San Antonio Symphony News and Archive

Majestic's still best bet for symphony




By Mike Greenberg

from the San Antonio Express News 10/11/98



A reader writes: "I've heard it both ways. Do you think the Majestic venue hurts or helps the San Antonio Symphony?"

On the whole, I think the city-owned Majestic is good for the symphony, which has made the former movie palace its primary home since 1990.

I still have research to do before dealing with the Majestic's user fees, which symphony management claims are too high. My guess is that the fees are higher than they should be, but not as outrageous as the symphony says, once you deduct income that is dependent on the venue.

The main problem is that the symphony is sometimes locked out of the Majestic by multiweek engagements of touring musicals. The current season won't be disrupted, but the start of next season will be.

Acoustically, the electronically enhanced Majestic is not ideal, but it's the best space in town for symphonic music. It has contributed to the orchestra's improvement in recent years.

The theater does have its detractors. Some visitors and newcomers deem its Spanish-Moorish fantasy interior unbefitting the dignity of a major symphony orchestra. I like it - perhaps for that very reason - and I think most San Antonians do.

Still, I continue hearing occasional pleas in favor of Trinity University's Laurie Auditorium. Free parking, ample legroom and better accessibility are said to be Laurie's attractions.

In my view, there are two names that should never, ever, under any circumstances be uttered in the same sentence. One is "San Antonio Symphony." The other is "Laurie Auditorium."

Laurie was designed to be a very good lecture hall, and that is what it is. It is a lousy concert hall. The acoustics are dry as dust. The musicians can't hear each other, so ensemble suffers.

Barring many millions of dollars for major reconstruction -raising the roof 30 feet, for example - Laurie will never be an acceptable concert hall.

There's no point in having a symphony orchestra if it can't play well and if the music doesn't thrill. So forget Laurie. Forever.

Some readers complain that the Majestic is too difficult for the elderly and disabled.

Well, among the elderly people I saw at the Majestic on the symphony's opening night were one in a wheel chair, one using a walker, several with canes and one stout fellow lugging his own oxygen tank over his shoulder. Clearly the Majestic was accessible enough for them.

One woman said the Majestic's downtown location was a problem. For a single woman, she said, downtown is "impossible," the implication being that downtown is just too dangerous.

In reality, most parts of downtown, and especially the area around the Majestic, are probably safer for a single woman than her own home is.

The downtown bicycle patrol operates out of a police substation in the parking garage next to the theater. The sidewalk is full of concert-goers and tourists. There are busy hotels and restaurants nearby. The place is safe.

Laurie poses a greater risk: Trinity president Ron Calgaard could pop out of the bushes and mug you for an endowment gift.

The tight leg room in the Majestic's mezzanine and balcony is, alas, not a matter of perception but of reality. Americans are conspicuously taller, on average, than they were 70 years ago when the Majestic was built, and there's no practical way to widen the seating tiers upstairs.

But most people are able to fit into the upstairs seats without great discomfort. Anyway, the Majestic's Broadway series does not appear to have suffered from a bruised-knee rebellion.

So the report card is mixed, but the Majestic is the still the symphony's best bet. Unless you'd like to write a $100 million check for a new concert hall.



Back to the Symphony Archives.