Length of ConcertDate: January 18, 2010
I am currently involved in a discussion with my executive board of my community chorus as to what the appropriate length is for a concert. We are a community chorus with a 23 year history that performs three concerts a year and typically have 14 weeks to prepare each concert. We charge $15 admission for each concert.
What do you think is an appropriate length for a concert? Replies (12): Threaded | Chronological
Dean Rishel on January 18, 2010 8:55am
My community choir concerts, with intermission, typically run just under two hours, and some people tell me they are too long. There have been shorter exceptions, but... I guess there is just so much music I want to include, and a chamber division has their own portion of the concert with about four songs. It is a lot of music but only a few people complain.
Are they right?
on January 18, 2010 9:31am
Kristen,
I have always strived for about 60-70 minutes of music. Intermissions, pauses and me talking way too much does not count in the length.
S
on January 18, 2010 1:54pm
Kristen:
The answer, unfortunately, has to be "it depends"! It depends on your singers and their physical and vocal endurance. It depends on your venue and how comfortable your audience is. And it depends on your programming and on how much you value variety.
The traditional choral program (still used by many directors and by such professional ensembles as Chanticleer) is largely chronological, which often puts contemporary folk, jazz, and lighter works toward the end of the 2nd half. Programming large-scale choral-orchestral works is a very different deal. Both are valuable, and both have their places.
With my university show ensemble, our big spring concert was always longer than ideal, because by the end of the season we had so much good material that I wanted to include. But it was a variety show, start to finish, and many audience members commented that the time seemed to fly because the material was constantly changing. Some of those concerts were 2 1/2 hours, MUCH too long for a "normal" concert.
Rules of thumb: 1 hour is too short. 2 hours is probably too long. I agree that about 90 minutes can be seen as the ideal, given all the other variables. But variety is the key. More of the same is NOT better than less of the same! And the first half is almost always better when it is longer and perhaps heavier than the second half. Another rule of thumb might be 50 minutes, 15 minute intermission, 20 minutes. (Adjust to taste.)
I'm very aware of the "always leave them wanting more" approach (more often quoted in show business than in classical programming). But "always leave them satisfied" often makes much more sense.
Let's remember what we're competing with. Time was when 3-hour church services and 5-hour operas were normal. Those days are gone. We're competing with TV shows in which every problem is solved in 60 miutes (actually more like 45 minutes plus commercials). A good movie is between 2 and 2 1/2 hours, and leaves its audience feeling satisfied, not "wanting more." "Wanting more" is for the Saturday morning serials at the movies that some of us still remember, the precursors of today's dramatic TV series.
For whatever it might be worth,
John
on January 18, 2010 3:00pm
A very good question, and the answer depends on a number of things. There is no clear-cut answer in my opinion, but one thing I don't think has any bearing on the length is how much you charge. People don't pay by the minute..they pay for the experience. The most important consideration to me is the age of your choir! Older singers have difficulty standing for long periods of time, especially on risers. I assume we are talking about an amatuer choir...people who look at this as an avocation, not a vocation. Another consideration is what is your audience used to? When I first took over my present community chorus they had been giving one hour concerts with no intermission. I have been gradually able to increase the length of the concert, tackle more "quality" literature, and insert an intermission to give the audience a chance to "refresh and stretch". Another consideration is the music you are programming. Is it lighter in nature, all Broadway, that sort of thing...or are you tackling some heavy duty literature? If the literature is familiar to the audience I find they are willing to sit and listen for a longer time! We put an intermission in two of the three concerts we give each year and they each run for approx. 75-90 minutes. We do not use an intermission in our Christmas Concerts, we invite other choirs to sing with us, and we try to tie the selections together in such a way that they flow from one to the next, allowing us to program 18-20 selections in about 70-75 minutes. Our Christmas Concerts are also our most popular. This years concerts saw about 1000 people total attend the two performances and I think they could have sat through another half an hour if we had the music! So you see there is no clear-cut answer.
