The Future of the Detroit Symphony Orchestra

[Horko]

Detroit has a larger urban and metro population then Cleveland, and, even in these difficult times, more financial rescources than Cleveland. By the way, thank God the car companies are recovering. I have always been impressed by how Cleveland makes sure its orchestra stays in the top rankings and how Clevelanders are justifiably proud of their world-class orchestra, in spite of the fact that Cleveland has many of the same urban difficulties as Detroit. Why can't Detroit do the same with the DSO?

[English]

I am a member of the DSO. We play over 200 performances a year. We mostly play in Orchestra Hall because it has extraordinary acoustics. But we play many concerts around the Detroit Metro area. This summer we played 4 nights at Greenfield Village for over 30,000 people, 3 free concerts in the metro parks, 2 nights at the Edsel Ford estate, 5 night at Meadowbrook, plus a number of community concerts. Its too bad that the focus all seems to be about the money. We understand that the economy is bad but the DSO brings over a 1/2 million people into downtown Detroit every year. Aside from the jobs the the DSO is creating directly, there's all the economic activity that those 1/2 million people are creating. A great orchestra like the DSO is an attraction and Detroit needs those more than ever. If the Tigers or any of our sports teams were to drop to a minor league status I think that would hurt the economy even more. That's our concern. Its about a whole lot more than the money we make. Yes, we are willing to take huge cuts. We offered 22% but think its very important to have at least a partial recovery so we can sustain the draw of the Detroit Symphony name. For those that haven't heard us in our hall you are most welcome to visit. And, by the way, support all your arts institutions. They're more important than you realize and also more enjoyable. Thank you!

No, we thank you, Michiganbass. At lunch with my colleagues last week, we were talking about how important it is for us to vigorously support Detroit cultural institutions. Several had DSO subscriptions and encouraged me to pick one up... I was waiting to see what happened with the strike before I did so, but I definitely will.

[Bearinabox]

Since when do we wring our hands about what will happen to someone with a starting salary of $104,000?

That question is the heart of which way this battle will go. Good luck to the musicians trying to sway public support in their favor. Their starting salary is more than my wife and me combined, with a college degree and 15 years on the job.

I think it's more an issue of the type of talent we can attract relative to other orchestras in other cities. The musicians' contention is that these pay cuts will significantly reduce the quality of the orchestra over time, because we'll start to lose our top talent to better-paying orchestras and fail to attract new musicians of that caliber. That, to me, is a claim worth considering, even if we can all agree that $75,000 is a very decent salary.

[Don K]

I think it's more an issue of the type of talent we can attract relative to other orchestras in other cities. The musicians' contention is that these pay cuts will significantly reduce the quality of the orchestra over time, because we'll start to lose our top talent to better-paying orchestras and fail to attract new musicians of that caliber. That, to me, is a claim worth considering, even if we can all agree that $75,000 is a very decent salary.

Exactly. I would guess most if not all of the members of the DSO have other options that may pay better if management's pay scale is imposed. There are some people you can say "take it or leave it" to, and there are others who can entertain better offers. The question is whether the Detroit area [[est. 2008 metro population of 4.5 million) remains in a class with, for example, Philadelphia [[est. 2008 metro population 5.1 million), or whether we belong in a class with, say, Louisville or Columbus.

[Gistok]

I can understand what Bearinabox and Don K are saying... the "First or Second Chair" musicians of each instrument could look elsewhere for better options/pay, thus leaving the sympony vulnerable to lesser prestige and performance.

[bartock]

It is simply fantastic that our roid-raging woman-beating athletes and corrupt, exploiting, inept CEO's and bankers can make millions per year and no one bats an eye, yet when people who create art of incredible beauty we resent their salaries. Quite a country we live in. Our priorities are screwed up.

I think that this is a great point.

These are World-Class musicians and major ambassadors for an American City that has World Class status in culture. These people are like all-stars in [[pick a sport), the conductor is known everywhere, and they have one of the best facilities in the entire world to play in. The Max is a huge part of it.

That being said, the DSO has been historically "subsidized" by corporate money that may no longer be there. My understanding is that there are politics involved as well. The "real story" is probably much more involved. For the really curious, there are a couple of local classical people [[DJs) that might have the details.

[Det_ard]

I think it's more an issue of the type of talent we can attract relative to other orchestras in other cities. The musicians' contention is that these pay cuts will significantly reduce the quality of the orchestra over time, because we'll start to lose our top talent to better-paying orchestras and fail to attract new musicians of that caliber. That, to me, is a claim worth considering, even if we can all agree that $75,000 is a very decent salary.

