Theatre Design & Technology - May 1973 - 64

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
To The Editor:
I have just finished reading Glenn Loney's interesting
article (December, 1972) on the Walnut Street Theatre
renovation. The article is certainly worthwhile, but there
are a few inaccuracies when acoustics is briefly mentioned;
also, there is a decided lack of emphasis on the coordination of various technical disciplines that were essential
to the success of the project.
First, regarding the inaccuracies:
(1)
The sound control booth is actually located
behind a sliding glass panel behind the balcony at the
house-right-rear corner. The sliding glass panel is installed
to permit the sound system operator to hear the mixture
of live and amplified sound as it exists in the house. The
"sound and light" control room referred to in the text
is actually intended for light control only.

(2) The purpose of the glass over the balcony-front,
ceiling, and side-wall lighting positions is simply to prevent the noise produced by most lighting instruments today from being heard by the audience. The space volumes
behind these lighting positions had nothing to do with
the application of glass. Experience in many other theatres
proved the necessity and value of such acoustical separation, and discussions with H. Poindexter, the theatre
consultant, and Kliegl's Robert Benson brought mutual
agreement that such acoustical separation was well worth
the slight loss in lighting efficiency.
Regarding the matter of emphasis, the Walnut Street
Theatre was not renovated as simply another theatre. It
was renovated to serve as a multi-purpose performing
arts hall that could (and has) serve as a concert hall for
orchestral, choral, and chamber-music concerts, as an
opera house, as a ballet theatre, as a motion-picture
theatre, as well as a theatre for dramatic shows and
musical comedies. A restoration of any of the earlier
interiors would not have solved the technical problems
inherent in any multi-purpose hall; and, indeed, the final
interior design actually grew directly from the requirements for sight-lines, lighting, and acoustics. For example,
one initial design placed a large number of seats deeply
under the balcony; but this seating was reduced and seats
were added to the balcony in the interest of satisfactory
acoustics and sight lines for the entire audience for all
intended activities.
Good sight-lines, provIsions that work well for stage
lighting, and good acoustics do not automatically fall
into place, at least these days and in most cases, and this
was not the case at the Walnut. Rather, such good results
are usually the product of a collaboration by persons of
different disciplines working together in harmony.

Mention might also be made of the sound amplification
system, which includes a flexible sound-effects system,
and, in addition, a far more powerful reinforcement system than usually specified for a 1200-seat theatre. The
reason for the reinforcement system's additional power
handling capabilities and the large area the loudspeaker
grille occupies over the proscenium was the requirement
for rock music reinforcement with built-in equipment.
I hope that mention of the factors I've discussed can
be included in the magazine to present a better picture of
the Walnut's renovation for your readers. Thank you.
Sincerely,
David L. Klepper
KMK Associates, Ltd.
To The Editor:
The lengthy review of Scenery for the Theatre in the
October, 1972 number merits comments by the authors
inasmuch as the reviewer has fallen into an error which
some students have fallen into before, and which we have
been at some pains, not always successful, to circumvent.
It is a preconception which distorts the purpose of the
book and confuses the reader of the review.
The reviewer states, "the book alternately tries to be a
text for students and a reference for the advanced technician." Wrong. It is a working text and that is all.
Certainly the student may want to look up something in
the text after he has studied it, but to exclude basic
illustrative tabulation from the text and make it a separate
reference section would spoil the continuity and definitive
illustration necessary for the text, and provide a woefully
incomplete reference section. We tried it. It won't work.
So with the exception of one appendix - Mechanics
and Mathematics - we put tabular and graph ic material in
the text where it belongs for learning purposes and
supplied a reference bibliography containing 140 publ ications. That's a reference library.
At the time of the first publication (1938) there was
little reference material and students got used to using
the book as a reference source. Unfamiliarity with the
current mass of reference material can make some technicians expect from the book information wh ich is best
found elsewhere.
We regret that the reviewer did not appreciate and
record the excellent work of our designer in that, with
very few !N(ceptions, it is not necessary to turn a page to
get from text to relevant illustration and vice versa, that
"bleeds" are used to gain the greatest possible enlargement
of illustrations when that is desirable, and that Chapter 15
is organized to serve as a manual for a lab instructor,

THEATRE DESIGN AND TECHNOLOGY

MAY.1973

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - May 1973