Many "smaller budget" orchestras have to rely somewhat on donations from the public for bringing in the bigger names. So if it looks like the musicians are getting low salaries, but they happen to be able to bring in a really big name...most likely, the artist is being sponsored by a donor. I've seen this done before.

Why don't some of the big names like the ones Curt mentioned offer their services on a sliding scale? It really should be what the market can compare.

Responding to a few points: Curt--you are exactly the kind of representative in your field that is a most welcome contributor to these forums. This whole thing about big names: I have traveled throughout the country with orchestras of all levels, and I have found that all names are not big in many places--it depends on who is music director at the time, who has been a guest soloist frequently and who they can afford. In some cases, the second tier orchestras don't need to bring in big name 'A' soloist because they perform close enough to a major city that takes care of that, unless we need to get a jumpstart on a certain concerto and they can afford it. I will admit that some of the 'biggie' names are now in the same position as the artists that don't have the household names yet, since their fees are perhaps too high for most places and there are simply too many big names that it's equally hard for them all to get the work they were used to in the 1980s and 1990s. It's the music directors with long-tern vision of bringing in artists and programming repertoire that focuses more on the community rather than booking the God of the vocal world to sell tickets. In these times of worldly uncertainty at any given moment, the majority of community concert goers are not thinking big name as much as they used to. Deep down, they see big name soloists in the same boat as they are: after 9-11, big name artist or not, you can be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and anything can happen anywhere in the world, so all they care about is seeing a program with music that appeals to them to please their senses. Certainly, name recognition helps, but I think Stuart Malina is on the right track. His job is to entertain the public--and it's in his choice of programming and artists that are his hallmarks of what he does. There are indeed many Malinas out there--and I have personally been satisfied with developing my image as an artist that embraces the great traditions of the Horowitzian persona, but in the 21st century, I have found it worthwhile to help develop the repertoire by bringing works by Ellington, Zwilich, Anderson, Emerson, and new works by Liebermann and more to come to cities that need to please their older audiences as well as newcomers to the concert hall. I have heard all too many sad stories of orchestras and recital presenters blowing their budgets on big soloist fees and losing lots of money. Could be a snowstorm or something that prevents people from going to the concerts etc. There are many excellent artists out there that need a break and play fantastically. I can safely say that in the next few years, even as I am playing with the top tier of orchestras, I will always make myself available to all the tiers equally. An artist must never forget who gave them their starts, and I for one, will always let my agents work with each orchestra individually to suit their needs and budget.

Several good points I would like to respond to

First, regarding donors who will fund big name soloists for smaller orchestras. There are indeed donors like that out there. My wife used to manage the Springfield (OH) Symphony (budget around $600,000), and she had one donor who would write a check for $20-$30,000 a year to bring in a big name soloist. Here in Dayton, one of the wealthiest local families has created an endowment fund for a similar purpose. Going back to the original poster’s comment, it would certainly be better for our musicians if these donors would write a big check to cover a raise for the orchestra, but there are always going to be donors out there who are only excited about "big names."

Second, regarding the comment about sliding scale fees for orchestras. There are definitely some strange market forces at work. Some of the big names can get all the work they want at their asking fee, so they would actually lost money by offering a small orchestra discount. I believe that there are some fairly big name artists who actually will take less to play with a top orchestra than they will insist on to accept a date with a smaller orchestra (i.e., because playing with the big guys is good for their career). But there are others who will negotiate discounted fees (especially if the routing and/or repertoire make sense).

Third, responding to some of Jeffrey's comments. You are exactly right about the big names outside of major markets issue. Once you get past Ma and Perlman and Galway and Watts, there are just not many people in our audience who recognize any soloists by name (not even Josh Bell, for example). What they do remember is who has given great performances with us before (regardless of how big a name), and they expect to see a mix a favorite returning soloists and new faces each season.

I completely agree with you that in the long run it is music directors with a long-term vision of bringing in artists and programming repertoire that focuses more on the community rather than a few big name soloists that builds a larger, stimulated and committed audience.

I also have to say that I am completely committed to programming a reasonable balance of familiar and not-so-familiar repertoire, and I think that having some bigger names on your season can help you program some less familiar repertoire. There are indeed people in our audience that will come hear anyone, as long as they’re playing a Tchaikovsky or Brahms concerto, but that doesn’t mean we should move to a season entirely made up of “cheap” soloists playing Tchaikovsky and Brahms.

Jeffrey,

So when you state that you will make yourself available to all tiers, does that mean your fees adjust depending on what the orchestra could afford?

