I have an idea that will eventually save the classical music industry millions of dollars per annum. It came to me in a dream……. a beautiful dream………………
**********************************************************************************
Good news! I bought a brand new car! It’s a beautiful machine made by one of the best car companies out there. As soon as it is shipped to me (I have to wait 2 weeks or I have to pay extra for quick delivery) I’m going to take it to my mechanic. Like all cars from this maker it comes without seats or headlights so it will take my mechanic at least three days to put those in. Then, of course, he has to check the internet for “known issues” with this particular model. I hear rumor that the rear brakes will probably have to be replaced, and he will have to double check the motor mount. As soon as that has all been worked on I will get to take the car for a test drive to see if it works (the dealer didn’t allow me to try it out). Although I don’t suppose it matters – since I’ve already bought the car I’m stuck with it. The maker has a strict no return policy.
*******************************************************************************
Can you imagine? Honestly, what do you think would happen to a company that tried to do business that way? It would never even get off the ground. Across the capitalist world there are policies in place to protect the consumer from fraud. Return policies are considered de rigueur. Even the telecommunications industry has standards, low as they may be. It is the most basic policy – if you pay for something, and that thing is defective, the company should replace it gratis with another product that works or they should refund your money.
It is that way for every industry I know with only one exception: music publishers.
Now I admit, sometimes you get decent scores and parts from publishers, music which is usable. It does happen. Even rarer, those times where the music is actually beautiful, easy to read, and easy to use. On the other hand, there are weeks like last week, where I wasted about 1/4th of my alloted rehearsal time either answering questions from my orchestra, or asking them to do something which was evident in the score, only to find out that the reason they didn’t do it was that it wasn’t in the parts. I would much rather spend the time making music. Instead I was answering questions about articulations, dynamics, etc., etc., etc. For the privilege of having all of our time wasted we had paid thousands of dollars to the various publishers. And god help you if you complain. They will simply inform you that they are doing you such a service for taking your money and wasting your time. You and your orchestra should be grateful.
This goes on day after day at every orchestra. There is no reason for it and we are all culpable in this travesty. Coincidentally, a very good friend of mine who works as a music librarian posted recently about the dangers of IMSLP and the like. Mark, I’m sorry, but I must disagree. I think that IMSLP and the like should be greatly expanded. I use IMSLP regularly and encourage other musicians to do so as well.
For orchestras, currently the routine is as follows:
- Buy an edition of choice (if your orchestra can afford it);
- Librarian then must check the specialized music librarian’s website to see what known mistakes there are in the edition, and spend however long to correct them.
- Librarian must transfer bowings from old parts to the new ones or have the principal’s do new bowings and put them into the new parts.
- Score and parts used in rehearsal, where musicians and conductor waste time finding even more mistakes.
Every step takes money and steps #2-4 waste money, although certainly #3 is a necessary part of our business. In today’s world there is no reason for these practices to continue. We have the technology to change the process, just as long as we have the will to do it. I propose a new system called NOLDOR: National OnLine Database for ORchestras. NOLDOR is an appropriate name since it also refers to the deep elves of Middle Earth who were most known for their knowledge and wisdom (Yes, I have revealed my full on Tolkien nerdness). But I digress.
Here is how I propose NOLDOR would work:
- Orchestras of North America band together and create a database to hold scanned copies of all their lbrary scores and parts. Each orchestra would have their own server which would be networked;
- All members and member organizations would have full access;
- All member orchestras would be required to have a full-time librarian on staff! No fair cheating and just letting other orchestras do all your work for you. This is a co-operative.
- Libraries can either make their own parts from downloads or, better yet, orchestras would take advantage of wireless tablet technology and download the parts straight into those devices;
- All mistakes or revisions would be updated online and instantly;
- For composers they could bypass publishers completely by uploading their works to NOLDOR (searchable by timing, orchestration, etc.). Every time an orchestra wants to perform a work a fee would be sent to the composer through NOLDOR.
NOLDOR would provide instant access to multiple editions of works, new and old. Every composer I know these days uses Sibelius or Finale or some such, all which would allow easy upload to NOLDOR and instant accessibility for their music. This would save our industry millions of dollars per year. Instead of relying on one publisher for any piece we would crowdsource our needs. This is open source brought to music publishing.
Now, here comes the part which is really going to enrage some people: what about music currently under copyright that is contracted to these publishing houses? Well, what of it? I’m tempted to advocate that every orchestra that has rented any parts/scores for anything should go ahead and scan them into NOLDOR. The industry’s dirty little secret is that most orchestras make copies of this material anyway. My frustration is such that I have little sympathy for the poor publishers.
Look, I admit it – I’m frustrated, I’m tired of wasting money, and I’m really tired of wasting rehearsal time. I’m perfectly happy to give composers the money that is their due. But I just want the music in the score to match the music in the parts, I want it to be legible and consistent, and I want it available without having to spend an arm and a leg. Right now that’s too much to ask. But in the very near future. with NOLDOR, even the smallest orchestras would be able to have access to high quality scores and parts. That’s worth it, isn’t it?
MOLA sheet music prep guides. Basic.
Once again you have proved my point. Why should I have to refer to the MOLA guides for something I have already paid for? That’s ridiculous, and it wastes time and money.
Actually, my bad. I suspect you are saying that the publishers SHOULD be following the MOLA guides. If so, from your mouth to God’s ears…
I hear the publishers are working on a new system, Make Orchestras Review Deficiencies Obfuscate Rehearsals, or MORDOR. One does not simply BUY scores
I am in agreement with you.. As an orchestral bassist I find it infuriating to play from the same terrible parts day in and day out. Poor formatting, ill-conceived page turns, terribly spaced note heads, unreadable accidentals…Recently Boosey sent out parts to my orchestra that, along with having the same above problems, were now reduced in size, to fit on 8-1/2 by 11 page. I have no sympathy for the publishers, either. They have shown that since there is no incentive, nor pressure, for them to repair any of the parts they have been sending out for decades that they are not going to take any steps to do so. What other industry could survive by proffering a defective product over and over? Musicians think that this is the way things are and have accepted it as the norm. So I have great interest in your idea. I found errors in scores orchestras have been have been playing for close to 100 years. One of my most recent finds is the third measure from the end of the “Bydlo” movement from the Moussorgsky/Ravel “Pictures…”. the score shows the basses divided in parallel thirds, but the bass PART repeats the previous measure (5th/unison/5th/unison) in that bar. In the fourth measure from the end the celli sound the D# on the 2nd and 4th 8ths, but drop out in the third from the end as the basses take over the D#, as the score shows. The original piano part shows this to be the case as well. But who can hear that low anyway?