So where does everyone think the money going to come from? There is an endowment fund that can be tapped [[and already has been) but that's like cashing out your 401k, what do you do when its gone and you're still in a bad spot financially? According to the News article, the endowment has $31.8 million in it. This year's deficit is about $6.5 million. At that rate, it's all gone in under 5 years. What then?

Are the musicians betting things will be so much better soon that that's not a real risk? Or are they just looking to get what they can get while they can and then if things blow up in 5 years, that's when they head out of town to greener pastures. If you think it's unlikely that corporate and individual donations go back to their peak levels anytime soon, then it's just a matter of when the musicians take their cuts, now, or in a few years when the DSO is bankrupt.

It's also questionable whether the DSO would really lose many musicians if the larger salary cuts take place now. Say the salaries are reduced to $75K. Moving to a better paying orchestra involves selling a badly depreciated metro Detroit home and buying a still pretty expensive home in a costly area like Boston, LA or NYC. If your Grosse Pointe home that you paid $350K for is now worth $210K, do you have enough money to bring to the closing table? Maybe you can short sale it or just walk away but you won't qualify for financing a home for years. Then when you move to the new city you're looking at houses that are still $500K - $700K, and getting less than what you had here.

That's the alternative to taking a pay cut, and that's the same choice millions in Michigan have had to face. Sucks either way, but demanding what the DSO simply can't give is childish and self-centered.

[BrushStart]

People should just support the DSO.

[GPCharles]

Let's have a telethon.

[everglade carl]

I guess this is just an aside. I realize the economics will ultimately decide the outcome, so this comment is just to inform people who don't know much about the context of what kind of musicians we're talking about.

I am not a classical musician but knew enough of them through music school and in professional dealings to tell you that if you are skeptical, thinking $100K is overpayment for someone in that profession, there about .001% of the population that can do what they do on that level. It might have been different in older days, but in modern auditions, 100s and 100s of people apply for one position like this and don't even make it into the second round.

A musician like this is one that probably studied and practiced hours a day during their entire childhood while the rest of us played on sports teams or hung out with friends. Many times parents having to put in mucho $$ to have decent teachers. As adults, they go through 2 or 3 degrees in good universities, going into debt without the assurance that a doctor or a lawyer would get in recouping their losses.

They then join the frey of 1000s of people hunting down the few positions that open up every year, paying their own way to go to auditions wherever they might be in the country or internationally.

They have to compete for these jobs by playing FLAWLESS auditions, for people giving them music to play, which many times being revealed to them at the audition. The whole time, all these musicians carry second jobs paying for everything themselves [[including usually expensive instruments). There is no musician welfare program.

When after years and years of auditions, spanning the country and sometimes globe; sacrificing the possibilities of families during this process, playing in community symphonies for $50 a service next to an amateur who only gets their instrument out for a performance, with more unpaid hours than they can count spent perfecting their craft, it is a crowning achievement for one of the supremely gifted individuals to gain a spot like in the DSO.

A $100K a year salary doesn't even start to make up for all of the effort that got them to that point. You can't compare it to any other profession, especially all of the conventional ones that we're used to.

YES, you can only pay someone what you can pay them, I don't dispute that.

If you are, however, judging these people, that they shouldn't get paid more than you for playing an instrument for only hours a day, with the exception of a couple of us reading this, yes they should. Their job training started at least 20, 30 years before getting that position, and they are held to a standard of every mistake being examined [[and recorded many times), every time they are on the job. It is one of the hardest gigs in the world to get, and Detroit is lucky enough to bring all these people together in a wonderful, acoustically brilliant room.

Support the DSO.

[English]

^ You've said it all. Amen. In my view, there's little difference between a DSO member and a professional sports player on the Tigers, Pistons, or Red Wings. These are not only highly skilled people, but they are uniquely talented as well.

[oldredfordette]

People seem to ignore the facts - the Symphony has offered pay cuts and concessions of all kinds - the DSO management team has rejected them all.

[scuola]

28%? Raise your hand if you would be willing to take a 28% pay cut.

They make over $100,000? To quote our President Obama: "At a certain point, you've made enough." It's time to "Spread the wealth around." Us poor folks would love to be paid $75,000 to live the life of a musician traveling around the globe playing music that you love.

