Royal Conservatory of Music Transformation | U/C | Downtown

[Taller, Better]

Pics from today...can't wait til this is done! This little project has a low profile, but is very nice!


http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/Autumn%202007/winter%202007/IMGP2894i.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/Autumn%202007/winter%202007/IMGP2896i.jpg

[Wrk_InProgress]

Thanks for starting this thread.

KPMB does it once again IMO.

I know it isn't shown in these pictures but the eastern addition and the concert hall behind the old building are the real stunners in this subtle renovation/addition.

[thryve]

STUNNING building... and the addition too.

Awesome.

[Taller, Better]

Thanks for starting this thread.

KPMB does it once again IMO.

I know it isn't shown in these pictures but the eastern addition and the concert hall behind the old building are the real stunners in this subtle renovation/addition.

I should have re-photographed those, sorry. I took a lot of pictures back in the summer when the next door ROM was opening to the public, and posted them in my photothread. It is really beautiful, and a magnificent addition to Philosopher's
Walk.

[babel]

These understated buildings, by our best local firms, can work so well. I think this is will be another good example, when it opens. The acoustic design is by the same firm that worked on the Four Seasons Centre, and the Weston Recital Hall, so audiences should be in for a treat when the Koerner Concert Hall opens.

The ROM and the AGO need to make a bigger splash - to draw in the ticket-buying masses by the thousands - by creating camera-friendly iconic structures, but institutions like the Royal Conservatory are free from having to take the Big Hair approach to design.

[Taller, Better]

So true. The ROM, once it is all completed, should go HUGE HAIR for a season, and invest in a blockbuster international show on loan, to draw the crowds from upstate New York, etc... this will introduce a wider audience to the wonders of the ROM- something even bigger than the Cortauld Impressionist one a few years back.

[Wrk_InProgress]

I should have re-photographed those, sorry. I took a lot of pictures back in the summer when the next door ROM was opening to the public, and posted them in my photothread. It is really beautiful, and a magnificent addition to Philosopher's
Walk.

Don't be sorry. As you stated, some of the best vantages points of the other addition can not be easily achieved from street level on a regular day.

[metroboi_nay]

The brick on the side looks like the four seasons opera centre, not much of a fan of it.

[UD2]

way to destroy the old building. No matter what anyone say, it'll never be the same again. I miss the days when I used to take classes in there.

And that chunck of black brick work is probabley the worst thing you can do to this building. Instead of seeing what I believe to be a spectacular example of Romanesque Revival architecture from Bloor street off St. George station, you see a black brick wall. Great!

[vancouverite/to'er]

I like the basalt though...

[KGB]

way to destroy the old building.


I hope you aren't suggesting any additions should try to mimic the vintage architecture?

No...this building has been successfully enlarged with good modern architecture, which is the architecture of the moment...any attempt at realistic historicism here would have been a farce.



Instead of seeing what I believe to be a spectacular example of Romanesque Revival architecture from Bloor street off St. George station, you see a black brick wall. Great!


I think what you will mostly see is the bleachers from Varsity Stadium, which more or less cover the entire west wall of the building.




KGB

[Mollywood]

What's wrong with new buildings that look like old buildings? I love One St. Thomas.

[UD2]

I hope you aren't suggesting any additions should try to mimic the vintage architecture?

No...this building has been successfully enlarged with good modern architecture, which is the architecture of the moment...any attempt at realistic historicism here would have been a farce.






I think what you will mostly see is the bleachers from Varsity Stadium, which more or less cover the entire west wall of the building.




KGB

I don't believe what was added on was an enlargement of the building, rather, an addition that occupies the space around the building where nothing of incredible value previously existed. I believe the new structure is only have minimal connections with the original building. Although this was necessary to preserve what was already there, I don't think it makes it any better.

This building now looks exactly like the old building, but only with three additional boxes surrounding it with very close proximity. The taller box (which i believe is the auditorium) almost completely blocks off the tower that is located at the back side. I'm pretty pissed off because I think the tower is the coolest feature of this building.

