What sort of room do you prefer to hear classical concerts in? We have all got used to industrial-strength symphony halls and opera houses, capable of holding 3,000 people, with dry acoustics and omni-look interiors. As with art galleries around the world, once inside you could be anywhere: there is little to tell you which culture any particular one comes from, apart from the signs indicating the lavatories.
The general public have come to accept the implicit anonymity of many halls, where individuality has often been sacrificed to size and comfort. Three thousand is a lot of seats, each occupant requiring good sight-lines and good facilities. In recent years smart cafés and even restaurants have become part of the classical concert experience, and are now included in the fabric of the building. The remaking of the Royal Festival Hall has shown how a run-of-the-mill concert hall interior can draw big crowds if you package it right.
Apart from the look of these halls, with their vacant spaces and awkward furnishings, one might have thought that the sound would explain why they have to be as they are. But here there is a considerable divergence of opinion. Historically they have always been acoustically dry, in the belief that a symphony orchestra playing loudly will not come over clearly in anything less. Opera houses are notoriously but ubiquitously as dry as a bone, making them hell to sing into, but again the argument runs that very loud presentation requires clarity not only because the sound has to travel quite large distances — up to the gods, down to the last row of the stalls — but also because in making the sound a singer will produce a lot of vibrato, to which the hall does not need to add anything.

Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in