Red Tape: The Difficulties Orchestra Composers Have Obtaining Recordings of their Works

Red Tape: The Difficulties Orchestra Composers Have Obtaining Recordings of their Works

As American orchestras perform an increasing number of premieres each season, it is all the more difficult to obtain that elusive second performance. A major roadblock toward that goal is the frequent inability of composers—and their publishers and agents—to secure recordings of concert performances for use in promoting new works.

Written By

Joseph Dalton

If there is any silver lining to this clouded situation, it is that there are so many new works being played by so many American orchestras. The most recent annual survey of orchestra premieres, as compiled and published by the American Symphony Orchestra League, lists performances of 220 new scores scheduled by 102 orchestras for the 2001-2002 season. From the Buffalo Philharmonic Orchestra to the California Youth Symphony, new music is getting commissioned and performed. Clearly, the twenty-plus years of efforts by organizations like Meet The Composer have paid off. Audiences can hear new sounds—at least if they’re at the symphony on the right night. Hearing a new piece again is another story entirely.

The chores and trials of being a composer are numerous and are almost as widely documented and debated as the difficulties currently facing the recording industry (a topic that will be left aside from this discussion). High on a composer’s agenda is keeping works alive after their initial performances. But whether it’s introducing a recent work to a conductor, approaching a record label, or applying for new commissions and awards, recordings are essential. Scores can be elegant and impressive but sound is what this business is all about.

Two premiere awards for composers, the Pulitzer Prize for Music and the University of Louisville Grawemeyer Award for Music Composition, both require recordings to be submitted. Since each of these awards is given for an individual work (as opposed to career achievement), the conductors and orchestras who premiered the winning compositions have a share in the limelight. Other prestigious and lucrative awards, such as the variety of prizes from the American Academy of Arts and Letters and fellowships from the Guggenheim Foundation, also require recordings to be submitted.

Apart from the push for status and success, composition is an art form that takes decades to master. Writing for orchestra is often considered a pinnacle of success but it is an opportunity that seldom comes early or often. After a performance, a composer wants not just a playbill to show for the effort, but also a recording, which allows him or her to savor and analyze the actual sound of the work.

“During a performance I’m usually too excited to really be a good judge,” says composer Melinda Wagner. “When I go home, I listen very carefully and learn my own piece and learn from my mistakes. Bach wasn’t able to do that, but he heard his music every week.”

from Red Tape: The Difficulties Orchestra Composers Have Obtaining Recordings of their Works
By Joseph Dalton
© 2003 NewMusicBox

“Horror stories” of how composers and their publishers have obtained concert tapes and used them in the wrong way are legion. Though most every composer who has pieces played by professional orchestras has something to say, many refused to be quoted on the record about their difficulties.

“It’s an on-going problem,” says Ralph Jackson, BMI‘s Assistant Vice President of Classical Music Relations and President of the BMI Foundation. “I’ve heard many stories where a tape was refused or an orchestra just didn’t record a concert. More often than not, a tape is made but won’t be given to a composer because union agreements won’t allow it. But certain mid-size orchestras understand and set it up.”

Three mid-size East Coast orchestras that specialize in contemporary music, the American Composers Orchestra, the Albany Symphony, and the Boston Modern Orchestra Project, each have good track records with composers on many fronts, including concert recordings, but their internal practices vary widely.

At the American Composers Orchestra (ACO), composers receive a recording as a matter of course but it wasn’t always so.

“At the ACO during the time I was there, it went from the musicians wouldn’t let us do it to it being in the collective bargaining agreement, so now it’s a standard practice there,” says Jesse Rosen, who was Executive Director of the ACO from 1987 to 1996 and now serves as Chief Program Officer of the American Symphony Orchestra League.

“The ACO does pay a premium to players because of who we are and what we do and we are happy to do it because we believe our players are the best,” adds Michael Geller, who is Rosen’s successor at the orchestra. Asked if part of the higher union rate is due to the practice of making recordings available, he replied: “I wouldn’t blame it on any one thing. The compensation is laid out for the whole of the services.”

The ACO builds into its commissioning agreements the stipulation that a recording will be provided to the composer for specific purposes, which include promoting his or her music and promoting additional performances of the new work, but it prohibits duplication or broadcast.

