Key Findings

Not surprisingly, nearly every festival examined chose to cancel, postpone, reschedule, or modify its 2020 season. In analyzing redesigned schedules, the following five distinct approaches to summer programming were identified, with many festivals adopting a combined model including more than one approach.

1. Modified In-Person Performances with Live Audiences

The two most popular models within this category were 1) small, intimate formats like chamber music concerts or recitals with a limited audiences and/or outdoor venue to allow for physical distancing and 2) drive-in performances.

Approximately 17 percent of all festivals decided to present in-person events, driven mainly by festivals within the Music and Multidisciplinary Arts categories and those located in the Rocky Mountains, Southwest, and Canadian regions. Modified in-person events were a common choice for smaller festivals with budgets below $1 million. Examples of this include Bravo! Vail’s reimagined 2020 season and Mainly Mozart’s Mozart at the Drive-in series. Ottawa Bluesfest co-presented a “pandemic-proof” drive-in festival with the Canadian National Arts Centre over two weekends, capped at 500 cars tuning their radios to a local frequency.

2. Digital Archives

Approximately 31 percent of all festivals reviewed decided to open their digital archives and stream audio or video recordings of performances from previous seasons—free of charge and often curated by artistic directors or performing artists themselves.

This option was common for Music and Multidisciplinary Arts festivals as well as those in the Southeast region, followed by Canada and Midwest. Free archival content was a popular choice among festivals with budgets above $3 million, as well as festivals presented by large arts organizations or performing arts centers, which are more likely to possess the necessary technical infrastructure to record content and maintain a digital library. The Grant Park Music Festival in Chicago and Artosphere Festival at Walton Arts Center were two examples of this approach.

3. New Digital Content – Free Access

By far the most popular programming choice, more than 51 percent of all festivals in this analysis chose to create new digital content specifically for 2020, available free of charge, free with registration, or for a suggested donation. The two most popular models in this category included 1) educational and outreach content such as artist interviews, conversations, or fun facts and 2) artistic content such as virtual recitals from artists’ homes or live in-person performances streamed online.

Free, newly created artistic content was the most common programming model within the Opera and Theater category, particularly in the Northeast, Rocky Mountains, and Pacific regions. It was also the top choice for festivals in the $3 million to $9.9 million budget group. For example, more than 20 alumni of the Merola Opera Program gathered to sing “Libiamo” from Verdi’s La Traviata and more than 70 young musicians from the Music Academy of the West performed the final movement of Haydn’s Symphony No. 104 in D Major, both of which were streamed via Zoom with singers and musicians joining simultaneously from their individual locations. Ottawa Chamberfest created Chamber Chats: At Home, Chez vous, a series of interactive episodes giving audiences the opportunity to view pre-recorded and live performances and engage with musicians, guest artists, and lecturers from all over the world.

4. New Digital Content – Paid Access

The least common approach among festivals was to charge for new digital content created specifically for 2020—taken by approximately 8 percent of all festivals reviewed. This applied almost exclusively to new artistic content rather than educational or outreach material. Presented content was often of high production and technical value, imitating a live concert experience with performers dressed up and positioned on stage with professional lighting.

This model was selected primarily by Music and Multidisciplinary Arts festivals, particularly in the Northeast and Pacific regions. Though perhaps unexpected, this approach was popular among festivals with budgets below $1 million—likely reflecting the capacity of smaller organizations to be more adaptive and nimbler in a relatively short period of time. For example, non-members could purchase single tickets to the Caramoor Summer Music Festival’s virtual recital series for $10. The Orcas Island Chamber Music Festival offered a $120 subscription for 12 live streams of in-person performances of the complete Beethoven String Quartet Cycle. For $250, the Decoda Chamber Music Festival offered five virtual town hall meetings to explore all the elements that go into building effective and engaging interactive performances.

5. Resources Conserved for Future Programming

Perhaps the least preferred but most cost-effective option, almost 23 percent of all festivals chose to cancel their 2020 seasons altogether, offering no programming—in-person or online, free or paid, artistic or educational—until 2021. This was particularly common among festivals in the Midwest and those presented by large arts organizations or performing arts centers. These institutions may have adopted organization-wide health and safety policies for artists, audiences, and staff, making it difficult to adapt summer festival programming.

The following charts provide an overview of these five approaches by artistic discipline, geographic region, and budget size, which contain aggregate data for all festivals reviewed in the analysis: