Print

Print


In fact, is acoustics an exact enough science that we know why one hall
sounds better than another?
Steven C. Barr

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven Smolian" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 9:52 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Poor sounding concert halls.


> Even as a non-profit, an orchestra has a financial responsibilty toward
> those supporting it if it wishes to survive.  It can't be built along side
a
> bottomless pit or it will fall into it during bad economic times when its
> supporters may be under pressure.
>
> The CSO owns the hall.  On days when it is not performing, the hall is
> rented as a concert theater.  That is a non-monopolistic booking situation
> in which it competes for attractions.  Othe venues with air conditioning
> have a distinct advantage.  Air conditioning is necessary.
>
> The true issue is how the need for a/c was met.  I think it is safe to say
> that more concert hall alterations are unsuccessful than neutral, much
less
> an improvement.  This is particularly so for older buildings.  A big cause
> of these failures is that rebuilding cancels some grandfathered in code
> violations.  Different materials, with different acoustical properties-
> densisties, etc., replace older, more confligration-dangerous ones.  Air
> conditioning removes cubic volume from resonant spaces. etc.
>
> The art is applying science to accomodate these changes.  Even with the
> latest computer technology to assist the architect, most new and rebulit
> halls flunk.
>
> In addition, the audience's expectations are partially derived from
> listening to records on various levels of equipment, made by engineers who
> have to accomodate a conductor who often wants the record to sound more as
> he hears it from the podium rather from the audience's perspective.  What
> recording does the architect use as a model?
>
> Complex is an understatement
>
> Steve Smolian
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Don Tait" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, April 07, 2006 7:27 PM
> Subject: [ARSCLIST] Fwd: [ARSCLIST] Fwd: [ARSCLIST] The waltz (was Which
> U.S. orchestra recorded ...
>
>
> >  Brenda is correct. It's true that air conditioning was added to
Orchestra
> > Hall during the 1966 renovation, but the project was undertaken for far
> > bigger
> > reasons. The majority were calamities, above all the idea that the sound
> > of
> > the hall could be improved, whereas it was wrecked. But another was the
> > practical one of giving the CSO members a reasonably comfortable
backstage
> > space for
> > themselves, which they'd never had. I remember standing on Michigan
Avenue
> > during the summer of 1966 and looking through the glass on Orchestra
> > Hall's doors.
> > I could see traffic on Wabash Avenue, a block behind the building.
> > Everything
> > in Orchestra Hall, including its stage and back wall, was gone. All was
> > rebuilt and reconfigured during the renovation.
> >
> >  Don Tait
> >
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
>
>
> "A sad tale of greed" ??????  With all due respect, let's get real here.
> We're talking about a venue that seats over 2500 people and has over 100
> musicians on stage in suits under hot lights. Any modernization efforts
> would obviously include the installation of air conditioning.
>
> Brenda
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Marcos Sueiro
> Sent: Tuesday, April 04, 2006 9:30 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Fwd: [ARSCLIST] The waltz (was Which U.S. orchestra
> recorded first and Arthur...
>
> Chicago's Orchestra Hall when empty. The latter changed with the
> > disastrous  renovation of 1966, which essentially wrecked Orchestra
> Hall
> > as a listening or  recording venue.)
>
> I find it particularly poignant that they did it to add A/C so that they
>
> could extend their season. A sad tale of greed.
>
> Marcos
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.5/303 - Release Date: 4/6/2006
>