“We would love to be able to do the maximum possible,” continues Geller. “The ACO’s long term goal is ideally to be able to record every performance the orchestra makes and to make it available in one way or another to the broadest possible public.”

At the Albany Symphony Orchestra, concert recordings are handled slightly differently but are still a matter of course. General Manager Sharon Walsh provided a copy of the orchestra’s one paragraph agreement, which is independent of a commissioning contract. It allows for use of the recording by a composer in grant applications and in seeking additional performances of the work, and concludes: “The composer accepts total financial responsibility to the musicians of the Albany Symphony Orchestra for any other duplication or broadcast.”

Things are different still at the Boston Modern Orchestra Project (BMOP) where the local union, the Boston Musicians’ Association Local 9-535 of the American Federation of Musicians, must approve the making of an archival tape for each performance.

BMOP’s Managing Director Catherine Stephan explains: “We actually file paper work for each performance. Ninety-five percent of the time we are able to get permission from the union. We do have a collective bargaining agreement, but for whatever reason our local union prefers to do the archival recordings on a case-by-case basis. They like to keep a close eye on it.” She further explained that both the composer and the orchestra can only use up to three minutes of recorded sound of the archival tapes for such purposes as grant applications and promotion.

John Grimes, Vice President of the Boston Musicians’ Association, was contacted to find out more about the procedure for BMOP. Grimes discussed at length a range of agreements, both national and local, that apply to concert recordings. In the Boston jurisdiction, to make an archival recording requires the submission, at least two weeks before the concert, of a relatively simple one-page request form. Grimes points out that the document has an aspect unique to Boston which allows for a one-time local broadcast of the concert by a noncommercial radio station—without additional remuneration beyond the standard performances fees paid to musicians.

from Red Tape: The Difficulties Orchestra Composers Have Obtaining Recordings of their Works
By Joseph Dalton
© 2003 NewMusicBox

At other orchestras, if a composer is allowed a copy of recording he or she must sign an agreement that calls for steep penalties if it is misused, and the tape that is finally delivered often includes “white noise.” These precautions are ostensibly to protect an orchestra’s performance from being broadcast or sold.

Joseph H. Kluger, President of the Philadelphia Orchestra, is chairman of the Orchestra Managers’ Media Committee and has dealt extensively on a national level with electronic rights issues including recordings, broadcasts, and the Internet. He was surprised to hear that many composers were having trouble getting recordings of their works and that some recordings were being electronically altered.

“I’m trying to decide whether I want to be quoted as saying that’s ridiculous or absurd or both …If that’s being done it’s because what I would call the irrational fear that somehow these recordings are going to be pirated. Who are we kidding here? These recordings are not hot like a Rolex watch. We should be so lucky that people would want to steal these recordings.

“It is conceivable that there are some orchestras where they don’t want to do this,” he continued. “But I don’t know where the resistance is coming from—the musicians in the orchestra or the union that represents them. In my experience, if the request is made in advance and it’s reasonable and the composer agrees to abide by the restrictions, there should be no problem.”

To see if Kluger’s optimistic view was being put into practice at his own organization, follow-up inquiries were made with two composers who have had major works commissioned and premiered by the Philadelphia Orchestra, Jennifer Higdon and Aaron Kernis. Both composers were provided unaltered tapes shortly after the premieres.

Kluger claims that to the best of his knowledge “there is absolutely no agreement, no contractual prohibition that I’m aware of on national or local level that precludes an orchestra from giving a tape copy to a composer, assuming that the composer asks for it, agrees to the promises that he won’t do anything with it other than use it in his own archive.”

Yet a conversation with Deborah Newmark, director of Symphonic Electronic Media at the American Federation of Musicians in New York and two discussions with John Grimes of the Boston local reveal that there are plenty of agreements to be surmounted.

Newmark provided a copy of the AF of M’s Composer’s Personal Use Tape Letter of Agreement, which, according to sources, was dra
wn up by an industry committee organized by the National Music Council. She claimed that it is the agreement to be used “by all orchestras with collective bargaining”—that is to say all orchestras with union musicians under contract.

The three-page agreement, which carries a revision date of February 1998, states that the recording of the particular piece will be sent by the orchestra to the Upper Montclair New Jersey offices of the National Music Council “for the purpose of making a duplicate copy of the performance with electronic processing which will render it unusable for broadcast, synchronization or sale.”

