Hall size

[Tom Servinsky]

Let me add my 2 cents to this thread.
One of the concert halls I service is a lovely hall which used to seat 620
people.  The hall was originally designed as a movie theatre facility with
an occasional live show thrown in. Through the years the hall had struggled
to survive, always  burdened with finances.
Somewhere along the line, the theatre became a full operational concert
venue and it has been the hottest ticket in S. Florida. Why...the acoustics
are fabulous!  Plus the intimacy make for a wonderful evening for the
performer and audience. Yes, the performers are requesting to return year
and after year, even with a much reduced concert fee, because the quality of
their performances are more enjoyable.  Even NPR has discovered this little
hall and uses recordings from these concerts for many of their broadcast.
The point being added, large halls facilitate one thing:  more revenue but
with bigger headaches, and much less intimacy.  The question in the end...is
it really worth it? I'm inclined to think not.
By the way, that little concert hall has been going through several face
lifts as of lately. The latest to change the seating to more comfortable
larger seats. The hall had to reduce it's seating capacity by 100 to gain
the comfort. Ticket costs will have to be increased. So far, no complaints
on cost.
Tom Servinsky,RPT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Phillip L Ford" <fordpiano@lycos.com>
To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 2:57 AM
Subject: Re: Hall size


> On Wed, 14 Nov 2001 22:00:25
>  Delwin D Fandrich wrote:
> >
>
> >The difficulty most business-type hall managers give for wanting larger
> >halls is, of course, financial. Theoretically a hall seating 3,000 people
> >can generate four time more revenue than a hall seating only 750. Still,
the
> >large halls seem to be constantly in financial trouble. At least they
seem
> >to be constantly in need of financial assistance from various government
> >and/or business donors. I wonder what the economic facts of life are for
> >halls of various sizes really are. Do the costs also increase by a factor
of
> >four? Or are they higher? Or lower? How about real vs. potential revenue?
I
> >should think it would be harder to consistently fill a 3,000 seat hall
than
> >it would be a 750 seat hall.
>
> -----
> I suspect that a 3000 seat hall is not four times as expensive to operate
as
> a 750 seat hall on paper.  The cost per seat is lower assuming all seats
filled, and
> filled as often as they would be with the smaller hall (which seem like
two pretty big
> assumptions).  This is probably why they get built in the first place.  As
with so many other things these days the cost seems to be the overriding
factor.  What often seems not to
> be accounted for are other  factors, to which it is perhaps difficult or
impossible to assign
> a dollar value.  If it doesn't have a dollar value it must not be worth
considering right?
> It's harder to fill a large
> hall consistently as you point out.  The list of performers that can be
booked gets smaller
> as the hall gets larger since you need someone who can draw a large
audience.  The
> acoustics suffer, etc.  And the money first attitude isn't confined to the
hall managers.  Many
> performers have it too.  They are stars.  They demand astronomical fees
which can only be
> made by filling a large hall or setting outrageous ticket prices or both.
The idea of giving a
> meaningful or satisfying musical performance is secondary.  I do wonder if
an impresario
> who chose to use a small hall which he filled consistently and more often
than a large hall
> using good performers who were not stars and would accept a reasonable fee
would make more
> money than the one who infrequently booked stars into a large hall.  It's
hard to say since
> I don't know of anyone doing it.  I would think this might be fertile
ground for a manufacture
> that wants to associate their pianos with artists.  All the manufacturers
who want to do this
> seem to be taking the route of building their own 9 ft piano and trying to
take market share
> from the Steinway C & A program in the large halls with the famous
artists.  Perhaps instead
> of beating their heads against a wall they might try this approach
instead.
> >
> >I mentioned seating capacities of 500 to 750 simply because these are the
> >approximate sizes of the halls at several schools I used to service
pianos
> >for some years back. There was nothing architecturally special about them
> >yet their acoustics were quite nice. I'm not all that knowledgeable about
> >building acoustics but it seems to me it is much easier to come up with
an
> >acoustically excellent small hall than it is to come up with and
> >acoustically acceptable large hall.
>
> ----
> That is my experience.  It seems hard to ruin a small hall but it seems
difficult to
> come up with a good large hall.
> ----
> >
> >These smaller facilities were (relatively) economical to build. They
didn't
> >require large permanent staffs to maintain, set up and prepare for use.
They
> >weren't excessively expensive to heat and/or cool. Everyone had a 'good'
> >seat, that is they could all clearly (and closely) see the performer. And
> >everyone could hear the full dynamics of the performance. Even those
seated
> >well back. After all, with rows 25 seats wide the last row back in a hall
> >seating 750 people is still only row 30. Offsetting all of the positives
> >were their somewhat smaller and less elaborate stages which probably did
> >limit the types and sizes of productions they could accommodate. Though
they
> >all had them, these halls didn't really need 9' pianos. I worked in two
of
> >them that several times brought in 7' pianos for duo-piano works and the
> >smaller pianos did just fine. Much larger and the 9' piano becomes nearly
> >mandatory. And, I think, the acoustics becomes some trickier.
>
> ----
> Yes, the small hall would seem to have many advantages.  One of its
drawbacks (if it
> is a drawback) is that the stage area is necessarily limited.  You're
probably not going
> to accomodate a modern large orchestra in a hall of this size.  But you
can accomodate
> everything else - instrumental or vocal, jazz, pop, or classical.  You can
even accomodate
> a smaller orchestra (chamber orchestra) or an opera performance with
minimal sets and
> a small pit orchestra.  The fact that you can't
> accomodate a large orchestra I think is one of the reasons we have these
large halls.  So
> much of the available musical life in many American cities centers around
the symphony
> that the community spends a huge amount of money to build a hall to
accomodate it.  Then
> that hall is expected to serve for everything.
> ----
> >
> >So. Shall we start a movement, or what?
> >
> >Del
> >
> ---
> Let's do.  I wonder how to start.  Perhaps the idea I gave above of
approaching a manufacturer
> about doing a 'small hall series' or a '7 ft concert series' might be one
approach.  I'm open
> to suggestions.
>
> Phil
> >
>
>