V.com weekend vote: What is the most important trait in a good conductor/music director?
This week I posted a few thoughts on conductors, as I've been thinking about the impending departure of several major conductors on the West Coast (Esa-Pekka Salonen from the San Francisco Symphony in 2025, Gustavo Dudamel from the Los Angeles Philharmonic in 2026) ...and the search for their replacements.
It made me wonder about everyone else's thoughts - what do you most value from a conductor/music director? And where are you coming from with that? As a player? Audience member? A board member? Something else?
A symphony's music director is many things to many people, and when searching for one, it is important to keep that in mind and find someone who has the right balance for a given community.
I'd love to have a wide-ranging conversation, where people share the different things they value. As a section violinist, I value clarity of physical communication quite a lot, but I also love to hear an inspiring story. And I'll say, I feel a certain pride about a conductor who really connects with the community, because that connection helps people to understand and enjoy the thing I do and the thing I love so much!
I've assembled a list below, and I know that the answer is really "all of the above"! But in the interest of starting a good discussion, please choose one aspect that you feel strongly about at the moment, and feel free to talk about this in the discussion.
You might also like:
- On Conductors: A Good Beat, and You Can Play to It
- Discussion: When to ignore the conductor?
- Conductor Esa-Pekka Salonen to Leave San Francisco Symphony in 2025
- Conductor Gustavo Dudamel to Leave LA Phil for NY Phil
* * *
Enjoying Violinist.com? Click here to sign up for our free, bi-weekly email newsletter. And if you've already signed up, please invite your friends! Thank you.
Replies
For amateur and community type orchestras, it helps to be able to run an efficient rehearsal.
I voted musical conception / vision. It is good to see it as number 1 at the moment. I believe that it represents the concept that we are striving to create great art. That lofty goal is irrespective of community relations, or even creating a respectful environment.
There have been lots of comdoctors with personality issues, lets just say, dating back to mozart and bach. They created great art none the less.
Stick technique, a clear beat, and the resulting benefit of not needing to talk too much in rehearsal.
Show us, don’t tell us.
Thinking of "clear physical communication..." difficulties can sometimes arise with conductors who are more accustomed to working with choirs. As filler to a choral programme the young conductor (I presume it was he) chose Britten's Young Person's Guide to the Orchestra. When we came to the final fugue warning signs were there at both rehearsals and in the end the message from the concertmaster was "just hang on to me!". Unfortunately the wind and brass weren't able to and the result was we all finished in bits.
What say we about directors who don't use a baton? Or the growing tendency to put the baton down in intense moments and use just hands? This latter, usually accompanied by a facial expression meant to project deep internal passion, reminds me of Mark Twain's parody of cultured ladies listening to poetry.
The best technical conductor I have ever seen, from the viewpoint of an audience member, is Albert Bergeret. That guy cues every last entrance on stage and in the pit. Incredible.
I have played under some very, very good conductors who chose to use hands only for certain pieces.
A baton is just a tool. Helpful in some settings, less so in others, but it’s the brain directing the hands with or without the stick that makes the difference.
I am going to be arrogant here: Musical conception and vision is the sine qua non skill. Without it all the other skills are for nothing (incidentally this is just as true for soloists and chamber players and even the church organist).
As to weighting the other skills: The ranking would depend on the exact job. Examples: A conductor at the opera does not choose the program (maybe he is consulted, maybe not). In a community orchestra the conductor's social skills are a great help in keeping the orchestra going and retaining members.
I have seen quite a few conductors whose technique was, shall we say, idiosyncratic, but who were yet able to get their vision across; it seems to be a case of "if it works it works" as we used to say in my youth.
90 % of the time I do not watch the baton. My eyes are on the paper. When I need a cue or some similar gesture I watch the conductor's whole body language.
The difference between a good conductor and a useless conductor is one beat. The useless conductor is reacting to the music, following, and all of his cues are too late. The good conductor is mentally ahead of the music. In the absence of needed cues I watch the concertmaster's bow. If I am the concertmaster I turn into an unofficial assistant conductor.
The baton is the cheapest instrument in the orchestra, with the easiest technique to learn. I am continually surprised by the odd or defective technique of some top-tier conductors. Their strengths are somewhere else; business management, musicianship, running the rehearsals.
The best baton technique that I have ever worked under was from a retired military band conductor.
Musical Conception and Vision: Moi Aussi!
I'm with others. The difference between a conductor who truly leads an orchestra, versus one who merely follows the orchestra as they play, is the above. An inspired performance can only come from a conductor with musical conception and vision.
Musical conception and vision, as long as I don't disagree with them! Unfortunately I don't think I ever played for a conductor who had anything special to offer in that department. I've often heard, occasionally played in performances that felt inspired but as players we can also draw inspiration from the music, a soloist or even one another.