The agreement further details the particular way the tape will be altered:

This process will entail mixing a modulated signal of white noise with the program material. The modulated white noise is to be faded in for five (5) full seconds, at ten (10) second intervals throughout the recording, at a level which is clearly audible but does not completely mask the original program material.

The costs of the tape processing, the agreement stipulates, “will be paid for by the composer of the tape.”

Later the agreement states that if the tape is misused, in “broadcast, phonograph records, promotional spots or commercial announcements, theatrical or commercial exhibition, or background music for any type of sound or film program,” then the orchestra—not the composer—will be required to pay the AF of M 200% “of the prevailing wages and allied fringe benefits.” The agreement has signatory lines for the orchestra, union, and composer.

An addendum to the agreement is the Certification of Compliance by which a member of the orchestra, as chairperson of the orchestra committee, signs off that “a secret ballot vote of the orchestra was taken, and that a majority of its members have voted in favor of permitting an audio tape to be created.”

In sum, there’s a considerable amount of red tape required for getting a white noise tape. And though the process is clearly laid out, there’s no guarantee that musicians, especially if they’re distracted by contract negotiations or are otherwise feeling disgruntled, will vote in favor—as a handful of composers with premieres by the Chicago Symphony Orchestra recently found out.

The so-called white noise tapes are becoming increasingly common and, not surprisingly, they stir strong feelings.

“The white noise tapes are of no use at all,” says Jessica Lustig, who as a founding partner of 21C Media Group, regularly introduces conductors and artistic administrators of major orchestras to new works by composers from her roster, which consists of many of the top American composers writing for orchestra today including Higdon, Steve Mackey, David Del Tredici, Augusta Read Thomas, Michael Hersch, and Michael Daugherty.

“The quiet hiss every fifteen seconds becomes a musical element,” says BMI‘s Ralph Jackson, implying that the noise interferes with the composer’s statement.

One of the only composers who brought up white-noise tapes for the record was Sheila Silver. In an email recounting some experiences both good and bad, she said: “The worst experience was with the New York City Opera readings—they purposefully put white-noise on the tapes so that we could not use them—and made us pay for the privilege.”

Tom Broido of Theodore Presser, sat on the National Music Council’s committee, which drew up the Agreement supplied by AF of M Contradicting Newmark’s assertion that it is a required procedure for all orchestras, he said that it is merely recommended.

“It is not binding on the orchestras,” he said. “It is a national suggestion, but left up to each orchestra.”

To a certain extent Broido also defended the addition of the white noise.

“It is useful in that if every conductor could read a score… even (for) those who can, you want to be able to show something of the lay of the land. Even with the hisses, it gives you the opportunity to get an idea of the work,” he continued.

Composers, though unsatisfied, seem to be willing to take what they can, noise and all. Yet there are additional problems with agreements, whether mandated from a local or national union or by a particular orchestra.

“The triple-damage-waivers that I’ve had to sign have more and more ominous language and restrictions,” says Kernis.

An example of how such damages would be invoked: A live recording tape is broadcast on radio in violation of an agreement. The union is alerted to the broadcast and decides to “press charges.” The composer is now responsible for paying double or triple the union rate that the orchestra would be paid for a broadcast. This can quickly escalate into many tens of thousands of dollars.

“There are some absurd releases that are just ridiculous,” continues Lustig, “and composers are under the gun at the concert.” Lustig said that she has repeatedly witnessed composers being given important legal documents to sign on the evening of a performance.

Derek Bermel may be speaking for a lot of his composer colleagues when he says: “I wonder in this industry if everyone’s just tripping over all of this legalese… The amount of money being made seems to be so out or proportion to the amount of legal jargon.”

from Red Tape: The Difficulties Orchestra Composers Have Obtaining Recordings of their Works
By Joseph Dalton
© 2003 NewMusicBox

Nobody said being in the music business is easy. It wouldn’t be hard to argue that there are as many demands and pressures on orchestra players—not to mention administrators—as there are on composers.

Todd Vunderink, at Peer Southern Music, was one of the few industry professionals from the composer/publisher side of things who spoke sympathetically of orchestra players and their need to protect their work and be guaranteed proper compensation.

