Klarinet Archive - Posting 000307.txt from 1994/11

From: Matthew Snyder <hsnyder@-----.EDU>
Subj: more on new music
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 21:21:16 -0500

From: Matthew Snyder <hsnyder>
To: Christopher Zello <en444@-----.edu>
Subject: Re: Contemporary orchestral music
In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 22 Nov 1994 00:30:55 -0500

> But I think it is unreal to suggest that mixed meters should
> automatically be incorporated in lesson materials for younger
> students. I believe that most of these students have enough
> trouble figuring our how to play Brahms, Mozart, Babin, and
> countless others. I see a trade off. My question is. . .at
> what point do we sacrifice learning classics to learn, say,
> mixed meter, or contemporary clarinet techniques (fluttertong.,
> multiphonics, or circular breathing)?

This is pure and simple hogwash. Young children growing up in any of
the multitude of peoples in West Africa can routinely perform rhythmic
feats which to the average Euro-American orchestral musician seem
miraculous. There is nothing more innately difficult about learning
complex rhythmic procedures than there is about learning complex harmonic
procedures. If the young are exposed early and often to a particular
musical idea, be it European harmony or African polyrhythm, it will take
root naturally, and there is plenty of room for both.
As for extended clarinet techniques, it depends on what the
individual wants to do. Any good musician worth the going rate of his or
her instrument should be able to do as much with that instrument as
possible. At this point in history, for example, it's ridiculous that
improvisation is still considered to mainly be a jazz musician's art,
or multiphonics and circular breathing the purview of "new music
specialists."

>
> As far as school orchestras learning contemporary pieces to
> give them exposure, I really don't see that as practical.
> Again, it becomes a trade off. . .at what point do you give
> up learning Mozart, Tchaikovsky, or Beethoven to learn the
> most contemporary orchestral literature? Dan is correct in
> saying that none of the students in an 80 piece orchestra may
> never play that specific piece in their lifetimes. Is it
> worth giving up valuable time for that?

Look, the orchestra and orchestral musicians have been concentrating
on Mozart, Tchaikovsky, and Beethoven for a ridiculously long time. Why
are YOU wasting YOUR valuable time trying to recreate music which has long
since had its authoritative readings and recordings of?

>
> Although I am barely in my mid-20s, I look around and see a
> failing music scene. . .to some extent clear around the world.
> Some bad composers have the bucks and practically pay off
> conductors to perform their junk (I take offense to a recent
> piece I heard by Richard Nanes. . .he is certainly no Joan
> Tower or John Corigliano. . .why even play his Symphonies?).
> There are places where music is emphasized, but really not in
> the school systems. It looks like parents have to haul their
> kids to Music Centers or community ensembles where people
> are training them. But really, are musicians better trained
> today? Twenty years from now, who will be replacing great
> clarinetists? By that time, some people will not even know
> who Harold Wright was. . .possibly.

The only "music scene" that is going under is the orchestral one.
There is a healthy, vibrant jazz scene, there is a heady "new music"
scene, headed by small multi-instrument groups like Relache in Philadelphia,
and there is plenty of great music being produced by people with the
vision to form their own circumstances rather than depend on a slowly
fading dinosaur like the symphony orchestra for their livelihood.
The truly great clarinetists and other musicians are surviving fine.
You just won't find the future greats in an orchestra

Matt Snyder
hsnyder@-----.edu

.