You must do what your choir and audience is most comfortable with...maybe some trial and error will be needed to find the answer.
Good luck!
Ron Sayer
ACDA National Chair for Community Choruses
Artistic Director
Marshall Community Chorus
on January 18, 2010 3:02pm
Thank you everyone for your feedback. IIt will be very helpful when I meet with my board.
on January 19, 2010 7:49am
If we've been asked to sing at a nursing home or senior facility, we ask how long they want the program to last. The answer is usually under an hour -- I average 50 minutes. If we are selling tickets to a general audience, I shoot for 90 minutes with a 10 minute intermission and a longer Part I. I try to keep any remarks to an absolute minimum and therefore pass out a printed program. My pet peeve: conductors who make remarks without a mic!
Ruth McKendree Treen
Cape Cod, MA
on January 19, 2010 3:13pm
Hi, Ruth. I agree on programs at retirement homes. I'm in at least 4 groups that perform at our local ones, and 45 minutes is usually what they're comfortable with.
But I have to take issue with your last sentence. Whether or not to use a mic for announcements/comments/aural program notes depends entirely on the venue, as well as the conductor! When a performance is miked, of course the announcements should be miked. But when it is not, the important thing is to communicate with your audience.
For informal concerts I often do give aural notes, in part to give my performers a little rest between numbers, but also because my mentor in grad school did so and our audiences expressed their thanks for not having to try to read printed notes in the dark! For formal concerts I do write notes for the program, but we also go ahead and turn down the lights. (Great Problems of Western Man, 12th in a Series!!)
As it happens, I am not blessed with a pretty voice and will never have a career as a solo singer, but I've studied voice with some very good teachers over the years and I'm quite capable of projecting my voice and speaking clearly in our 220-seat, amphitheater-style Recital Salon, where two of my ensembles perform. (Understanding the difference between conversational diction and public speaking diction also helps a lot.) I do so three days a week when I teach a large class there. I had a visiting Mom come down after one of those classes and ask where my mic was, since she couldn't see one, since in fact I don't use one, but she had no trouble hearing or understanding me. In our huge, 3000-seat auditorium, on the other hand, I would never be so foolish as not to use a mic.
But I've observed classes where other teachers simply couldn't be heard in a normal sized classroom without a mic. They'd had no training in vocal production. This is also the case with almost all corporate speech-givers, many of whom assume that if there is a mic anywhere in the same room with them it will pick up their voice and project it perfectly! Microphone use is a skill just as much as vocal projection is, and equally must be learned.
All the best,
John
on January 18, 2010 4:37pm
Always leave your audience wanting more. Ninety minutes plus and intermission is enough.
on January 19, 2010 9:07am
Our concerts tend to be about 1 1/2 hours, including intermission and talking. What drives this is that I always aim for 60 minutes of actual music, that being the right amount for my chorus and soloists to learn. By using this standard plus my standard of 12-13 choral works (the rest ensembles & solos), it forces me to craft the most interesting program I can out of these materials.
Bill Paisner
Director, Southwest Women's Chorus
on January 19, 2010 9:38am
Absolutely, shorter rather than longer, you don't want everybody to start getting tired and looking at their watches. We've had concerts down to an hour and everybody liked the experience and didn't complain about paying full admission.
on January 20, 2010 4:58am
The instruction I received in college that I has always kept in mind and has proved helpful in programming comes from an audience members point of view: "What my butt can't stand, my brain can't absorb." I took it to mean take into account the comfort of the listeners and make sure they are comfortable throughout the entire performance. That varies depending on the venue - bleacher seating vs auditorium seats.
on March 16, 2010 8:13pm
I like that quote Ken! My Pastor used to say that as well!
I can't imagine an audience locally sitting still for 2 hours. The last few concerts I have attended or conducted have had fairly poor audience etiquette. OUtside of our local University's Christmas concert (runs about 2 hours), most seem to average 1 hour.
|