Does anyone know of any pre-existing orchestra with such a position? I think I’d love to go and work there next time. A psychologist in his basic degree would have some exposure to industrial-organisational psychology knowledge and research on human perception, perhaps to do with music cognition and acoustics perception. So how about linking the two fields together, with music psychology and organisational psychology expertise, into orchestral psychology?

With a grounding in IO psychology, the psychologist could quite begin his consultancy by assigning roles to each member of the orchestra: the conductor who is the director; the principal players who would be like the manager/subject-matter experts; the rest who would be the staff. In fact, more configurations could be possible. Via motivation and incentive, and professional tools of the trade, the psychologist could aid in building an orchestra highly focused upon their craft, and committed to their passions.

While in the commercial business-oriented setting the goal of such consultancy is to achieve monetary and productivity payoffs, which would be measured by accountants and business economists, the goal of the orchestra would be to achieve better acoustics and musicality. This, while is a task traditionally tasked to audiences and critics as judges, and teachers as coaches, could actually be interpreted as, in turn, another domain of psychology. The psychologist could offer advice on memorization strategies; learning; the effects of the vibrato on the human emotion; the affect of the timbre.

Besides, traditional results of IO psychology can also be expected from the non-musician core of the orchestra when the services of the psychologist is engaged in those areas i.e. in the event management department; sponsorships department etc.

Yet, will the introduction of such a role in the structure of the orchestra be a challenge to the traditional hierarchy and unwritten rules of the musicians? Why should a psychologist, a scientist, be allowed to interfere into the domain of artistes? Will experienced players not be better judges and coaches than the psychologist, the former with their empirical and hands-on knowledge rather than the latter’s clinical training? Perhaps, the maximal acceptance one can give to the psychologist is to allow him with his practice of IO on the orchestra – his coaching of leadership and motivation in the orchestra might be welcome in a setting where the onus is on the conductor, the leader of many, to synthesize and bring out collective magic in his players, each a talent and individual star. However, the psychologist who tries to advise on the direct experience and creation of music could be seen as overstepping his line of duty. Do IO psychologists try to advise businesses on strategic acquisitions and mergers? If no, then why should they advise orchestras on musicality, even if they may be a tad more trained on musical perception than business strategy? A musician who is trained as an IO psychologist might do better, conferring advice as a fellow artist, improving organisation as a practitioner.

But has IO psychology looked into the performing arts? I am guessing that orchestras can benefit as much, if not better, from IO as compared to the white-collar industry. I have not heard of any openings in orchestras, or theatre groups, for IO psychologists though. I think sadly, the undersized incomes of arts performing groups around do not allow themselves such luxuries in recruitment, perhaps. To justify the extra cost of a professional psychologist to the sponsors would require a very excellent reason to change the status quo.

Anyway, Sarah Chang’s performance was stellar. I think I counted six or seven curtain calls. (Disclaimer: As usual, this is all to the untrained ear ) Her opening was intense, and her way of playing throughout exuded a great deal of self-confidence. I would say that hearing it played live was much better than the studio recording of her performance. It could perhaps have been the acoustics; the atmosphere or the emotional sincerity that comes out better playing to a physical human audience than an electronic mic. Applause to the Singapore Symphony Orchestra as well for their accompaniment of her concerto. Bravo! I would most definitely want to go and see a similar performance to this in the future.

It ought to be a musical blasphemy to actually compare two virtuosos and their talents. Yup, music ain’t a science. Hence I’m not exactly going to say who’s better… Just some observations… (NOTE:) From the musically untrained ear, I should qualify.

Hmm. Anyway, how come coincidentally, all the four names I mentioned are all chicks?

The first Chang piece I heard was her Air on the G String by Bach. Thank YouTube for bringing live classical music into the reach of many. For a piece I thought pensive, I think there was too much vibrato. But perhaps it was just that my untrained ear couldn’t process it. I didn’t exactly have a good first impression anyway.

When recently I decided to pick up classical music again, I stumbled upon the works of Mutter. Ah, the first piece I heard from her was Vivaldi’s Summer, third movement – Presto, done with the Berlin Philharmoniker and conducted by . Always a timeless piece, my favourite movement out of the entire Four Seasons; I think I first loved this writing of Vivaldi’s since I heard it, albeit re-arranged in crossover style, in Vanessa-Mae’s Storm. The fury, the intensity, the passion that was hinted by Vanessa-Mae. Ah well, Mutter screamed it. I loved it! Only the original could have such power; any re-arrangement would have it diminished, I think I would now say. No amount of synthesized beats and modern electronics could perfect perfection. Okay, maybe not perfection, but yup, make no mistake. Vivaldi was good…

Some things are there in classical renditions that don’t exist in crossover. The echoes of the string, the imagery of the resonating string. All these effects are reduced if not sacrificed in the playing of electric violins. Deemed undesirable, they would otherwise cause feedback under the artificial amplification of the sound. A significant part of the violinist’s message is lost in the process in the quest for sharper sounds, rather than deeper, more hollowed acoustics. Ah, didn’t Nicolas de Lenfent call the violin the Devil’s instrument for its unnatural, human voice amongst all instruments (From Anne Rice’s “The Vampire Lestat”)?

I’m almost forgetting Sarah Chang and the original aim of this writing… Getting lost in appreciation of the Devil’s instrument. Too bad I can’t play it.

Sarah Chang! In my quest for the perfect Vivaldi, I heard her again. Turns out that she too had her own album of the Four Seasons. It’s been said to be more subdued… But I think actually it sounds like she stresses her violin so much when she plays Presto from Summer, it sounds like she’s making love to it. Subdued? Perhaps mine is a bad recording of it, but I think I hear scratchiness on some strings. But I wouldn’t say that it’s bad skill, in fact, it’s in making her violin struggle, resist, moan that the feeling of the piece comes through. BRUTAL! I think I loved it too! It’s technicality as well in my opinion. It’s not exactly the scratchiness of a beginner, but the scratchiness of a pro, like she meant it to. Like she knows how to make it sound precisely like that, to stretch the limitations of her violin. It shows how much she and her violin are one. All her passion poured into the piece! SHIT! I NEED TO HEADBANG TO THE PIECE!!!

In general, for the whole Four Seasons, Mutter seems to have a much cleaner sound and places equal emphasis on each note. But Chang is like rushing to the last stroke before the rest-note, where she ends off stylistically signing off the release of her musical angst, in the sound unique to each movement and season, then plunging into the next. You can hear it in Summer where it’s an aggressive slash, Autumn where it’s a gentle step-off. If my words may be adequate, Chang likes release, Mutter likes being epic. But they both love the concertos. I enjoy both performances.

The dilemma would be to decide whose rendition I should encode into MP3 for storage in my disk space-challenged phone for portable music listening. Hmm… I think I will settle with Chang’s. No reason. Just feeling. Ah, super-short conclusion for a very long dilemma.

A side-note, I guess after listening to both interpretations, I have come to appreciate the role of vibrato usage in violin playing as well. Vibrato adds feeling, it’s the accent of the violinist. Hmmm. Wasn’t there some debate over whether baroque should be played with any vibrato at all, if tradition ought to be followed in the spirit of history? Ah well, I think you know my answer.