More Repertoire Thoughts

I’ve been trying to listen to the promotional recordings the same day we receive them from the publisher. Immediately following the opening of the reservation system, we received so much stuff that it meant a lot of late nights. Even so, another group beat us to a new publication that I’d really love to perform next December. In fact, they reserved it a good four days before we even received information from that publisher. After hearing it on the demo recording, I instantly logged in and tried to reserve it, but was too late. It’s probably not what you’re thinking though, it’s a grade one! One of the best released in years. Oh well, on the waiting list we go. I find myself checking the reservation system a couple times a day to see if they’ve happened to release it from their reserved list.

Since Tuesday, we have been permitted to reserve up to 18 selections. I again cleared my teaching schedule around 10:00 AM to be available to enter our selections. In the days leading up to the 16th I had compiled a list of the 12 works we’d try to reserve in order of my preference and in anticipation of what other groups might be interested in. I managed to get my selections entered quickly and wasn’t beaten to the punch on any of them.

Of the eighteen works reserved, we have 6 that are about as definite as you can get…plus 5 good candidates, and 7 weaker candidates. I carry a list with me of what our program would look like if the Midwest Office asked for it today. Right now, it contains 9 works, although as it currently stands, our current program wouldn’t be approved. With 5 older pieces, and 4 new pieces, we’re not at 50% new publications. We’re also about 50 seconds over our times limit, plus I’m not completely sold on the opening work for the concert. Never-the-less, it’s a good starting point and I’ll continue to tweak it over the next several months.

I don’t typically program new music. Why? For no real reason other than I firmly believe that the test of time is the best indicator of the quality of a piece of music. Even if I love a new work that I hear in a promotional recording, I typically (although not always) wait a couple years before considering it for programming. I figure that if I still like the work a couple years down the road, then it’s more likely that my original impression is correct and the work is worth investing the time and effort we will put into it.

If the musical difficulty of a work does not meet or exceed the technical difficulty of the work it is not worth programming. Period. We owe it to our students to select music of depth…material that will allow our students to mature and develop as musicians. Our program will certainly reflect this philosophy.

I’ve also come up with a small set of self-imposed rules for our program. Some of them are humorous, even if only to me — not really fit for the Midwest Blog. One of my rules has to do with older literature. My intent is to not program an older work that is similar to music being released by publishers this summer. As a result, I’m quite proud of the older works we’re planning to perform. Although they are not performed very frequently, at least around here, they are classics and worthy of being reintroduced to the Midwest audience.

I’ve had it described to me that the selection of a Midwest program is similar to putting together a puzzle. This is certainly the case. There is an extensive set of rules, almost three typed pages, for selecting your Midwest program. While some of the rules feel reactionary to problems there have been in the past, for the most part, they seem designed to insure a varied repertoire in terms of the difficulty of music, contrast of styles, and the publishers represented. First and foremost, though, I do believe the primary purpose of the rules is to reinforce and maintain the educational nature of these concerts, keeping alive the traditions started 60 years ago.

—–