advertisement


Rattle's new London concert hall will not now be built

Maybe it would be better to build a world class concert hall somewhere else in the UK, like Birmingham, Manchester, Edinburgh etc, seeing as London already has a few?
 
Those cities already have great concert halls- Birmingham and Manchester getting beautiful modern designs. London is a major world capital and a prestige project like this would enhance the attractiveness of London as a destination. It looks like the new footbridge at £185m, across the Thames will go ahead instead.
 
London has a plethora of attractions, including several prestige concert halls, I doubt a new one would attract many new visitors beyond the initial novelty factor.

How about another destination city getting a concert hall that might attract an international audience, Liverpool, for instance, or York?
 
Rob998 said:
Maybe it would be better to build a world class concert hall somewhere else in the UK, like Birmingham, Manchester, Edinburgh etc, seeing as London already has a few?
Click to expand...

Edinburgh spent a few million on upgrading The Usher Hall recently.
 
TheDecameron said:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...s-funding-for-world-class-london-concert-hall

Sadly, funding has been pulled by the current government.

It's quite some time since I've been to either the Barbican or the RFH and I'd be interested in folk's current views on the acoustics of both. The Barbican has been well covered but I wondered if the RFH had benefited from its acoustical refurbishment?
Click to expand...

I haven't been to the Barbican, but I went to the RFH a few years ago and thought the acoustic was ok, nothing more. Having heard classical music in Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham, I can understand why London would want a hall which matches the sound in the halls in those cities, but I suppose it would be hard to justify spending a fortune in the present economic climate. Especially as only posh elites listen to classical music, as any fule kno ;)
 
Rob998 said:
London has a plethora of attractions, including several prestige concert halls, I doubt a new one would attract many new visitors beyond the initial novelty factor.

How about another destination city getting a concert hall that might attract an international audience, Liverpool, for instance, or York?
Click to expand...

London has a number of "prestige" concert halls but they are all somewhat outdated and / or poor soundwise.
The cancelled Rattle hall held the promise of becoming a true world class venue.

I would be in favour of new concert halls in places such as Liverpool or York but would they attract the audience required to make them worthwhile - I have no idea.
 
The Rattle hall hasn't been cancelled.
It just isn't being funded by the tax payer.
 
Saffron Hall in Saffron Walden is supposed to be one of the best sounding venues in the world right now. Maybe the LSO should go and play there?
 
TheDecameron said:
. . . . London is a major world capital and a prestige project like this would enhance the attractiveness of London as a destination.
QUOTE]

I'm afraid that for me, it would take rather more than yet another concert hall to "enhance the attractiveness" of a London so unrecognisably different from the one to which I moved in 1959. In my view the government is right to can the project.

However, there is a cogent argument to be made for having more but smaller venues dotted around the country, perhaps in the more populous county towns, rather than large auditoria catering for 120-piece orchestras for which there already is adequate accommodation in the major cities. Remedying a shortage of attractive halls outside "Metropolitania" and suitable for, inter alia, instrumental or chamber ensembles would have considerable merit.
Click to expand...
 
I think there are plenty of superb venues which can accommodate chamber or choral music. Hell, I play the organ in one!

A perfect environment for a symphony orchestra concert is much harder to come by and, although London and Manchester both have one, London does not.
 
I'm not one to enthuse about capital spending projects in London as opposed to other parts of the country which also need investment...but its shame that the LSO doesnt have a decent hall to play in.
 
I believed the return of Rattle to the UK, directing the LSO in perhaps his final job, was the opportunity for a world class symphony hall in London. The Barbican is not one of those, hence my questions about the RFH acoustic. The RFH is one of the most iconic pieces of architecture in Britain and may have fitted the bill as an alternative home for Rattle if it's acoustic was up to it (and if course if they could evict the existing tenants..).
 
I've been to a lot of concerts there recently and would say the RFH acoustics are mixed at best. Only go there for performances by huge orchestras. Generally, the hall seems to suck the life out of the music, as is often the case with halls of that period. You have to be either right in the middle of the front stalls (not too far from the orchestra but not so close that you're sitting below the players, something like rows K or L), or in some of the boxes on the side. The sides of the front stalls, in particular, are very dead. I pity the poor singers that have to project their voice in such a dry and unforgiving environment.

I was sitting in one of those "good" seats the other day talking to an habitué, and his take on it was that things were not great but had improved a bit in recent years. His recommendation were the seats right in the middle behind the orchestra (in front of the organ).
 
Ah, so still dead zones. You would have thought they could have engineered it out at the refurb. Architecturally, I love the building and the look of the hall.
The Brabican and the Avery Fisher are about the worst I've experienced- in stark contrast to the Philharmonie and the Gewandhaus(incredibly reverberant).
The Royal Concert Hall in Glasgow was over lively and they toned it down with damping on the movable ceiling reflectors. Birmingham is a peach- he might go back there if they're not careful!
 
You can whisper from the stage in Birmingham and be heard right at the back. I've tried it. Remarkable acoustic. Bridgewater is its equal. Alas for London.
 
There's probably only so much they can do without changing the basic structure or spending a ton of money.

I don't find the Barbican that bad. Certainly not great, a bit harsh and small for the LSO, but not the worst I've been in, unfortunately (that would be the Finlandia Hall in Helsinki, another 50-60s sort of concrete barn that just kills the music. The new Musiikitalo is great, though.)

Avery Fisher has improved a bit over the years (a bit like the RFH?).
 
Nic Robinson said:
You can whisper from the stage in Birmingham and be heard right at the back. I've tried it. Remarkable acoustic. Bridgewater is its equal. Alas for London.
Click to expand...

Yup, both Birmingham and Manchester are wonderful. RFH and Barbican...
Surprised Brexit hasn't been blamed.
 
It would seem not to be the Barbican acoustic after all....

One of the ironies of Rattle’s campaign is that where the LSO’s Barbican concerts under his predecessor Valery Gergiev often sounded overbearing and coarse-grained, his own recent performances with the orchestra there have revealed so much more subtlety and refinement, suggesting that not all the previous problems can be blamed on the acoustics.
The Guardian.
Click to expand...

For balance, Daniel Harding did say in the same article that it was just not possible to get a blended sound in the venue, citing the experience of conducting the same orchestra a day later in Amsterdam of Berlin with much better results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top