As with the view from St. George. Where the black box is currently used to be a parking lot. So it gave a a good deal of gap that allows you to see the facade and one side of the building (currently covered by the box) from as far away as the Tim Horton's adjacent to the TTC terminal. The new box seem to completely block off the facade, and it won't be seen until you're directly in front of the building.

again... I don't like it.

[Taller, Better]

I'm with KGB. You can't mimick the past.. new additions should complement the old, but not
ape the same style. Times have changed, and different styles can coexist.

[Sixrings]

i believe 9t6 should have been built to look like the rest of the village on the grange

[addisonwesley]

I'm with KGB. You can't mimick the past.. new additions should complement the old, but not
ape the same style. Times have changed, and different styles can coexist.

I wouldn't agree with you. The whole notion of not being able to use perfectly good architecture is BS. There's no reason why the addition couldn't have been designed in the same style. They could've hired an architect with the skill and willingness to do the research. Just look at all the lamenting being done in the thread about Toronto's demolished buildings- people clearly recognise the beauty of pre-'modern' architecture, and yet we continue to put up these new buildings like slaves to fashion.

[Taller, Better]

Each to his own. I prefer an architect who can think for himself, and marry a contemporary design onto a historical one, over one who is willing to play the role of trained monkey and try (probably in failure) to mimic a building built over a century ago.

[KGB]

There's no reason why the addition couldn't have been designed in the same style.


But whenever you try to make something look like a historic style, you end up being "retro", and that's not something most developers or especially architects are even interested in doing. Not to mention trying to faithfully mimick high victorian would be difficult, if not impossible, when you factor in available materials, skill and costs to do it.

I suppose you could come up with some kind of pomo-neo-high victorian design, but given the fact that high victorian buildings have a certain "finished" symetry to them, any additions would not look right (which is why the edwardian addition of 1910 does not try to mimick it, but actually looks a tad awkward anyway).

That's not a great idea either, because of the amount of additional space required (wrapping around all three sides of the building), the best bet here, is to go for the juxtaposition of modern-on-historic. The best thing to do, is excactly what they did in 1881, when they put up the original building....use the style popular in the moment.

You can take the route ROM did, and make the addition stand out with avante-guarde superstar architect additions (which worked for ROM), or you can use sublime modernist architecture to compliment, rather than compete or overshadow the original. KPMB are the perfect choice for this, as this is their specialty, and it gives this project that somewhat distinctive "Toronto Look".


As for the western side...well, that's not the most flattering exposure to the place (never was). With the bleachers of Varsity Stadium (and possible future development there), there's really not much to be done. The heritage building's best side is on Bloor, which has been left alone, and I think the finished project will look fantastic and actually much better than what it was before.




KGB

[CrazyCanuck]

Your first line paragraph is bang on KGB. Imagine the cost to trying to replicate the old building, it would be through the roof.

[Taller, Better]

And it simply would not work... you could not match the building materials, the way the stones are finished, the colour, etc... it would look fake. Even replicating a long ago demolished building that was intricate in detail would be incredibly expensive and difficult. Far better to be honest and match contemporary design with traditional.

[addisonwesley]

I prefer an architect who can think for himself, and marry a contemporary design onto a historical one, over one who is willing to play the role of trained monkey and try (probably in failure) to mimic a building built over a century ago.

But whenever you try to make something look like a historic style, you end up being "retro", and that's not something most developers or especially architects are even interested in doing.

An architect 'thinking for himself' is precisely the problem- he should be obligated to think about the people on the street, as they are the ones who must look at his work every day. If people are interested in experimental design, then they ought to keep to fashion shows, or at least perform their experiments away from well designed buildings.

A good design is a good design, and should not be rejected for the sole reason that it has been 'done before' or is not new. Believe it or not, there are still architects who are capable of pulling off 'retro' designs. As for the developers, they're just out to make the cheapest building possible, so I wouldn't expect anything from them anyway.