“What they’re saying is ‘you all are going to make money on this piece by sending it around and getting new performances. Why can’t we get a piece of that?'” said Vunderink. “That needs to be build into an agreement.”

Such generosity of spirit has been hard to come by. This is not to say that among the nearly two-dozen composers and administrators interviewed that there was an attitude of anger or dismissal toward the musicians. But rather there is the general view that a concert tape is an artifact not an on-going viable product.

This is in sharp contrast to the views of union executives. “There are entities in this country who feel that musicians should not be compensated for everything that they do,” says John Grimes of the Boston AF of M</ a>. “We feel that when sound is out there it’s our intellectual property. A lot of people can sit down and tell the difference between the Philadelphia Orchestra and the London Symphony and now if that’s not your signature sound, then what is?”

But one might wonder if such discerning listeners could distinguish between the great orchestras when the music is a brand new score rather than a chestnut from the orchestra canon.

“We’re not threatening people that we’ll go to court, (but) we point out that we have agreements,” Grimes continued. “Most of the time people simply stumble into situations and push the boundaries because they want to get away with things they sort of know they shouldn’t be doing.”

Grimes then gave an example. A young composer recently posted on his website a piece in a performance by a Boston ensemble. “The group may have even told him to go ahead,” Grimes admits. “I have to contact him and tell him to cease and desist.

“What’s he going to gain from having the piece on there? Somebody’s going to like his music and say ‘let’s commission him.’ He will then in the next commission maybe make $5,000, or whatever they pay for a young composer, and so that came directly out of the fact that he used that product.”

By this chain of logic, commissioning agreements might have to start being revised so that commissioners and performers could share in the composer’s income stream thereafter. But if a premiere goes poorly, could a composer seek damages on account of lost future wages?

Such conjecture aside, there are plenty of examples of when supposedly discrete uses of concert tapes obtained through questionable means became not so discrete—to the embarrassment and liability of composers and publishers.

There’s the time a composer wasn’t supposed to have a concert tape of an orchestra premiere but did and he passed it on to his publisher. A few years later, as part of an effort to get a second performance of the piece, the publisher approached the orchestra that premiered the work and presented the recording.

Recently a composer was scheduled to get a prominent second performance of a two-movement piece by the orchestra that commissioned it. In advance of the concert, his agents sent an important critic the score and an unauthorized recording of the premiere performance. At the concert, it was announced that the orchestra would only be able to perform one of the two movements, due to the demands of the piece and the lack of rehearsal time. This raised the ire of the critic who in his review attacked the orchestra for its disrespect of the composer and his piece—which the critic proudly stated that he had already come to know and love because he was given a tape of the premiere. The orchestra, publicly embarrassed by this negative review, threatened the composer with a lawsuit.

“It all depends on each individual agreement. You have to figure out who you trust,” says Monica Selkel, who as Director of Artist Management at Young Concert Artists has helped a series of young composers gain orchestra performances. She added that the same difficulties arise in getting concert tapes of performances by soloists. It’s that old catch-22, you can’t succeed until you’ve shown you’ve succeeded.

Obviously all of this is what leads to the legal jargon that Derek Bermel bemoaned. But there is another topic that can expand the domain of a discussion in no time: electronic media. Beyond radio and television, there is the Internet: MP3s, live and pre-recorded webcasts, sound samples, and the list goes on.

“Electronic media is far outpacing what any five or ten people can come up with in a room that will control how you pay people,” says Grimes.

With so many options in the world of cyber space, it’s understandable that musicians and their unions fear where a recording may sooner or later end up—no matter how much goodwill there is with a composer who just wants to let other conductors hear his or her music.

One composer ended an email by stating: “The situation in regard to publishers and composers ‘rights’ to promote and/or make copies of taped performances is vague and it would be better for it to remain that way.”

from Red Tape: The Difficulties Orchestra Composers Have Obtaining Recordings of their Works
By Joseph Dalton
© 2003 NewMusicBox

The Chicago Symphony Orchestra has stopped recording its performances. Period. During the spring it was topic number one in the new music community. Strictly speaking, the Chicago Symphony did not make archival tapes for some time. Rather, broadcast tapes were made of all of the orchestra’s concerts by the local classical station, WFMT, which aired them nationally. Funding for those broadcasts ran out about eighteen months ago, and since there was no provision in the musicians contract to continue recording for archival purposes, week after week of performances began to be lost.

