conductor question

rje66

I enjoy classical music and would watch the odd bit on telly(proms etc). Just wondering about the role of the conductor. Is he keeping the tempo going at right speed between different sections, bringing in sections at the right time ,all of these , none of these, other?

The reason i ask is when watching a performance most musicians appear to be reading the sheet music.
Is his dramatic baton waving part showmanship, part him 'really getting into it'?

What would happen if he started a performance, then 3 mins in sat down and left them to it.:eek::eek:?

thanks

purebeta

Most of a conductors job is in rehearsal.

Fluorescence

Most of the conductor's work is done outside concerts. The conductor decides how to interpret the score, and directs the orchestra in what to do. Imagine a play in a theatre - the director tells the actors where to stand, how to hold themselves, what tone of voice to use in certain passages but the script is written by a playwright (who can be a different person). The conductor is broadly the same.

During performance, the conductor keeps time, indicates when people should join in, and generally just reinforces the directions already given during rehearsal.

nickibopp

As far as I know....

It might look like the musicians are only looking at their music but they can all see the conductor out of the corner of their eye and will be taking in what he's doing as well as following their music (as well asplaying their instrument and listening to what's going on around them).

As well as keeping everyone in time and reinforcing what what was said in rehearsal, the conductor will be listening for the balance between sections of instruments and indicating if he/she wants some people to play louder or softer for example. And he/she'll be listening to the music and might do something slightly different or more exaggerated from rehearsal and if it's a good orchestra can trust that they will follow and respond. Ideally a conductor could feel free to have a brilliant new idea on the spur of the moment about how to do something and if everyone's watching he can communicate that.... it's more exciting for the musicians that way and more exciting for the audience.

If the conductor sat down after 3 minutes, depending on the orchestra of course, you could expect the performance to be less tight, more sloppy and you wouldn't be able to have the tense and exciting changes of pace (speeding up would be impossible as everyone would be aiming at a different speed).They could keep a steady pace to dance to ....but they couldn't make your heart race.

That said, a great orchestra with great leaders of each section (that are all being followed by the rest of their section) could do pretty well, especially if the music happens to have a steady pace.

rje66

thanks all. that makes sense now. it will make it more interesting to watch, now that im a bit wiser:D:D:D.

nickibopp

No probs! Course - best thing to do would be to go and see an orchestra perform, then you'd get a real feel for it - it's quite the experience

The Mad Hatter

Actually, an even better way to learn would be to join an amateur choir. That way you can see them at work. Depending on the choir, you might not even need to be able to read music.

It's true what was posted above, that the conductor's work is mostly done in rehearsal, and depending on the quality of the orchestra, many could probably manage a performance (not necessarily a great one) on the night without the conductor. Some orchestras, like the Orpheus Chamber Orchestra and the European Chamber Orchestra, play without a conductor, though in both cases these orchestras are a) quite small, and so less unwieldy than a massive symphony orchestra, and b) made up of some really incredible musicians.

That said, it depends on the conductor as well. I spoke to a violinist once who had played with an orchestra with Sir Simon Rattle conducting. She said that the experience was incredible - like he was literally pulling the music out of the orchestra.