Whatever the case, what's done has been done, and at least it's small enough that it can be taken down in the future.

[Taller, Better]

"he should be obligated to think about the people on the street"

you are making the assumption that everyone on the street objects to contemporary additions to historical buildings. This is not the case... there are very good examples of it here, and worldwide, too. Architecture design must move with the times, just as Art does... we should be able to look at a piece of
"Modern" art, beside a classical painting, and appreciate both! :)

[Maximalist]

There is nothing wrong with adding an attractive modern building to a beautiful building. I.M. Pei did it well at the Louvre, Foster did it well at the Hearst Building and Libeskind has done it magnificently with the ROM. But there is something wrong with attaching a butt-ugly modern building to an historic one. The east side of the conservatory works well, but IMHO the west side is an eyesore.

[Taller, Better]

Bear in mind the budget for the Royal Conservatory of Music, and the Royal Ontario Museum were not in the same stratosphere. We won't even begin to get into comparing it to the budgets of I.M. Pei at the Louvre, or Foster at the Hearst Building.

[Maximalist]

Agreed. But as Mike Huckabee would say, it isn't always a matter of money. If they had gone with more of a glass stucture on the west side at least it would have created a little symetry by having the historic building enveloped on both sides by glass, with the added advantage that it would connect better with the street by allowing the public to see some of what goes on in the building -- as both the ballet school and the ROM have done well.

[Tuscani01]

I just got back from the RCM. Its coming along really nicely. It does a good job of hiding the stands of Varsity stadium.

[InTheBeach]

An architect 'thinking for himself' is precisely the problem- he should be obligated to think about the people on the street, as they are the ones who must look at his work every day.

C'mon. That makes not sense, and would be a race to the lowest common denominator. Why should she/he think for people who have never had an original thought?

[InTheBeach]

Agreed. But as Mike Huckabee would say, it isn't always a matter of money. If they had gone with more of a glass stucture on the west side at least it would have created a little symetry by having the historic building enveloped on both sides by glass, with the added advantage that it would connect better with the street by allowing the public to see some of what goes on in the building -- as both the ballet school and the ROM have done well.

To each his own. I like the west side. It works well with the streetscape IMO. Done right, glass would have been interesting, but it could not be symetrical and work next to the stadium.

[addisonwesley]

Architecture design must move with the times, just as Art does... we should be able to look at a piece of
"Modern" art, beside a classical painting, and appreciate both! :)

I believe this was the whole point I was trying to get at- architects shouldn't turn away from classical styles of architecture just because they're 'old'- a good design is a good design. As for art, well- it's easy to hide a poor painting in a back room but it's much more difficult to make a building disappear. People don't realise buildings stand for decades and centuries at a time, and mistakes are all the more obvious and conspicuous for this reason.

C'mon. That makes not sense, and would be a race to the lowest common denominator. Why should she/he think for people who have never had an original thought?

Makes no sense? It makes no sense that something as permanent as a building in constant view of the public shouldn't have to appear the slightest bit appealing to them? This isn't some bad book that can be tossed in the fireplace. If every building had to be designed just for the sake of being original, the cities we live in would be very seriously f*cked up by now. Every joe architect and his brother would be out there trying to design the the latest original building. Once that novelty wears off, what are you going to do with it? It's not about doing something that no one else has done before, it's about creating something that looks good.

[UD2]

The minimalistic internationalism is getting out of hand. That's all I have to say. It's like brutalism or modernism. Once you over do it, it's done.

I think whoever designed the RCM overdid it. The Four Seasons Center fits into its sorroundings. The RCM doesn't. Just because you can build something doesn't mean you should.

Time for a new style.

ps. by no means was I ever suggesting that brutalism looked good at anytime.

[Elkhanan1]

How does the RCM not fit its surroundings? I think this expansion is beatifully designed and executed, with amazing attention to detail and top-notch materials.

