The sound in the church is unusual.  The pianos carry very well, but speaking is another matter.  In fact,  we were asked if we would consider using a microphone, as people near the back generally have a hard time hearing when performers talk.  Jim and I both feel that this is a bad idea.  The contrast between a miked voice and an acoustical instrument makes it hard for the audience to adjust their mode of hearing, and no matter how much you pump out the playing, an acoustic sound always sounds softer than sound that is miked.  Anyway, there was no real problem, as we pointed out that the last time we were here we didn't use a mike, and everyone said our voices projected sufficiently. 

After the rehearsal, we went back to Duck Key where Jean and Bennet had prepared a rack of lamb with a wine sauce that was indescribable (sans alcohol, needless to say!).  Because the church was so close, we decided to change at the house, and arrived for the concert at about 7:40. 

Well, music is a funny business.  You owe it to your audience to play well all the time, but the fact remains that once in a while, everything clicks.  Tonight was one of those nights.  As soon as we started Jupiter, I thought to myself "Oh boy, this is going to be a good one", and this feeling remained right through to the end of the concert.  When we came off after the Brahms, we could hardly contain ourselves, we were so happy, and at the end of the second half, the audience was on its feet before the last chord of the Gershwin had stopped sounding.  Jim feels that much of the reason for a response like this lies with the acoustics; a live hall creates a communicative sound, and draws the audience into the performance.  I agree; it is extreemly difficult to project musically in a dry hall, and the results are never as satisfying either to us or the audience. 

I've spoken in other journal entries about the relationship between how a performer feels about a performance, and the actual performance itself, so I'll just reiterate here that Jim and I don't think there is necessarily a correlation, except that if you feel good about how a concert went, it almost certainly was good.  What is less clear is whether or not it was any better than other times where you were satisfied, but perhaps not as "high" emotionally?  We don't pretend to have the answer, but what is certain is that we were 100% satisfied with the concert tonight; no reservations.  It would be interesting to have a good quality tape of tonight, and other nights where the ecstasy level was not as high, in order to compare them objectively.  All I will say is that I think Jupiter was the best we have ever played it, and that it feels like it has finally "arrived", so to speak. 

After the concert, we hurried back to Duck Key, as Bennet had promised us a treat.  We weren't disappointed.  When we came into the dining room, we were greeted by an exquisitely delicate pastry enclosing ice cream, with fresh berries and whipped cream on top.  Along with this was vintage Riesling, and 1977 Vintage Dow Port to finish off the evening.  Rough life, eh?  Needless to say, the cuisine of this trip is not typical of your average concert tour!  Also, Jean and Bennet are two of the nicest people on this planet. 

Tomorrow, we fly back to Toronto, but we are not taking off 'till 7:00 p.m... which means we don't have to leave the Keys 'till mid afternoon... which means we can play golf tomorrow!