Klarinet Archive - Posting 000672.txt from 1995/05

From: David Gilman <dagilman@-----.EDU>
Subj: Re: weird keys
Date: Wed, 24 May 1995 12:36:49 -0400

>Rich Copeland, after reading the discussions about keys,
>wonders why he doesn't have trouble with "weird" keys.
>Maybe it's because he has a masters degree in music with
>concentrated clarinet study.
>
>One thing we all have to realize is that with something as
>global as the Internet, on a mailing list with a topic as general
>as clarinet, we are going to get input from people with a great
>variance in background on the instrument.
>
>I was the one who started this thread by asking why stage show
>composers write in such weird keys. My formal training in
>the clarinet ended in high school. Even though I was !st chair off
>and on in a high school band that was very competitive, I chose not
>to pursue music in college. As the years went by, I became less
>and less active in music. Now that my daughter is in the high
>school band (same band, incidently), I once more became
>interested in playing and got out my old clarinet. One of the
>reasons I joined this list was to keep my interest active and to
>keep me playing.
>So far it has worked. I am amazed at how much I have learned
>just by reading messages from musicians with so much more
>experience as me. When you are practicing on your own, selecting
>your own music, the temptation is there to pick out music
>that makes you sound as good as you can, instead of music
>that will help you learn. This usually translates into picking out
>pieces in easy keys that has the most difficult technique that one
>can handle. After all, I am doing this mostly for my own enjoyment.
>But Rich's message, along with others on this thread, made me
>realize that to really get the most out of the instrument, I should
>go back to the basics.
>I am not familiar with the Klose books, but I still have my Rubank
>books from Junior High School. I seem to remember that the
>Advanced I and II books had scales and arpeggio exercises, that
>between the two books, covered all the major and minor scales.
>Would it be a good idea to go back to these lessons, or would
>the Klose book be better?
>
>
John,
I don't know the Rubank books very well. But, as far as I'm
concerned, Baermann Book III is the best for scales and arpeggios. It has
just about everything you really need in an expanded format with an extended
range (to c''''). Klose Part II, the first few pages, is a good condensed
review for daily practice/memorized routine. [I also like some of the grand
duets.] I am using the Hamelin <<Gammes et Arpeges>> now for a few things.
It's nice for harmonic minor scales (Baermann III uses melodic minors), but
I still like Baermann III much better. My teacher likes the Rudolf Jettel
book for very advanced scale/arpeggio/etude practice. Personally, I haven't
tried it yet.

David Gilman