[InTheBeach]

Makes no sense? It makes no sense that something as permanent as a building in constant view of the public shouldn't have to appear the slightest bit appealing to them? This isn't some bad book that can be tossed in the fireplace. If every building had to be designed just for the sake of being original, the cities we live in would be very seriously f*cked up by now. Every joe architect and his brother would be out there trying to design the the latest original building. Once that novelty wears off, what are you going to do with it? It's not about doing something that no one else has done before, it's about creating something that looks good.

The creative process does not start with "what does everyone else think or want".

Maybe it does for you, but it doesn't start that way for creative people.

I would prefer to put creative work in the hands of creative people.

[Taller, Better]

^^ exceptionally well put, Beach. I, too, am a firm believer in "expertise".

[Jasonzed]

This is one of my favourite buildings in all of Toronto. A class act!

http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/article/432023

Royal Conservatory celebrates rebirth

May 28, 2008 04:30 AM
Martin Knelman

Peter Simon, president of the Royal Conservatory of Music, was in an ebullient mood when, donning a construction hard hat, he took a curious visitor through the dusty concrete labyrinth just three months before the RCM's long-awaited reopening.

"We're going to start moving the instruments back here over the summer," he said with anticipatory glee. "Then over the Labour Day weekend the rest of the big move will take place."

And in early September, both the new space of the Telus Learning Centre and the refurbished old building will be alive with the sound of teachers and students making music and talking about how music is made.

"This is an incredibly exciting time for us," Simon says, "and we are taking advantage of the tremendous momentum we've achieved."

You'd hardly guess that Simon has weathered more than his share of rocky moments, and many twists and turns involving some startling changes in the master plan.

One snag is that the jewel of the project, the 1,140-seat Koerner Hall designed by architect Marianne McKenna, will not open until the fall of 2009, a year later than planned.

Another is that after greatly expanding the goals and terms of reference for this project, the budget has virtually doubled from original projections, to a daunting $110 million. But luckily for Simon, former Bank of Montreal CEO Tony Comper and his wife, Elizabeth, have agreed to lead a new fundraising campaign.

Tonight, Simon's attire will be black tie rather than hard hat for the Royal Occasion, a $1,500-a-plate dinner plus musical soiree celebrating the conservatory's own rebirth as well as feting some of its best-known alumni, including Nelly Furtado, whose mini-performance lends the gala a touch of showbiz glitz and glamour.

And tonight will not be the time to mention the trials and tribulations the Royal Conservatory has experienced.

The RCM's problems include construction delays; stressful meetings with its bank; the federal government's failure to deliver top-up funding; and a mass whacking last fall when eight employees were let go in what was described as a restructuring exercise.

How did this become a much bigger project than what was announced in 2002?

According to Simon, the RCM realized it would be smarter and less expensive to add "phase two" components now – building the west wing and renovating its old building – rather than leave those aspects for later.

Now, with a startling announcement last week, the RCM has something to crow about in the financial department as well as in music. The Compers have taken on the challenge of raising $50 million over the next two years – and that's in addition to the original $60 million campaign that reached its goal three years ago.

Without the Compers, some skeptical observers were wondering how the RCM could manage to pay the scarily increased cost of its much-expanded project. But their clout – along with that of 25 yet-to-be-named power couples who've signed on for their campaign cabinet – means there's a reason for the RCM to feel confident.

One point is becoming clear. The RCM is changing its identity, going beyond its historic teaching role and breaking into show business.

By building Koerner Hall and a more intimate but technically sophisticated black-box space in its new west wing (cheek by jowl with U of T's Varsity Stadium), RCM is turning itself into a performing arts centre as well as an educational centre. That's why a top priority now is to hire a miracle worker who can both program its dazzling new spaces and manage them.

Simon has great expectations.

"We think this will be one of the world's great halls," he says, "and it will attract top artists."

He casually mentions Cecilia Bartoli and Valery Gergiev.

No one ever accused Peter Simon of dreaming small.

mknelman@thestar.ca

[Taller, Better]

"No one ever accused Peter Simon of dreaming small".

We need all the big thinking we can in Toronto, to try and combat much of the small thinking! ;)