[Det_ard]

People seem to ignore the facts - the Symphony has offered pay cuts and concessions of all kinds - the DSO management team has rejected them all.

No one has ignored those facts. Those facts are front and center in this thread. You're ignoring the "can't get blood from a turnip" fact. What if the pay cuts and concessions offered by the musicians aren't large enough to balance the DSO's budget? Does money magically appear once workers make "enough" concessions? You're the one ignoring reality.

[EastSider]

^ You've said it all. Amen. In my view, there's little difference between a DSO member and a professional sports player on the Tigers, Pistons, or Red Wings. These are not only highly skilled people, but they are uniquely talented as well.

There's one big difference...more people are willing to spend their money on sporting events.

[kryptonite]

Very true East Sider. Classical music has zero appeal to me and to many people. I like baseball and hockey however. I have been offered free tickets to the DSO and cringed at the thought. But I am always open to going to see the Tigers or Red Wings. It's no fun getting dressed up to sit quietly listening to music I hate.

It's just a sign of modern times. big popular music names can pack stadiums for multiple nights, so do many sports teams. Symphonies just aren't that popular.

I don't wish the DSO or any symphony ill will, but they have very limited audiences.

[DetroitPole]

One of the last thriving industries we have left in this region are world-class cultural institutions, and small-minded people would rather have them axed just because a majority of people like to slam Budweiser and watch our loser sports teams. Great priorities here.

It is the same mentality of: "I will never ride mass transit, so I don't want it" Well, sucks for you, it is still vital to the region. I guess when you have a region of self-governing feifdoms and subdivisions, people start acting selfish.

I'd hedge my bets that the majority of Londoners don't go to the British Museum and the majority of Parisians don't go to the Opera. Yes, I'm sure they'd rather be watching futbol and drinking vastly superior European beer. However, I don't think any of us would like to imagine those cities without their world-class cultural institutions, and we should not think of Detroit in any other way.

Hell, I only go to the symphony once every couple years maybe, while I can say I spend a lot more time in the corner bar, I understand its importance.

If any of the naysayers bothered to look into the DSO and what they do, they play a lot more than classical music, for starters. Oh, but we wouldn't be caught dead at Orchestra Hall. Rather get high in the garage instead or something.

Finally, go to their FREE summer concerts in the park. The massive crowds seem to indicate that the majority - or at least a numerically significant number - of Metro Detroiters do care about the DSO and appriciate them and that the ARE relevant to peoples' lives.

Or just hang on to your vapid idea that classical music is for snobs and let the DSO crumble.

[Bearinabox]

a majority of people like to slam Budweiser and watch our loser sports teams.

Don't forget the shouting. Being quiet is apparently a tall order around here. Maybe if the DSO let people shout themselves hoarse during performances, attendance would go up.

[jackie5275]

Finally, go to their FREE summer concerts in the park. The massive crowds seem to indicate that the majority - or at least a numerically significant number - of Metro Detroiters do care about the DSO and appriciate them and that the ARE relevant to peoples' lives.

Do these attendees REALLY care about the DSO, or are they attending because the concert is FREE?

[Det_ard]

One of the last thriving industries we have left in this region are world-class cultural institutions, and small-minded people would rather have them axed just because a majority of people like to slam Budweiser and watch our loser sports teams. Great priorities here.

Our cultural institutions are anything but thriving industries. Frankly, as a group, they seem to perpetually be in danger of closing for lack of money. The DIA, Zoo, African-American Museum, DSO, etc. have all had financial crises recently because they can't take in enough in fees and donations to cover their expenses. That ain't "thriving".

It is the same mentality of: "I will never ride mass transit, so I don't want it" Well, sucks for you, it is still vital to the region. I guess when you have a region of self-governing feifdoms and subdivisions, people start acting selfish.

Are they really vital? Or just a nice ego stroke for some? Most of these institutions have a small number of financial supporters and patrons and a lot more people who rarely if ever give a dime or attend but like the idea of having cultural institutions around. I guess because not having cultural institutions makes us feel like uncultured rubes. Well, if most people rarely attend those institutions, then we are mostly uncultured rubes, even with museums and symphonies all around us.

I'd hedge my bets that the majority of Londoners don't go to the British Museum and the majority of Parisians don't go to the Opera. Yes, I'm sure they'd rather be watching futbol and drinking vastly superior European beer. However, I don't think any of us would like to imagine those cities without their world-class cultural institutions, and we should not think of Detroit in any other way.

