如何評價一個交響樂隊的好壞？

12-20

如何從指揮，個別樂手和整體氛圍來評價一個交響樂隊的好壞？

QUORA上摘錄的Yvonne Caruthers的回答：
「1. You have to do what the conductor wants, even when/if you disagree. This is not as onerous as it might sound, because in the largest orchestras you see a wide variety of conductors, so if one is not to your taste, there will soon be another one on the podium that hopefully you"ll be happier with.

2. You have to play with what you hear around you. It may not be "right", it may not be what you like, but you have to stick together. Let"s say the conductor has asked for an accelerando, and you feel that the orchestra is lagging behind where the beat actually is. Maybe you are "right" that the group is behind, but if you don"t play with the group, you make everyone look bad.

3. You should respect your colleagues, even the ones that you think are past their prime, or those who lack experience. Why? Because you have been the inexperienced one yourself, and at some point you will become the one who is past his/her prime. In addition, each player represents an enormous body of work: practicing, performing, what they learned from their teachers, etc. You may have little exposure with their particular type of background or experience (maybe they are an emigre), but they add to the richness of the whole. 」

如果樂團的每一個團員們都能遵從上面的所有規則就算好的樂團了。尤其是第二三條。

個別樂手或聲部最簡單，就是聽他們獨奏的時候有什麼問題。
整體氛圍最關鍵的是能不能齊，其次包括強弱對比，速度對比這些非常基本的東西，再就是音色的好壞，不過音色還和樂器、演出場地什麼的有關係。
指揮的問題，首先一個樂團不是只有一個指揮的，有可能這個指揮帶這個樂團演得好，那個指揮帶那個樂團演得好，這些跟樂團和指揮的質量都是沒有關係的。當然樂團的水平與常任指揮的訓練有關，但是一般人並不容易判斷指揮工作的好壞。

靜若處子動若脫兔銅管不冒泡 mozart 海頓能玩好，就已經很不錯了

簡單來說，能幾十號人拉的像一個人那麼輕，又能幾十號人拉的像暴風雨那麼響，這樣的樂隊絕對頂級。舉個例子來說就是勃拉姆斯的匈牙利舞曲，那個經典到爛掉的曲子，如果輕響對比相當棒的話，就很棒。

小白一個求不罵^ ^
我從演奏員身份來說，指揮當然是對作品的了解和熟練程度，而且對大部分作品要有自己的見解才可以啊。而且指揮對於作品的這些了解還要講給演奏員聽才可以。
個別樂手的話，那應該是指solo或者首席什麼的吧？solo什麼的都會比別人多拿錢的…當然有獨到之處，名團都有台柱子的，第一是穩定，第二就是在尊重原著作者的基礎上，升華點兒自己的東西進去，那就不只是樂匠了。
而總體呢…齊是真的…不過大部分專業團體齊都沒問題，有多齊就不一定了，卡拉揚為什麼那麼神，跟在他指揮下的柏林愛樂有多齊肯定有大關係啊…
整體的氛圍如果能讓觀眾感受到代入感，那就很厲害了（也得看曲子那次跟普拉松先生排關老師的大地安魂曲我實在沒法兒好好坐著…）
小白一個求不罵^ ^

看睡著的人有幾個？？？