4 ms·

> The real problem is that we don't need enough orchestras to actually sustain orchestras as an industry anymore I don't understand how you reach this conclusi

> The real problem is that we don't need enough orchestras to actually sustain orchestras as an industry anymore I don't understand how you reach this conclusion. Orchestras exist primarily for their live performances, and the halls where they perform seat just as many people as they always have. Classical music is alive and well, from what I can see -- what makes you think differently?

jerf 16y ago
A series of articles like this over the years: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/25/arts/music/25ravi.html http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/25/arts/music/25ravi.html If that is inaccurate reporting, then I plead being fed bad data. The other problem is that market behaviors are typically nonlinear. If you cut the demand down by 50%, that doesn't necessarily mean that you get 50% less output. If the going price based on the supply and demand curves sinks below the cost of production for some of the players, production can drop dramatically, not just linearly proportionally. Unless something drastic changes in the demand trends I don't see how this fate will be escaped.
- hugh3 16y ago
  I have no idea what the precise financial situations of the world's orchestras are. But I do know that many of them are perpetually crying poor but never actually closing their doors. I can't think of any major orchestra which has ever actually had to shut down due to a lack of money coming in. New recordings must be, I imagine, a rapidly-dissolving revenue stream anyway. Any piece which is actually popular among buyers already has a number of "definitive" recordings which it would be difficult to top, and anything which isn't already the subject of a zillion recordings will probably never sell much anyway.
  - MartinCron 16y ago
    Many orchestras are supported by donations from wealthy benefactors, so "crying poor" is a core part of their (generally non-profit) business.

jerf 16y ago

A series of articles like this over the years: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/25/arts/music/25ravi.html http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/25/arts/music/25ravi.html If that is inaccurate reporting, then I plead being fed bad data. The other problem is that market behaviors are typically nonlinear. If you cut the demand down by 50%, that doesn't necessarily mean that you get 50% less output. If the going price based on the supply and demand curves sinks below the cost of production for some of the players, production can drop dramatically, not just linearly proportionally. Unless something drastic changes in the demand trends I don't see how this fate will be escaped.

hugh3 16y ago
I have no idea what the precise financial situations of the world's orchestras are. But I do know that many of them are perpetually crying poor but never actually closing their doors. I can't think of any major orchestra which has ever actually had to shut down due to a lack of money coming in. New recordings must be, I imagine, a rapidly-dissolving revenue stream anyway. Any piece which is actually popular among buyers already has a number of "definitive" recordings which it would be difficult to top, and anything which isn't already the subject of a zillion recordings will probably never sell much anyway.
- MartinCron 16y ago
  Many orchestras are supported by donations from wealthy benefactors, so "crying poor" is a core part of their (generally non-profit) business.