Metro Violin Story

[Tom Karol]

A man sat at a metro station in WashingtonDC and started to play the violin; it was a cold January morning. He played six Bach pieces for about 45 minutes. During that time, since it was rush hour, it was calculated that thousands of people went through the station, most of them on their way to work.

Three minutes went by and a middle aged man noticed there was musician playing. He slowed his pace and stopped for a few seconds and then hurried up to meet his schedule.

A minute later, the violinist received his first dollar tip: a woman threw the money in the till and without stopping continued to walk.

A few minutes later, someone leaned against the wall to listen to him, but the man looked at his watch and started to walk again. Clearly he was late for work.

The one who paid the most attention was a 3 year old boy. His mother tugged him along, but the kid stopped to look at the violinist. Finally the mother pushed hard and the child continued to walk turning his head all the time. This action was repeated by several other children. All the parents, without exception, forced them to move on.

In the 45 minutes the musician played, only 6 people stopped and stayed for a while. About 20 gave him money but continued to walk their normal pace. He collected $32. When he finished playing and silence took over, no one noticed it. No one applauded, nor was there any recognition.

No one knew this, but the violinist was Joshua Bell, one of the best musicians in the world. He played one of the most intricate pieces ever written, on a violin worth 3.5 million dollars.

Two days before his playing in the subway, Joshua Bell sold out at a theater in Boston, and the seats averaged $100.

This is a real story. Joshua Bell playing incognito in the metro station was organized by the Washington Post as part of a social experiment about perception, taste, and priorities of people. The outlines were in a commonplace environment at an inappropriate hour:

Do we perceive beauty? Do we stop to appreciate it? Do we recognize the talent in an unexpected context?

One of the possible conclusions from this experience could be:

If we do not have a moment to stop and listen to one of the best musicians in the world playing some of the best music ever written, how many other things are we missing?

[peterk1]

I think the journalist who wrote this is wrong to assign blame to the public. The people he played to on the subway are not the same people who purchased tickets to his show. At his show, he had a captive audience, but in the subway, he had to prove himself.

There's lots of little lessons, for the MUSICIAN, that can be extracted from this story as well:

1. Never blame the audience. It is not their job to pander to you, but your job to entertain THEM. If he did not connect, then that is HIS fault. I used to play in a sax quartet and we would have eaten him for lunch in that same situation by playing things that people rushing to work would want to hear and by doing things that they would want to see. We would try to make them smile and arrive at their desks happy.

2. Great gear is is not enough to save you.

3. Never believe that you are above playing any gig. The article did not mention it, but I have a feeling (classical musician ) he was exuding a certain attitude and was not really, really approachable while he was playing. In my quartet, if you had a young child who happened to come up close while we were playing, you were pretty much not leaving with your kid without giving us at least 5$. We had that part down to a tee!

[Tom Karol]

Interesting response, Peter. I was just passing along something that had been passed along to me. But I think he would have garnered more attention if he had been playing electric violin through a Henriksen JazzAmp!

[peterk1]

Originally Posted by Tom Karol

Interesting response, Peter. I was just passing along something that had been passed along to me. But I think he would have garnered more attention if he had been playing electric violin through a Henriksen JazzAmp!

I love stories about street musicians.

One of my friends used to be one of the most recognizable street musicians in town and she was going out with a guy who was a well known band leader, arranger, studio cat. Her boyfriend had a ton more knowledge, talent, experience - but when it came to playing on the street, she would kill and he could barely make a quarter. It's a specialized skill, and not too many serious conclusions should be drawn from success/failure on that front.

Incidentally, my JazzAmp has been sounding really, really good lately!! Guess I just had to reset my ears.

[Metal Fingers]

That is a good story.I don't really get the reply that you would have eaten him for lunch.(I think that's beside the point)To me the interesting part is that he had no gimmicks.
Sure you will get more money for pandering to people but that's more of an entertainers thing.This guy was top notch,isn't that enough.I'm sure at least some of those people would go to one of his concerts(then rave to their friends) and give a standing O,because after all he is one of the best in the world right?In the subway he's a nobody so nobody cares.

[peterk1]

Originally Posted by Metal Fingers

That is a good story.I don't really get the reply that you would have eaten him for lunch.(I think that's beside the point)

The point was, that we would have connected with the crowd more than he did . And we would also have made him look bad if he was in the vicinity. He was out of his element. It has nothing to do with the lack of sophistication or laziness of the audience as was implied in the original story.

Originally Posted by Metal Fingers

This guy was top notch,isn't that enough.

Why? Because critics say he's top-notch? Because the media says he's top-notch? I have to confess that I have never heard his name before reading the story.

No, someone telling me that someone else is good/great is not enough for me. I need to hear it/feel it for myself. Reputation doesn't matter.

He obviously did not connect with the audience he was playing for. I don't know if he was necessarily trying to or just going along with the experiment for kicks. But he was obviously not top-notch for the people who counted in that particular situation.

Playing Bach isn't going to cut it all the time either, even though Bach is also considered top-notch. Why would you not alter your repertoire for your audience? Playing something quicker, snappier, more up-beat given that the audience is likely to be a bit down heading into the office in the morning.

It comes down to whether you're playing for your own enjoyment, other's enjoyment, or to make a living. Most of the time you would be best served playing for the audience's enjoyment. The musician's motivation in this case is not clear. He seems to have been only taking part in a media ploy.

[BigDaddyLoveHandles]

Bach, never heard of him. Now, Burt Bacharach...

[peterk1]

There ya go, I love Bacharach (usually much more than Bach!). Gonna stick on Look of Love right now.

I guess the key is

If we do not have a moment to stop and listen to one of the best musicians in the world playing some of the best music ever written, how many other things are we missing?

Other people saying what the "best" music and the "best musician" are doesn't work. It's very personal. If Bach doesn't touch you personally, then hearing someone play it very well is probably not going to do much for you. And given the state of classical music (and jazz sadly) these days, the vast majority of people (and subway riders) fall into the "doesn't do much for me" category.

[Metal Fingers]

I wonder if he advertised himself with his bio would people then pay attention to him?

could be round 2 in the social experiment.

[rabbit]

Henrique Prince of the "Ebony Hillbillies," NYC:

One in 8 Million - New York Characters in Sound and Images - The New York Times