It’s likely that the Chicago Symphony is not the only American orchestra that, for one reason or another, is unable to record its own concerts. But the Chicago Symphony has had a good track record of commissioning and premiering new works. And considering that it is one of the top ensembles in the world, composers that it honors with a premiere may never again be on such a pedestal.

Chicago’s season climaxed during the month of May with a series of three premieres conducted by Music Director Daniel Barenboim. The commissioned composers were Bernard Rands, Elliott Carter, and Melinda Wagner, whose new piano concerto was played by pianist Emanuel Ax.

In a late April phone conversation, Synneve Carlino, Director of Public Relations for the CSO stated, “We don’t have an agreement with the musicians union to record archivally without payment… The reason that there wasn’t a need for the clause previously is because all of the concerts were being recorded for radio broadcast. Now that that doesn’t exist, we’re not talking to them about how to bridge the gap before the new contract takes places.” The CSO’s contract runs until fall 2004. Carlino said that a musicians committee would soon be meeting to decide if permission would be granted to make archival recordings of the May premieres.

Caught in the middle of this situation has been Augusta Read Thomas, the CSO’s long-time composer-in-residence, and in the middle is where she has wisely stayed. “I don’t take either side, management or the union,” she said. “I take the composer’s side.”

To address the CSO’s recording situation prior to the May premieres and in preparation for the meeting of the musicians committee, Thomas wrote a letter that she provided to NewMusicBox. Thomas also attached to the letter commissioning agreements that she had signed with the Los Angeles Philharmonic and the Philadelphia Orchestra, which provided for her to have concert recordings for her use under certain circumstances.

The Chicago musicians refused to
allow recordings. Stephen Lester, a bassist and member of the orchestra since 1978 and chairman of the musicians committee, refused to comment for this article.

The CSO management came up with a partial solution. According to Carlino, a separate clause in the musicians contract would be invoked which allowed for a limited number of ‘personal’ recordings to be made. “As part of one of our media agreements… we’re able to make a partial recording—up to 20 minutes of each piece. While it’s not ideal—we would love to be able to record the whole thing—at least this provides the composers some record of the piece, and the ability to use excerpts if they’re applying for grants or appeal to other people for future performances.”

Since the contract allows for only a limited number of the so-called personal recordings per year, only the Rands and the Wagner were recorded. According to Carlino, Rands’ piece is approximately 40 minutes and Wagner’s concerto is just over 20 minutes. “We’re using our remaining two uses for the Rands and the Wagner,” she added. “We wish we had a third and we would record Carter as well.”

The Chicago episode supports the view of many industry figures who feel that these problems are not about composers and new works but about conflict between musicians and management. “For those orchestras not making archival recordings, their problems are far larger than just whether the composer gets a tape,” says Philadelphia’s Joseph H. Kluger.

Notwithstanding Thomas’s list of orchestras that do right by composers (see full text of her letter), the Windy City incident is not an isolated one, only a spotlighted one. Other institutions are in the midst of struggles on this issue.

Several composers, requesting anonymity, complained of recent difficulties in obtaining concert tapes from the National Symphony Orchestra. Although John Corigliano stated in an email that Leonard Slatkin, the NSO’s Music Director and a long time friend to new music, had set things right, this could not be confirmed. Repeated requests for comment were made to the NSO’s press offices to no avail and Artistic Administrator C. Ulrich Bader likewise did not comment.

Mark Adamo, composer-in-residence at the New York City Opera, shared how things are headed in the right direction with regard to recordings of the company’s annual reading sessions. But there have been problems.

Some years back, composers were routinely given recordings of the opera excerpts as performed in workshop format. The workshops and the recordings must have helped because one composer was getting his opera mounted by a regional opera company. However, the company used portions of the City Opera reading session on a promotional CD that was sent to its entire mailing list. The year after this violation occurred, there were no recordings whatsoever of the reading sessions.

This year the recordings are back—though with the notorious white noise added. “It’s better than nothing,” says Adamo, who indicated that issues of recordings still aren’t fully settled and called it “a very delicate conversation.”

