The 27th Lancers. This corps’ standard parade song was O Danny Boy. Whenever we marched in parades, the locals knew that we would play Danny Boy for them. So, up and down the streets of Boston, half-drunk (and often fully-drunk) men would scream like teenage girls at a boy-band concert for us to play Danny Boy. Once the music would commence, they’d often break down in tears and begin sobbing and hugging each other. It was a sight that I’ll never forget–and the sound of their demands for this old tune will forever leave me with a weird smile on my face.

The muppets, of course, have the definitive performance of the tune. (sorry–the embed to this video seems to be broken at youtube today… will try to fix as soon as i can.)

I personally love the idea.

However, there are some problems. To quote the NYTimes:

Yet despite the general acclaim for the Met’s innovation, introduced and championed by its general manager, Peter Gelb, a few voices have raised concerns about long-term effects on the art form.

The dissenters say that the movement will lead to more conservative programming; that the voice will become subservient to appearance; that listeners will be trained to hear something electronic and lose an appreciation for a live experience.

What caught my eye in the above quote was “…more conservative programming.” (my italics) Now, I’m not sure how the author of the story, Daniel J. Wakin, meant “more conservative”, but I can read the sentence in a few ways:

• Opera houses will program more “warhorses”–that is, the only operas we’ll be able to see will be well-established, tried-and-true money makers; or
• Opera houses will program only “safe” and uncontroversial operas; or
• Opera houses will program operas that are musically conservative.

I’m sure there a few more ways to parse the word “conservative,” but I don’t think it really matters exactly which meaning Wakin intends, because all of them readily apply to most opera houses in America today.

More conservative?

Heaven help me. The cost of producing new operas is astounding. The financial risk is even more frightening. It’s hard for me to believe that the medium will break out of its conservative ways any time soon.

I have no proof but my gut feelings, but I think that taking opera out of the opera houses, which in America are seen as the epitome of stuffy, snooty, elitist artforms may actually open the medium up to be appreciated by the masses. There is a real concern that moving operas to the screen will place pressure to cast looks over vocal quality, but, frankly, that concern doesn’t impress me too much. Opera is supposed to be a visual as well as aural medium. Making the music the only concern in the production ignores the fact that the lyrics sometimes are in complete dissonance to what is actually happening on the stage. Large, older women are the sung about as young, thin things. Watching a 200 lb. woman sing about wasting away from consumption is just weird to me.

I’m willing to sacrifice a bit of musical quality for a more cohesive dramatic experience. If listeners only want a perfectly sung/played opera, then let them support concert performances of those works. Somehow, I don’t think those productions will make much money.

The first thing that I noticed when the quartet began playing was how loud it was. Then, I noticed that they had microphones. My next thought was, “It looks pretty windy out there, and the mics don’t seem to be picking up any of the wind noise! I wonder how the sound engineers managed that? Maybe they’re sheilded really well by the bullet-proof glass surrounding the entire stage…”

If you’re not up to speed, it was revealed after the ceremony that the quartet had recorded the work a day or two before-hand. That recording was pumped through the public address system while the performers wore earphones and played “live” along with the recording. In essence, they did a lip-synch.

The ceremony organizers released this information to the news outlets before the ceremony started, but none of them announced it. However, afterwards, some folks began to complain.

My thinking is that the performers made the right decision. There is no way the piano, the cello or violin could have been heard on that very windy, cold day. The clarinet might have popped through above the wind for people sitting 20-30 yards away, but other than that, no-one but those sitting within a few yards of the performers would have been able to hear.

While the performers made the right decision, the inauguration committee committed a huge gaffe, I think. Usually, the outrage associated with lip-synching is that there is a feeling of deception. Is milli-vanilli REALLY singing or is it someone else entirely? Well, there is no doubt that Yo-yo Ma, Itzak Perlman, Anthony McGill, and Montero are not the performers that they claim to be. In fact, they are universally viewed as some of the greatest musicians of our time. So, there is no deception about the “who” that is performing. That, in itself, muted some of the criticism in the mainstream press.

What the inauguration planners should have done is made sure that the networks announced that the players would be accompanying themselves on a recording, because the mics could not pick up enough of their sound due to the windy conditions. I think that simple acknowledgement and a quick explanation that the quartet was still actually playing would have washed away any controversy at all.

As usual, transparency would have been the best choice.

Williams’ composition was an odd one. Let me start by saying that I think Williams is a very gifted composer. His greatest talents lie in his deft ability to emulate styles and genres and to use them for his own ends–usually in service to the narrative of visual images (but not always). I think the real problem with Air and Simple Gifts is that the work was stuck in the middle of an incredibly important historical moment. A four-minute work for a mixed quartet was already missing the point before a single note was sounded. An artistic artifact for that moment needed to be either as big as the moment (probably impossible) or so poignant as to leap into the mind whenever one remembered the inauguration itself. Of course, the problem with meeting either of those goals is that the musical interlude was, also, a practical moment in time. Music in such a ceremony must always serve the ceremony rather than being ars gratia ars. That Williams decided to write a serious work that engaged with the moment in a tenuously philosophical way, was, in my opinion, a mistake. The music either had to be fully connected and engaged in the history of the moment, or it had to eschew it entirely to try to arrive at some other artistic impulse–all the while keeping in line with the fact that this is not a concert, but an inauguration that was dripping with historical import.

Easier said than done, though. Williams was in an impossible position to write a work worthy of such a moment. I honor him for his try. But, of course, how could one pass up the opportunity to write a work to be premiered by a quartet such as Ma, Perlman, Gillman, and Montero?