I translate and summarize the contents of the article because I agree in some points, not certain in others and disagree in some. Sorry for the mistakes, I'm on the train and quite on a hurry 
:
...
Up to almost 2nd half of XX century it was considered that each orchestra, aside of its quality, a particular sound and style, as a product of the particular school where each orchestra was inserted, developing each orchestra its personality.
Those were times of less changes and of directors that worked deeply with a single orchestra. One could talk about the personal sound of Toscanini or Furtwängler but also could be distinguished the way of conceiving the strings by the russians, the softness of the Wiener Philarmoniker or the incissive virtuosity of american orchestras.
Today, such variety has confluded to a common, general level. What has happened? In first place, one could talk about musicians' formation, more international, which means that any performer ends up attending to the same schools than his colleagues from the other side of the world.
... [He cites as real beginning of this process the massive exit of jewish musicians from central europe due to nazism and the disgregation of Soviet Union]...
But not only orchestras travel more and perform around the world [not all, one could point out], also records, radio and internet has provoked that are listened everywhere, and ones learn from the others... ending up unifying the style. Every one aspires to the brilliancy of american orchestras or the "viennesse" sound of the the philharomonica... But also the working methods have changed as well as the director's profile.
Being an orchestra an expensive ensemble, the number of performances tends to increase and the number of rehearsals to diminish. Today, orchestras have few rehearsals, and british ones, very few. That's why it's not easy to enhance repertoire nor to adapt to the director's differences. It is compensated because the level of musicians has raised enormously and because directors have became travelling machines that adapt themselves to the sound of the orchestra instead of looking for its own [...]
One could say that today orchestras, directors and soloists play far better technically than before but with far less personality. Yes, the sound of the orchestras tends to unify, but also the rest of the musical life, which brings out good and but results of which we can complain, what's hard is to change them.
:...
Up to almost 2nd half of XX century it was considered that each orchestra, aside of its quality, a particular sound and style, as a product of the particular school where each orchestra was inserted, developing each orchestra its personality.
Those were times of less changes and of directors that worked deeply with a single orchestra. One could talk about the personal sound of Toscanini or Furtwängler but also could be distinguished the way of conceiving the strings by the russians, the softness of the Wiener Philarmoniker or the incissive virtuosity of american orchestras.
Today, such variety has confluded to a common, general level. What has happened? In first place, one could talk about musicians' formation, more international, which means that any performer ends up attending to the same schools than his colleagues from the other side of the world.
... [He cites as real beginning of this process the massive exit of jewish musicians from central europe due to nazism and the disgregation of Soviet Union]...
But not only orchestras travel more and perform around the world [not all, one could point out], also records, radio and internet has provoked that are listened everywhere, and ones learn from the others... ending up unifying the style. Every one aspires to the brilliancy of american orchestras or the "viennesse" sound of the the philharomonica... But also the working methods have changed as well as the director's profile.
Being an orchestra an expensive ensemble, the number of performances tends to increase and the number of rehearsals to diminish. Today, orchestras have few rehearsals, and british ones, very few. That's why it's not easy to enhance repertoire nor to adapt to the director's differences. It is compensated because the level of musicians has raised enormously and because directors have became travelling machines that adapt themselves to the sound of the orchestra instead of looking for its own [...]
One could say that today orchestras, directors and soloists play far better technically than before but with far less personality. Yes, the sound of the orchestras tends to unify, but also the rest of the musical life, which brings out good and but results of which we can complain, what's hard is to change them.
Comment