“This is something we talk about a lot,” says Heather Hitchens who, in her capacity as president of the Meet the Composer, has negotiated dozens of composer residencies with orchestras, chamber ensembles, and other organizations across the country.

“It’s an issue every time we have a contract. They get awarded a grant and I always stick it in there,” she continues with a chuckle. “We’ve been down this road several times, but they always change the language to be ‘may’—’may provide a tape’ or ‘may not provide a tape.’ And that just leaves it wide open.”

“Everything about the orchestra is designed around the assumption that the composer is dead,” Hitchens recalls a composer saying. “And this is a good example. It’s not like Beethoven or Mozart are waiting around for recordings of their works. I have found that if the composers have the chance to speak with the musicians, and to ask the musicians, the musicians are likely to be in favor of this.”

from Red Tape: The Difficulties Orchestra Composers Have Obtaining Recordings of their Works
By Joseph Dalton
© 2003 NewMusicBox

“There’s an increase in individuals interested in commissioning works,” says Heather Hitchens. “A lot of times they’ll pay for a commission and then never get to hear the work. They’ll get to hear the performance, but they’ll never be able to say to their friends, ‘Hey I commissioned this work, wanna hear it?’ … But when they commission visual art, they can say to their friends, ‘Look I commissioned this. See it, experience it.'”

“Ultimately what an orchestra commissions a piece for is the prestige,” says Jessica Lustig. “A piece can’t become important unless people hear it. They should be spreading recordings around, not worrying about the remote possibility that they will be broadcast—which is one in a million.”

“Can you image being able to hear the first performance of the Brahms Fourth Symphony or of the BartÛk Concerto for Orchestra?” asks Tom Broido.

Through all of the stories, perspectives, and insights shared by the many who contributed to the research for this article (both on and off the record), there was often a discernable sense of fear. Perhaps, for composers and publishers, that comes from a sense of guilt over questionable uses of recordings, or from an apprehension at appearing to bite the hand that commissions you. On the part of orchestras, it might be a reluctance to acknowledge the skeletons in the contracts and that values other than music often drive an orchestra’s activities.

There is certainly a broad-based dread that a bad situation might get worse. Given the predominance of fear among those who did take time to respond to inquiries, fear must be the likely motivation for the many others who never answered emails or returned phone calls—orchestra managers, composers, noted new music advocates. In our niche of the music world, where press coverage of any kind is always in short supply, that some egos are unwilling to talk is just further confirmation that getting concert recordings of orchestra performances remains a vitally charged issue. It’s enough to make one think that this isn’t an industry at all, but rather a big dysfunctional family, like Broido alluded to at the beginning of this article. Some steps toward a better situation would be more honesty and mutual trust, greater dialogue
and sharing of goals, and finding the ability to act in the best long-term interests of music.

“One way or another I always get that thing eventually,” commented Tobias Picker via email. “But it is really just another pain-in-the-ass type of thing that composers really shouldn’t have to be put through.”

from Red Tape: The Difficulties Orchestra Composers Have Obtaining Recordings of their Works
By Joseph Dalton
© 2003 NewMusicBox

[NOTE: This letter was sent to all my colleagues on the Orchestra Committee of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra in an effort to illuminate a composer’s perspective about the necessity for making archival recordings of world premiere performances of the works we commission. I also spoke to the committee and the management in person. It is not my place, to in any manner, interfere with the negotiations between the musicians and the management. I do not take either side. My job as Composer-in Residence is TOTALLY rewarding and inspiring. I care deeply about the CSO and therefore feel strongly that we need quickly to resolve this issue.]

Friday, May 2, 2003

Dear Colleagues,

Thank you for the privilege to speak with you today about the issue of making archival recordings of the compositions that the Chicago Symphony Orchestra commissions and premieres.

As you requested, this letter is sent to recapitulate my thoughts and to illustrate my suggestion.

We all understand that this issue falls under the umbrella of the far larger issue to do with the radio broadcast rights. As a musician who composes, I would like to address
specifically what it means if we do not record for archival purposes our new music.

Our opportunity involves great artist musicians (composers, performing musicians, conductors and soloists) with hundreds of years of collective experience, such that the quality level is exceptional and therefore to be treasured, supported and nurtured.