Confidentially (well, not any more), most of my colleagues do have their agents work with each orchestra to make it work. I usually do alot of outreach and have the other presenters ie schools, piano dealers, have me come in and do meet-n-greets and master classes, which helps fill out the fee a bit. It depends on the repertoire--but we don't typically stray off course from the initial fee. Typically, when someone asks us back, the agents handle the fee jump, when applicable. As an artist, I don't like to get too involved in that--but my agents always apprise me of the deals.

A smart artist manager will work with any ochestra to get his artists work. (Of course, I'm not speaking about the few superstars that Curt and Jeffrey alluded to.) One of the veterans of the business said to me: "I tell my artists that 30 years from now you're not going to remember that you performed with the 'XYZ Symphony" for a certain fee." In other words, it's not good business to turn down a gig.

Having said that, a smart artist manager also knows which of his/her artists I can afford to hire and won't waste either of our time offering someone I can't possibly engage.

Curt and Jeffrey are quite right about the importance of "name soloists." It's great to have 1 or 2 as part of a series but they don't necessarily sell tickets.

Ask how many people in audiences under the age of 30 who know who Rubenstein and Horowitz were. They might as well have lived with Beethoven.

It's a huge danger for artists to expect only the highest fees with a narrow repertoire. Atleast my syudents are taught to learn a broad and varied repertoire and expect little and appreciate each engagement as they are offered. Turning down work gets around all too fast.

quote:

Originally posted by TrickySam9:
A smart artist manager will work with any ochestra to get his artists work. (Of course, I'm not speaking about the few superstars that Curt and Jeffrey alluded to.)...Having said that, a smart artist manager also knows which of his/her artists I can afford to hire and won't waste either of our time offering someone I can't possibly engage.

A smart orchestra manager knows how to work around the artist's manager...

Drew

Drew: I love ya, big guy. You're beautiful. Don't ever change.

quote:

Originally posted by Jeffrey Biegel:
It's a huge danger for artists to expect only the highest fees with a narrow repertoire. At least my students are taught to learn a broad and varied repertoire and expect little and appreciate each engagement as they are offered. Turning down work gets around all too fast.

That's a good point. There are times when we are looking for unusual repertoire and we have a hard time finding anyone who will play it. If I had a demo tape from an emerging pianist giving a stunning performance of the second Shostakovich concerto or the Moritz Moszkowski concerto, he/she would have a good chance to be booked as a soloist here.

I am inundated with promotional materials for artists I have never heard of, and I am definitely more likely to listen closely if it is for off-the-beaten path repertoire.

Aren't you Curt from Delaware days gone by? I remember you now--so you want the Moszkowski--you got it--actually, if you visit my web site and click on repertoire, there's plenty of unusual stuff there (though the Moriyz M is not on there yet)--Neal is wonderful and it would be a pleasure to finally do something together--we were in touch recently--ever done the Ellington, Anderson, Emerson concerti??--stay in touch--Jman

Jeffrey,

If Curt books you with Dayton, don't forget to give myauditions an agency fee!!

quote:

Originally posted by TrickySam9:
Drew: I love ya, big guy. You're beautiful. Don't ever change.

Larry, thanks for the sarcastic response,but some of us acatully find Drew's comments intestesting and refreshing.

I'll do a benefit for myauditions after Dayton--hey--aren't we all in this musical world together helping each other??

Performing live, from your own studio, netcast exclusively on Myauditions.com. Heck, I'd pay for that.

quote:

Originally posted by Jeffrey Biegel:
Aren't you Curt from Delaware days gone by? I remember you now--so you want the Moszkowski--you got it--actually, if you visit my web site and click on repertoire, there's plenty of unusual stuff there (though the Moriyz M is not on there yet)--Neal is wonderful and it would be a pleasure to finally do something together--we were in touch recently--ever done the Ellington, Anderson, Emerson concerti??--stay in touch--Jman

Yes, that's me. Two years in Delaware, and eleven years here in Dayton.

Piano soloist and Edmonton Symphony music director Bill Eddins had something to say about soloists and fees in his Take a Friend to Orchestra Month contribution. Some folks might find it insightful: http://www.artsjournal.com/adaptistration/archives20050501.shtml#100115

Best,
Drew

Thanks for sharing--Bill is dead-on in your article link--I am sure the Edmonton fit will be interesting to follow.

Great article. Reminds me of the time in 1984 I heard Kazukiko Yamashita play at a classical guitar convention in Toronto. The audience was split almost evenly between those who loved his playing and those who reviled it. The opinions were strong enough that it almost brought several audience members to fisticuffs! I actually did sit in front of 2 elderly gents who literally began to duke it out at the Metropolitan Opera during Traviata when one began booing Robert Merill after his first aria as Germont. That's the kind of passion that great music should inspire.