Hell, I only go to the symphony once every couple years maybe, while I can say I spend a lot more time in the corner bar, I understand its importance.

Important to one's ego apparently, not one's life. If symphonic music was truly important to most people then the DSO's coffers would be overflowing. Having a symphony and rarely attending is like having exercise equipment in your basement but only working out a few times a year. Having it might make you feel better about yourself than not having it but there's no practical difference.

[Bearinabox]

If symphonic music was truly important to most people then the DSO's coffers would be overflowing. Having a symphony and rarely attending is like having exercise equipment in your basement but only working out a few times a year. Having it might make you feel better about yourself than not having it but there's no practical difference.

I don't necessarily agree with this. Exercising twice a year is pointless; it makes no difference to your health or level of fitness. But going to see the symphony [[or the zoo, or the DIA, or Greenfield Village or whatever) is not something you have to do on a regular basis to appreciate. They're nice things to do once in a while, but they aren't the sort of thing that become part of most people's daily or weekly routine; while wonderful experiences, they're time-consuming, expensive, and the experience doesn't change all that much from week to week. There's nothing wrong with that, it's inherent to the nature of these kinds of institutions, but it does make it hard for them to survive financially in a place like this. I don't think we should confuse their financial situation with nobody in the region caring if they live or die, though. It's more a symptom of our economic troubles coupled with the way cultural institutions typically pay for themselves.

[BrushStart]

I agree with DetroitPole on the importance of these institutions, which I semi-regularly patronize. The problem with Metro Detroit is that going to the orchestra, the opera, and the DIA are not mainstream activities in Southeast Michigan. In NYC, going to see a Broadway show or its equivalent is considered fun and fashionable. People talk about such stuff in NYC and there is a level of "must see" for certain performances. The same goes for Chicago when hype builds around a coming show. When is the last time you heard a Metro Detroiter talk about seeing exhibit X at the DIA or so-and-so perform at the Detroit Opera House? It is not part of the mainstream here the same way hanging out in downtown is not mainstream here. In Metro Detroit, people would rather spend time at home and not out enriching their lives in the same ways that most other Americans do regularly.

To be saved from eventual extinction, all of our cultural institutions need to be patronized by average Metro Detroiters. It is true that some people will not enjoy hearing one the world's best orchestras play, but the vast majority of people will likely really enjoy it, they just don't know it yet.

[EastSider]

In NYC, going to see a Broadway show or its equivalent is considered fun and fashionable. People talk about such stuff in NYC and there is a level of "must see" for certain performances. The same goes for Chicago when hype builds around a coming show. When is the last time you heard a Metro Detroiter talk about seeing exhibit X at the DIA or so-and-so perform at the Detroit Opera House? It is not part of the mainstream here the same way hanging out in downtown is not mainstream here. In Metro Detroit, people would rather spend time at home and not out enriching their lives in the same ways that most other Americans do regularly.

Stereotype much? Broadway is considered "fun and fashionable" by whom? Certain performances are "must see" for whom?

I'd like you to offer some statistical backing [[per capita would be helpful but it's always understood around here) for your assertion that somehow metro Detroiters are less interested culturally than "most other Americans."

[Gistok]

Eastsider... I have to concur.... Detroit's theatre district is larger than either Chicago or Los Angeles. Are the venues in Detroit busy?? Well it explains why Preservation Wayne can only do their theatre tours in August... the venues are too booked up the rest of the year. SOMEBODY must be keeping them busy??

As for more people being interested in sports versus the arts.... well that's a no-brainer... that's the trend nationwide!!

All major American cities have Symphonic Halls and Opera Houses generally in the 2,000-3,000 range... and their hockey/basketball barns are generally 15,000-20,000 seats, with their baseball and football stadia generally 2 to 3 times that size.

No big revelation there...

[English]

What is special about cultural institutions in Detroit is how accessible they are to those of us who aren't upper middle class or wealthy. One of my colleagues is from New York City. When we were talking about DSO, she talked about how much she loved living in Detroit because "back home, I couldn't afford to go to Broadway or be a member of all these museums on what I was making." Thanks to DPS exposing me to many of our cultural institutions, I've never felt as if the DSO, the DIA, or the opera house weren't places that I belonged.

I actually *do* enjoy classical music. My mom used to make us listen to classical while we were doing our homework, and that is what I listen to during my morning commute. My entire family were educated in the Detroit Public Schools, and it wasn't until adulthood that I appreciated the fine music education we received.