Composers, as you know, can spend eight, ten, twelve, to fifteen months composing a big work. Large works are not made on a conveyer belt; composers get extremely close to their music. They spend additional time overseeing the engraving, proofreading and editing phases of the project to insure elegant and articulate materials.

Furthermore, composers spend about a week here at the Chicago Symphony Orchestra for no fee (hotel and travel are covered) in order to attend rehearsals, give lectures, and do other activities that get arranged by our staff. (If a composer were at a university or at a festival for the same week, for instance, they would receive an honorarium of about $5,000.) Composers are generously giving of themselves, their time and their expertise above and beyond writing the piece.

If we commission a work, and prepare it for performance, and then do not record it composers are badly hurt. When composers are hurt, so, in turn, is the profession and, in turn the art form suffers.

Composers need recordings of their music for several reasons.

Foremost is to be able to reflect carefully upon the sound of the work in a quiet setting, away from all the nervousness and distraction of the public concert events. Such reflection leads to a deeper understanding of the workís strengths and weaknesses and allows the composers to grow and improve their musicianship.

Prizes, including the Pulitzer Prize, the Siemens Award, the Grawemeyer Award, just to mention a few, all require recordings. The Chicago Symphony Orchestra will not win one of these awards if archival recordings are not made.

It is very difficult for a composer to win future commissions without recordings of previously made work. Awards for general excellence in composition (such as an award from the American Academy and Institute of Arts and Letters or from the MacArthur Foundation) all require recordings. Second performances are hard to organize and become almost impossible to arrange without the reference of an archival recording.

The general respect that a composer is afforded in the profession is not helped if the composer has no recordings of their orchestral music. For instance, getting hired for a teaching job requires recordings. If a composer spends one year writing a large orchestral piece, and then comes up for tenure, without a recording, tenure becomes more precarious.

In short, a composer is not able to benefit fully from their effort and skill, nor benefit from the excellence of that massive collective musical experience I already mentioned, when archival tapes are not made.

This situation will, in turn, lead composers to only compose for orchestras that give archival recordings. Colleague orchestras such as the Los Angeles Philharmonic, the Boston Symphony, the New York Philharmonic, the Philadelphia Orchestra, the Cleveland Orchestra, and the San Francisco Symphony, among others, all give composers archival recordings of every performance of a world premiere.

Donors may not want to commission anymore if they know that the sound will evaporate into thin air after the premiere. Donors are in the business of helping to advance the art form and would expect composers to be able to hold a document of the sound of their composition. It will be hard to tell the Schmidt Fund, the Prince Prize, and The Royal Philharmonic Society—who commissioned the Rands, Wagner, Carter works which we are about to premiere—that there will be no archival recording.

Music is sound – it is not a concert program or a score or a part. This seems a simple thing to say, but in the end it is perhaps the most important sentence in this letter.

I would hate it that the Chicago Symphony Orchestra, which is a leader in the world in so many ways (one of those ways is its dedication to the music of our time, and to a diversity of musical styles being composed today) to take the stance that it will not allow composers to hold a document of the sound of their music on a private recording.

Music is about nuance. We need to document the sound of it.

Music is collaboration.

I can assure you that composers of the international stature, such as Bernard Rands, Melinda Wagner, and Elliott Carter, would never, by inappropriate or misuse of archival recordings, betray the trust you afford them. They, like you, are consummate professionals of the highest integrity.

*

Therefore, my suggestion is to remove this issue from the larger issue of broadcast rights. To allow composers recordings of each performance of their world premiere. To insist that composers sign a detailed contract stating the limitations on the usage of the recordings, which clearly outlines the consequences if it is misused.

I attach here, for your reference, a contract, which I recently signed when the Los Angeles Philharmonic
premiered my new work, CANTICLE WEAVING in March. I signed a similar document in January when the Philadelphia Orchestra premiered my new work, CHANTING TO PARADISE.

With all my respect, and admiration, and as a fellow musician, I want to ask that you consider these points in your deliberations.

It has been, and remains, a privilege to serve as your advisor on matters to do with new music.

Respectfully submitted,

 

Augusta Read Thomas
Mead Composer-in-Residence, Chicago Symphony Orchestra