The ability to bring out the best in every member of the orchestra, to create a common will to work for each other and create something good together. I guess that is most relevant for amateur orchestras.
If I have to pick one, it is clear stick technique and physical communication. Of course really good conductors have many of the different qualities. A musical vision is critical, too.
My pet peeve for conductors, though, is too much talking. The occasional short, relevant story is fine. Constantly talking and telling stories takes away from valuable rehearsal time. Show us instead!
Even if I disagree with the concept, Steve, I prefer it to a no-concept conductor, a live metronome with cues. One learns from visions one disagrees with, probably more than from agreeable ones. And maybe one even ends up convinced. I have had the luck of playing with several very inspiring conductors and I learned from them. And anyway if I play orchestra I expect to execute the conductor's vision and I am not happy if I feel there is no vision.
My vote went to “conception and vision”, although i am rather disappointed with the wording of that option. While other choices include explicit specifications of quality (for example, “clear” stick), such qualifiers are unfortunately absent for the "C&V" entry. The problem for me is that throughout my long orchestral life i have seen some conductors each of whom definitely had his/her C&V, but those were neither interesting nor tasteful - in other words, utterly unconvincing and deeply unsatisfying. And unlike AZ whose comment is just a few inches above mine here, i would not prefer a conductor with poor C&V to the one without any, because with a fairly efficient conductor - even without any distinctive C&V - a fine orchestra can still perform quite well thanks to their memory of playing the piece with finer musicians, while an equally efficient one with boring and/or tasteless C&V would make it virtually impossible to give a good piece justice. So, by registering my vote in favor of that option, i am assuming that Laurie probably meant to, but simply forgot, to put the words “high quality” at the very top of her C&V entry.
There's no one thing. Sometimes I'm desperate for a conductor to work out what his baton is for, but it would be silly to tick that one.
Funny story - my violist friend bought a baton in a transparent box from a music shop, so it wasn't wrapped, and when she left the shop a man on the pavement said, "careful, love, there's a bin in front of you". He was serious - he thought she was blind.
Not the funniest viola joke I ever heard. How about "You should put that thing straight in the bin love/mate" A violist with conducting ambitions, see? I knew one only too well.
Of course every conductor has some conception of a piece, even if it's just the standard one. The question is how far they should impose their own "vision" and personality. Not too far I'd say.
This was really hard, but I ended up voting "Creating a respectful, professional, collaborative environment" since one point needed to be chosen.
The one that says "Clear physical communication/stick technique on the podium" is also very good but I wanted to put attention on more than technique in my answer. After all you could say that technique enters the scene when you are professional.
The one that says "Musical conception and vision" is also very important and great. After all the whole point is to play music.
The other options only got few votes. BUT I think that doesn't mean that these aren't great. It is more about that you had to choose just one option.
I voted "Clear physical communication/stick technique on the podium", although I agree with Laurie that the best answer is "all of the above". But when you're in the trenches, you're looking for a clear beat (with advance warning of ritards), and dynamics. A description of the history of the music, a biographical sketch of the composer, etc. are a wonderful addition during a concert, although somewhat less important during a rehearsal. Still, any hints as to why a composer wrote a piece the way he or she did can be helpful, but if it becomes lengthy it's perhaps better given by e-mail before the rehearsals.
This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.
Violinist.com is made possible by...
Dimitri Musafia, Master Maker of Violin and Viola Cases
Johnson String Instrument/Carriage House Violins
Subscribe
Laurie's Books
Discover the best of Violinist.com in these collections of editor Laurie Niles' exclusive interviews.
Violinist.com Interviews Volume 1, with introduction by Hilary Hahn
Violinist.com Interviews Volume 2, with introduction by Rachel Barton Pine
November 3, 2024 at 03:30 AM · I voted “musical conception and vision.” I also highly value “stick technique” and “collaborative environment.” As I write this, these three items are at the top of the vote list.
From childhood, I had the ambition to become a symphony player - it’s what nerved me to take up violin study as a kid. Starting in my late teens, during my days as a music major, I played a couple of seasons in the CSO’s training school, the Civic Orchestra of Chicago. In this venture, we worked with a good number of well-known guest and resident conductors. I’ll name two of them here: the late Sir Georg Solti, who was CSO Music Director; and the late Margaret Hillis, founder and first conductor of the CSO Chorus.
I remember Solti as having a very precise beat that you could clearly read and play to. I also remember him for getting right to the point and not wasting words, being cordial, yet businesslike and not effusive.
Hillis I remember as one who could really draw the music out of players. I always felt at ease with her and, at the same time, really felt like going the extra distance to give her what she was looking for in a performance.
At 21, I set aside my orchestral ambitions, feeling that small chamber playing suited me better - that’s for another discussion. But I will always be thankful for the orchestra experience and training I did have - wouldn’t have wanted to miss it.